Does John 6 support Calvinism?

it's time the soteriology 101 podcast where God is most glorified by his love and provision for all people welcome your host the director of apologetics for Texas Baptists and adjunct professor of theology and a local teaching pastor dr. Leighton flowers hello and welcome back to so triology 101 as you can see on the screen we're gonna be talking about John chapter 6 especially verse 44 because it's one of the top three passages in Scripture I think along with Romans 9 ephesians 1 john 6 is probably one of the most referenced passages in the discussion over so triology in specific with regard to the Calvinistic interpretation no one can come to me unless the father who sent me draws them and I will raise them up on the last day now how do we as non Calvinists understand John chapter 6 how do we answer the Calvinistic interpretation of John chapter 6 is it exclusively Calvinistic in other words if you believe that statement that Jesus says right there do you have to be a Calvinist and if not why not and so I want to give a thorough explanation of John chapter 6 from our perspective and insight some sources for you to be able to look at for further study as well and before we jump into that I do want to point you to our website so triology 101.com you will see there there is a a list of different resources we've got a resource page which has the audio files there's video resources that are trying to try to categorize some of the video resources and a different top subtitles so that people can find more information there a list of books and resources for your edification and further study as well there's also a classroom link if you're interested in getting a higher education Trinity Theological Seminary is available Trinity College of the Bible and Theological Seminary there's a classroom linked ocean more information about how to get a higher education I'm a professor there with Trinity and would love to help you find out more information about that great school if you're interested in getting a higher education a lot great schools but this is one of the few schools that offers a fully online education and it is has huge high standards and a lot of alumni who have graduated through Trinity and I just highly recommend this school and appreciate what they are offering for so many students who cannot go to a traditional you know on-campus type of study environment and cannot afford that kind of study environment but these they are offering a higher education for anybody in the world wherever you may be if you have an internet connection you can get a higher education so I appreciate Trinity also you can find out more information just by searching here if you've got a questions about certain theological points or a passage for example when you type in John chapter 6 eventually this video will come up along with probably an article that I've written on John chapter 6 that we're gonna go over and so instead of emailing me which I do get a lot of emails and Facebook messages or Twitter messages asking me specific questions and I have to declare bankruptcy because I cannot get to all those questions I get at least a dozen a day of asking specific information about specific questions and I feel horrible I don't want to ignore any question people are on earnestly seeking answers to to hard questions I just don't have physically the time to to respond to all of those and so if you could do a search and try to find those or go to the Facebook page and post your questions there sometimes if I can't get to it some of the other listeners and other PhDs and and and educators who come to the website sometimes they can take the time to answer some of the questions from their own perspective and and give you some a place for dialogue also I would be remiss to say I cannot do this without the support of the patrons and and I know you hear that all the time when you talk about radio stations you know this this radio station is brought to you by you know supporters or listeners that's what this podcast is this podcast is brought to you by our patrons those who regularly support this this ministry and if you click on that support link you you can click there to see I can become a monthly donor which is one of our patrons and or you can make a one-time donation through PayPal and all of the proceeds go to help promoting the material on and helping get this information out some of the materials gone to buy this microphone that I'm talking on and those kinds of things the broadcasting fees that they all cost money I paid for those for the first several years out of just my own pocket but as the the popularity the podcast has grown we opened up patron as just an opportunity for you to contribute and help make this happen the only way we're going to get into this top part portions of the search engines along with all the Calvinistic sources that usually monopolize the first two or three pages on Google is if people start getting behind and supporting the scholars that teach these these doctrines from our perspective so I'm not afraid to ask for help we need all the help we can get if you can help then we would really appreciate you signing on and becoming one of our supporters and as a regular listener let's let's dive in now to the actual issue at hand John chapter six there are two basic ways and again this is I'm reducing it to two basic ways there are various nuances within the two perspectives that could be taken and explained here but when I say there's two basic ways to interpret this I'm reducing it to mostly the Calvinistic understanding of it versus the traditional istic understanding of it or somebody called the Arminian as many of you know who listened to me regularly I don't call myself an Arminian but but I would side more in the sociological camp with the Armenian interpretation than I would with the Calvinistic interpretation though I disagree with Armenians on other nuances of sociology and so it wouldn't be really fair or accurate to call me an Armenian which is one of the reasons what we've we've referred to being a traditionalist versus being an Armenian and so there are two basic ways to interpret this passage and it hinges really on the words Rawls and the word to them okay and so that's why I underlined the word draws you sent me draws them and I will raise them up on the last day and so kind of follow that when you when you focus on the word drawls they're the word elko in greek which we'll go over in just a minute and the word them and if you look at those just those two words and you and you look between the two of those the possible renderings of what pug what excuse me Jesus is referencing it'll lead you a different perspective as we've talked about before with the Bleek's the the pictures that look like both the duck and the rabbit it's easy to when you're reading something from one perspective to only see one picture and not the other and I'm asking you to just shift your perspective and try to understand the other picture that could be being painted here if you're so used to seeing one picture that you're not even willing to look at the other then it's impossible to learn or to grow and I'm just asking you to step away from your interpretation for a moment and look at the other side the Calvinistic rendering would be more like this no one can come to me unless the father who sent me drags them and I will raise those who are dragged at the last day now I'm and that may sound like an overstatement when I say the word drags but the word drags is actually one of the options within the lexicon of the word of Elco for drawls like he drugged the Netta fish that the same greek word is used there and Calvinists like our seas pearl and others will actually reference that as a compelling or an irresistible kind of force and so I'm not using the word drags here in you know in a negative sense to try to paint Calvinism in a negative light they actually use that term to to illustrate the compelling nature of this drawing this would be in reference to the eye of irresistible grace within the Calvinistic worldview because the tulip the eye is that God that God's work of irresistible grace or the effectual calling as sometimes it's referred to as and this this all goes back to really the Calvinistic understanding of T of total inability total depravity and and this is the idea that mankind is born in a condition by which they are incapable of coming to faith in Christ because of their inborn nature they're born in a fallen condition and therefore they're incapable of responding to even God's own appeals to be reconciled from that fall and that's that's kind of the Calvinistic interpretation and I want to look at that a little bit further this is a quote from aw pink who's a well-known Calvinist and he wrote a book called the sovereignty of God and he says this he says as a creature the natural man is responsible to love obey and serve God as a sinner he is responsible to repent and believe the gospel but at the outset we are confronted with the fact that the natural man I mean the fallen man the natural man is unable to love and serve God and that the sinner of himself cannot repent and believe that would be kind of a summary of the doctrine of total inability to tea of the tulip which is this idea in this concept that main cannot repent and believe now if not for the the term I've underlined thereof himself actually can affirm this statement technically speaking because we would also say that main kind of himself in other words if left without any help at all would not be able to repent and believe either because he wouldn't know that he needed to repent and believe if not for divine revelation if not for God's both common and special grace if what God does in bringing the gospel in bringing his holy spirit to bring conviction to the world if God had not initiated our salvation then if left to ourselves here on earth and then no one could repent and believe no one would know that they needed to repent and believe if not for God's gracious work so the this of himself statement makes that statement something that even we as as traditionalist and even the Armenians could affirm because nobody believes I don't even think any scholar that I'm ever aware of has ever believed that that we're doing something completely and totally of ourselves or without any divine aid or help or common grace that God has granted or anything that God has done for us so that's just important to point out now Calvinists believe that because mankind is born fallen they are morally unable to respond to God's own appeal to be reconciled from that fall yet God punishes them any way okay so you'll hear oftentimes Calvinists say well we believe means responsible just like you heard from a WPS quote right there he says that people are responsible to believe the gospel they are responsible to repent and believe but what do they mean by responsible well what they mean is not that man is able to respond which is kind of what the word seems to connote you know if you're responsible to clean your room as a child that means you're able to respond to the command of your parent to go clean your room there's a there's a implicit meaning there that you are able to actually go clean your room you wouldn't tell your you know your two month old baby go clean your room and when the baby didn't do it spank him that would be cruel and unusual punishment because obviously the child at two months old is not able to is not responsible it's not able to respond to that command and therefore you wouldn't hold a child at that age responsible for for not cleaning the room because the fact that they're not able to respond for a calvinist however the the concept of responsibility is actually what it means is that people are justly punished even though they cannot morally respond in other words because they are they have this nature that is adverse to God from from birth in other words they're born haters of God according to the Calvinistic worldview and they cannot do anything but hate God because of the nature they've been born with and they've been born with this desire to rebel against God they've been born with this desire to reject God they've been born with this desire to even refuse his own appeals to be reconciled from that fallenness and that's what the Calvinists believe is that because your fallen you're also born incapable of recognizing and admitting confessing your fallen condition and humbling yourself in admitting that you need the gracious help of the father who's offering it to you unless God does something irresistible he compels he drags you he changes your nature and makes you want to come so you're born unable to want to come unless he makes you want to come and if he makes you want to come you most certainly will come okay the the way the Calvinistic system works and I think I'm being fair and saying that I'm not I'm not trying to misrepresent Calvinist some Calvinists may use certain kinds of an Acula to explain this but I think I'm being fair and saying that the fallen man under Calvinistic worldview is born in a fallen condition so much so that he's unable to willingly he's unable to positively respond even to God's own appeal to be reconciled from that fallenness and again I don't know how else to explain that but that's that's basically where they think mankind is and they think that John 6 is actually addressing that condition ok so when they're reading John 6 and they're seeing the duck versus the rabbit and that that particular picture they're seeing it from this perspective they're they're seeing it from the total disability perspective that mankind cannot come to Jesus because they're born in this fallen condition and they're unable to want to come to Jesus because of this fallen nature they were born with they didn't have any control of it they didn't have anything to do with it it was just imputed from Adam Adam as our representative when he sinned when he rebelled against God that made all of us born and God haters and even when God comes to us and makes his appeal he sends Jesus he sends the Holy Spirit he sends the gospel none of that works all that grace that's not enough grace you need a supernatural effectual drawing dragging elko kind of grace that drags you in to the kingdom that and it changes your will not does it mean that you're dragged against your will or Calvinist will say but it changes your will it makes you want to come to him that's what the Calvinist is saying now my argument in contention is this Christians should affirm the biblical doctrine of human depravity okay that mankind is sinful and in need of a savior we should all affirm what we've all fallen short of the glory of God as Romans chapter 3 very clearly teaches all of us are sinners nobody can can earn or merit their own way to heaven through their own righteousness we must have the atoning work of Christ we must have the blood of Jesus covering us so that is what human depravity is affirming is that all are sinners and under the the curse of sin okay that's one thing we can affirm that but we don't have to affirm this concept of Calvinistic inability that mankind because of the fall is also incapable of recognizing their fallen condition and confessing it humbly saying yes I'm in bondage to sin yes I cannot stop sinning because of my my nature and because of my bondage and because of my selfish lusts and because of my my pride I cannot refrain from sinning I cannot refrain from following my own evil passions and desires and I humbly admit that to you please help me in my bondage you're incapable morally speaking of doing that under Calvinistic system and that's that that's the rub that's the distinction between our two perspectives is we both believe we're in bondage to sin the Calvinist just says you can't confess that you're in bondage to sin and humbly admit that you need help when it's offered and that's gone too far the bible does teach you're in bondage to sin it does not teach that you're incapable of humbly admitting that fact in light of the Gospels appeal and that's the problem with with the Calvinistic system see the the scripture says we therefore are Christ's ambassadors as though God we're making his appeal through us we implore you on Christ's behalf be reconciled to God so the gospel in other words is Christ's appeal Christ making his appeal through his messengers be reconciled to God this appeal is to beg it's to beseech the Fallen man to be reconciled from that fallen condition and what the Calvinist is saying is that appeal that's not enough that grace needs more grace to work because that gracious act of the gospel that gracious call of the gospel that's not enough grace according to the Calvinist God's grace needs more grace to work God's grace of the gospel appeal is not enough of a grace I don't find that anywhere in Scripture but that's what the Calvinist is ultimately having to say that the gospel grace is not enough you need Elco grace you need draging grace you need irresistible grace you need something coming in and making you want him because you're born incapable of one otherwise that's that's the that's the difference between the two worldviews I would say as isaiah 55:11 my word goes out from my mouth it will not return to me empty but will accomplish what I desire and achieve the purpose for which I sent it in other words God's purpose never fails what is God's purpose in sending the gospel to make an appeal now according to the Calvinist the purpose of the gospel is to inform the elect that God loves them and has and has has provided at home it for them and that he will cause them to want to believe but according to the scriptures the Gospels purpose is to make an appeal so that you can choose to follow him or to reject him so making an appeal is the purpose of the gospel and it doesn't fail in accomplishing that purpose because the purpose is not to effectually make somebody follow him in our perspective but it is instead to make an appeal to allow you to know as you are fallen you need to know that your fallen and it's the only way for salvation is through Christ and so he's making an appeal so what is the purpose of the Gospel according to John 20:31 these things are written speaking of the gospel these things are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah the Son of God and that by believing you may have life in his name that's the purpose of the gospel that's why I've written these things so that you may believe and that by believing you're given new life so what's the order salutis here what's the order of salvation you believe so as to have new life the Calvinist reverses that order and says none to know you have to be made alive you have to be regenerated you have to be irresistible graced you have to be dragged you have to be L code you have to be irresistible changed in order to be made to want to believe and then you will then then you will believe in him if you're made alive first that's again I think opposite order of salutis from what the scripture says that believing you have life in his name so let's just say this no one can seek God on our own we would have that no one can fulfill the laws demands as Romans chapter 8 says no one absolutely no one can completely be perfect in all the commands and always follow God's laws to the perfect tee we will always fall short we can also all say we're all spiritually dead as the Calvinist will often plant we're spiritually dead we're spiritually dead we're in bondage to sin amen amen we agree with that and so yeah while will affirm no one can see God on her own we're not on our own so why are you talking about what we can't do on her own if we're not on our own anymore oh he sent his son he sent the Holy Spirit down like fire at Pentecost he sent the the gospel the inspired message of God's Redemption his appeal to be reconciled so let's stop talking about what we can and can't do on her own because we're not on our own anymore God has intervened through incarnation he has sent Christ he has sent the cross he has sent Redemption so let's stop talking about what we can and can't do on our own because we're not on our own anymore all right so we'll all agree with you we cannot seek God we cannot save ourselves we cannot do anything of ourselves it's it's God's grace it's just a matter of whether you think the grace of the gospel is sufficient or not or whether you think God's grace needs more grace to actually to actually work and we can also say no one can fulfill the laws commands but the inability to be perfect does not equal the inability to trust in the perfect one did you follow me their inability to be perfect which we'd all say absolutely it's incapable for us to be perfect to fulfill the demands of the law but is that equal and inability to humble ourselves and to say you're right I'm not perfect and I need the perfect one I need the help of the perfect one I need the imputed righteousness of Christ I need the blood of Jesus that's what the Calvinist has done they've said because your your ink ability to be perfect equals your inability to admit that fact and trust in the perfect one there's there's no it's a non sequitur it does does it follow that the inability to to earn your own righteousness equals the inability to admit that fact and trust in the one who can okay but that's the connection the Calvinist is made they just conflated those two things and they're taking the inability to earn or merit salvation and they've applied it to their sociology to say oh yeah by the way you're also incapable of humbly admitting your inabilities you're incapable of admitting your bondage to sin you're incapable of admitting you need a Savior because of your inborn condition that you have no control over you're just born that way and you can't control it I'm sorry that's not what the Scripture teaches it's just not so are we spiritually dead well of course we're spiritually dead but are you dead like Lazarus dead like the Calvinist will often use the the story of Lazarus which the Bible never relates Lazarus condition to sociology in any way shape or form but that Calvinist often uses that as an analogy to to explain what it means to be spiritually dead like a corpse like dead meaning that Lazarus just like he couldn't come out of the tomb unless God effectually drugged him out and it effectively gives him a grace to make him alive and then he'll come out that's the way the Calvinist wants to explain so triology but that's not the way the scripture ever does it the scripture compares more to the concept of the prodigal son and we know the story of the prodigal son the father says he was lost but now he's found he was dead but now he's alive the concept of deadness the the idiom of spiritual deadness within scripture is talking about being separated from God because of rebellion that's what deadness is just like the body is separated from the soul when you're dead so - if you're spiritually dead you're separated from God in rebellion so just like an Italian father might say to a rebellious child you're dead to me meaning I'm you're separating you were far from me just like the prodigal son was far from the father and so the deadness is talking about a a location you're separated from God or you're brought near to him you're made alive you were lost meaning you're separate from him but now you're found you're brought near and so this concept this idiom of deadness is not talking about a moral incapacity to respond to God's life-giving truth it's talking about being a an enemy with God our being is separated from God because of rebellion because of your your own in fulness it's not talking about a moral incapacity to respond and we have several articles on sociology 101 that goes through other uses of the idiom of spiritual deadness and how paul uses it how James uses it and how even in the book of Revelation Jesus uses it causes the church dead does it literally mean they can't heat is warnings and repent it means that they have separated themselves because of the rebellious carnality it has nothing to do with their spiritual incapacities to respond to God's warnings so yeah we're slaves to sin but God's truth may set you free so yeah we're enemies of God we would say that along with our Calvinistic friends but Christ made his appeal to all his enemies be reconciled to God we were spiritually dead and in need of a new life but God sent the gospel so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of the Living God and that by believing you may have life in his name as exists you'll eighteen says cast away from you all your transgressions which you have committed and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit for why will you die o house of Israel for I have no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies declares the Lord therefore repent and live there's the order salute us again repent so as to live cast away from you your transgressions repent so as to make yourselves a new heart that's Ezekiel 18 so there's a obvious order salutis there John 5:40 which gets us back into John where we're about to go into John chapter 6 he says to the rebellious Pharisees of the day you refused to come to me to have life well if the Calvinistic soteriology was correct he should have said I refuse to give you life so that she would come to me that that's the Calvinistic rendering because notice the order that you refuse to come so as to have new life that's the order salutis you come so as to get new life not I make you alive so that you'll surely come and so the order that the scripture gives a time and time again is that we believe as to get new life you repent so as to live not the other way around and you'll see that continually throughout the scripture so back to John chapter six here I pulled that back up here does the Calvinistic rendering therefore using the most literal word drags no one can come to me unless the father irresistible changes his will drags him in that sense makes him want to come so he's not he's not saying he's coming against the will they're very careful to say that is a Calvinist I remember as a Calvinist explaining that's not what they mean they don't mean that they're dragging you against your will it means that he irresistible changes your willingness okay he makes you want to come and I will raise those who were dragged those who were affectionately graced I will raise those people up on the last day that's the Calvinistic rendering and it's based upon again their understanding of total and ability that you're born in that falling in capacity to respond willingly to God and therefore you need the irresistible grace to make you want to do that that's the the way they're seeing that duck of their systemic within this text now how do we as traditionalist understand this passage okay so you've understood hopefully the Calvinistic rendering now how do we understand it we would say no one can come to me unless the father who sent me enables them okay because the word elko if you look at the lexicon there are several ways to translate it okay which we'll go through here in a minute so Elco yes can be and has been in some passages interpreted as to drag or to compel and in other times it's it's interpreted as to draw or to enable or to entice or something like that okay so we understand the word elico to mean the father who sent me in Abel's them and I will raise those who come at the last day and so no one can come that's the them he's referring to and on our understanding unless there's enabled by God okay they can't come to Jesus unless they're enabled granted to come by God and those who do come will be raised up in the last day that that would be our rendering of it so now the Greek structure allows for the author to be referencing them who come in not necessarily all those who are drawn which is the way the Calvinist obviously takes that for instance if the sentence translated in English were structured in this manner the intention might be more obvious only those drawn by the father may come I will raise up them those that come at the last day again I'm not trying to convince you right now if you're a Calvinist ending into this I'm not trying to convince you to believe our view I just want you to see both the duck and the rabbit understand what we're saying first and then you you were qualified to contend with it a lot of Calvinists that I come in contact with don't even know how Calvinist a non Calvinist or traditionalist handled John chapter 6 and so I'm just trying to get you to see it first and then and then we can talk about how you might contend with it after the fact so here's another example the confusion over John 6 can be clarified by applying the same interpretive principle to other similar sentences for example there's just a sentence taken out of you know just another another worldview about the army and again this helps sometimes just to see the other perspective this is not trying to make an argument so much as to help you see the other picture clearly okay no one can join the army unless they've been recruited and those who have been recruited will be trained okay so to use the Calvinistic interpretate an interpretive method on this sentence would suggest that the only the army only intended to recruit those who are eventually trained when clearly the army attempts to recruit thousands who never actually join the clear intention of this sentence is to presume the recruitment process led to the actual joining and eventual training of those in view likewise Jesus could simply be referring to those who do come as a result of God's enabling his gracious enabling given that at this time God has not completed His redemptive plan and sent the gospel to the Gentiles it is safe to say he is not enabling all to come yet now let's talk about the word dragon here a little bit more in depth and depth and understand why the Calvinist is coming to their conclusion many Calvinists will appeal to the word elko or drawl in the original Greek which can be understood as to drag as a net a fish being dragged into the boat but the word can also mean to lead or to draw as you can see at Faiers greek lexicon even if one were to accept the rendering of the term elko to mean effectually caused as in to drag the text still does not say enough to necessitate a Calvinistic reading one could be compelled to come to Christ while he was down from heaven as verse 38 says as was Judas even in verse 71 without necessarily being saved Jesus told those who came to him that they must count the cost to be his disciple as Luke 14 25 and 34 teaches and some who came only followed him temporarily one must presume that coming to Christ is equivalent to effectual salvation in order to support a Calvinistic interpretation in other words even if we were to agree and concede with the the rendering of the word elko which I don't I think the word elko is actually referring to draw or to to lead I don't think there's a sexuality that has to be implied with the word elko but what I'm saying is even if you were to concede okay Calvinists it is going to be taken as drag that's going to be contained as effectual compelling even that's not enough to get you to Calvinism because you could argue in a sense that God used effectual means persuasion persuasion like walking on water and healing the blind to to cause his his twelve who he goes on to reference in John chapter six to follow him and so you could say he compelled them using signs and wonders like he compelled Jonah to go to Nineveh you could you could say he L Code he dragged Jonah to Nineveh and in the same way you could say well it's possible that he's referencing here a compelling way in which he has gotten his followers namely the twelve to follow him and he's not necessarily doing that with everybody at this time because he doesn't want everybody to come to him at this time in history he has a purpose to accomplish obviously as we go over another other passages as well so this speaks to the compelling of the twelve the Apostles were in a sense compelled or convincingly weighted by external means such as signs and wonders as we see in Acts chapter 10 verses 40 and following and they're compelled they're there in a again convinced to come while he was down from heaven so as to accomplish the purpose for which Israel was elected which what why was Israel elected why did God choose Israel to carry the word to the world to bring the message that all the families of the earth would be blessed through you okay so in other words God chose Abraham and the lineage of Abraham to bless all the families of the earth so he selected Israel and the lineage of Abraham then Isaac not Ishmael then Jacob not Esau he he selected this lineage through whom the message would come through the blessing would come through this line of people and so his purpose and electing Israel would be accomplished that the word would come and therefore if God needs to at times use big fish or blinding lights or miracles to convince his messengers then he's going to do so he's going to compel drag them if it's necessary but that's not necessarily proof of effectual salvation as is the case for example with Judas was somebody that nature who may have been chosen for a noble cause of Apostleship but still not not actually saved proof that God has used externally persuasive means like signs big fish blinding lights to ensure his message is delivered does not prove that God internally and irresistibly compels certain pre-chosen individuals to believe their message for example proof that God uses a big fish to convince Jonah to go to Nineveh is not proof that God uses some kind of irresistible internal effectual means to make certain people believe his message when he gets there a matter of fact it makes little sense that he would use a big fish in a storm to convince the will the free will of his own messenger only to use some kind of inward irresistible means to make certain people believe his message once he got once he gets there it just it's again it's a non sequitur it's like saying because God uses convincing means to make his purpose in electing Israel the messengers to take the message that that somehow proves that he's going to decide who will and receive who will and will not receive that message once that right it just it doesn't follow but yet many of the amidst interpretations of Calvinist within the New Testament are taking passages about God's work to bring about God's electing of Israel to fruition and his blessing of all the nations of the earth through this lineage and passages about that as a proof for their sociological will view of individual effectual salvation of those pre-chosen for that end and that's again just never supported in Scripture as far as I can tell there are a number of ways to take this text without having to conclude that God has salvific Lee rejected most of humanity before the world began for no apparent reason ie unconditional election which again I'm not trying to be unfair and saying it that way I know the Calvinist wouldn't word it that way but what I'm saying is is that the Calvinistic system ultimately has not only the doctrine of election but the doctrine of reprobation now some Calvinists will try to downplay this and try to deny this concept of double predestination but I don't know logically speaking how one can come to that conclusion that if you choose before the world began a person for for no apparent reason for unconditionally as they'll say it for salvation then by default you're also choosing Esau the other side for damnation without any regard to their choices or their actions unconditionally as well and so it's it's impossible in my estimation to get around this concept of reprobation as calvin says being doomed from the room created for destruction in other words highlighting god's power and his justice through creating and even predestiny someone for damnation in order to demonstrate his power and his wrath towards that person that that that again is I don't think a biblical concept but yet is it is a part of the Calvinistic system and so let's let's talk about Jesus's own commentary on the verse this is one of the things you learn in hermeneutics is allow scripture to interpret scripture in other words if you can find other statements from the same author are the same speaker who is reiterating his words or expounding upon his meaning then that's the best place to go to find the actual intention of the author and so do we really need to guess what Jesus's intention was because he does tell us what he means later he actually gives his own commentary on what he's meant in verse 65 he in other words verse 44 doesn't stand alone it has a context and in verse 65 he gives us a little bit more insight and he says this is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the father has enabled them and again I've underlined the word enabled because that's the word that I chose for verse 66 the the interpretation of hELCO in the traditionalist interpretation because the word enabled here is is the one most translators have chosen Jesus could have clarified his meaning by saying this is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the father drags or compels by irresistible means this person Jesus had the choice of many Greek words that could have clearly indicated that intention but Jesus said did oh my which is typically understood as to grant or to permit or enable now Calvinists will often use the term enable or grant as if it's somehow connotes effectual causation but that is simply a systematic presumption that they are reading on to those terms I can enable you to call me call me by giving you my phone number but you are you still have to pick up the phone and dial and since when does to enable necessitate to effectually cause this is another thing that you'll hear Calvinists talk about well I said well faith is a gift of God and they'll quote from Ephesians chapter 2 typically ignoring the the obviously the Greek issue with the the the neuter versus the feminine form of the word faith and the fact that even Calvin himself concludes that he's saying that is not of yourself as referring back to salvation as a whole and not to faith individually even we were to concede with our Calvinistic friends that faith is a gift of God since when does a gift have to be affectionately given in order for it to be called a gift there's no gift in the world that I've ever given to one of my children that I have to effectually cause them to use in order for it to be called a gift in a it's the same way with enable the word enable or to to grant never means to effectually cause somebody to do something I can I can give you a gift and you can choose to use that gift for a good purpose or for a bad purpose or not to use it at all it's your responsibility as how do you use the gift God may give you the gift of of speaking eloquently but don't you have the choice the responsibility is how you use that gift where you can speak eloquently about lies and deception you can become a false teacher using your gift of speaking publicly or you can use your gift of speaking publicly like the the late Billy Graham who just learned just died this morning and honor his work and pray for his family and I know that he served the Lord well in his ministry but God gave him the gift of proclaiming truth eloquently I think all of us regardless of whether you agreed with Billy Graham's theology or not would say he was an eloquent communicator and it would also agree that he used his giftedness to to honor God and to proclaim the gospel but was it Billy Graham's choice to use that gift of God for good well of course it was but it was still a gift of God no one would say that his his eloquent ability to speak was not a gift of God so in other words you can give God credit for giving a gift but still take responsibility as how you use that gift and so we can say yes faith is the gift of God in so much as that he has given mankind the ability to believe he has given mankind the gospel faith cometh by hearing so I grant you faith by granting you the means by which you may believe in him and how do I do that I send you the word faith cometh by hearing the gospel the truth of God's Word so if I bring you light revelation then I have in a sense granted you faith I've granted you repentance by bringing you the gospel repentance but it's still your responsibility as to how you use and respond to that gift and so this concept their idea that to enable something or to to grant something or to give something as a gift necessitates irresistibility or a sexuality or compelling this this this this you don't have a choice in the matter kind of concept it's just not founded in scripture that's isogenic we read on to those terms it's not it's not something the scripture itself teaches so other texts to consider there's of course John 12:32 which is the same word elko is used again in reference to what God does here and so when John 12:32 is taken into account the traditionalist interpretation in my estimation obviously makes a lot more sense it says this and I when I am lifted up Jesus speaking when I Jesus and lifted up from the earth I will draw all people to myself now the Calvinist would have to take that passage to mean if they're using the word elko as to drag with compelling force irresistible you know grace kind of a way then it would mean I when I am lifted up Jesus speaking when I am lifted up from the earth I will irresistible drag or I would compel all people to myself well that's universalism if you take it that way right because then it would be I literally have you know irresistible drug all people to to myself and therefore they would all be you know saved by effectual or irresistible means but to avoid that Universal rendering of this passage Calvinists are forced to wrangle the text to suggest that Jesus is not really meaning to sound inclusive here but exclusive in other words I will drag a few of all kinds of people rather than the idea that Jesus clearly expresses elsewhere like in John 17:21 that these things were written so that the world may believe that you have sent me in other words it's it's not it's not inclusive and that the world I want the world to believe that you sent me I want the world to come to me I want the world to know that for God so loved the world that there's a salvation that's been provided for the entire world that all the nations of the earth will be blessed it's not that kind of inclusive message anymore it's an exclusive message instead in the Calvinistic rendering to say Oh what he's saying is that God is is going to drag with irresistible force all types of people so both Jews and Gentiles he's going to some of every category of people he's going to compel them and that's what's meant by this passage one has to virtually ignore I think the entire context of John 12 and most of the New Testament to suggest that Jesus was attempting to be exclusive to a pre-selected part rather than inclusive to the entire world so let's look at context it cannot be ignored that the audience in John 6 is Jewish what do we know about the Jews of this day they have grown hardened ever seeing but not perceiving otherwise they might see here understand in turn so as to be forgiven you can see this in John chapter 12 verses 39 and 41 you can see this real clearly in acts 28 23 through 2008 where Paul is preaching and some are convinced by what he says some are persuaded it even says and some refuse to believe and in that context Paul gives this same discourse as to why many of the Jews of that day were not able to see hear understand in turn because of their hardened callous condition not because they were born in a fallen condition imputed to them because of Adam but instead because of their continual rejection their heart had grown calloused and hardened to the things of God and therefore they were not able to believe in Jesus if you can't believe the the father and you're grown hardened to the father's message then guess what's gonna happen when you hear the son you're not gonna hear the son either and the converse is also true if you've listened and learned from the father you will listen and learn from the son because your heart is open to what the father is teaching so that naturally follows you're gonna listen to what the sons teaching but if you've grown hardened to what the father is teaching then of course you're gonna reject what the sons teaching and so that's the condition of the Jew in this audience at this particular time in history and that's that the context of what's happening so the reason this audience cannot come is not due to some innate fallen condition divinely imputed to all humanity because Adam sinned as the T of the tulips suggests as we talked about with aw pinks first commentary on total inability earlier does the scripture really teach that God sovereignly decreed for all people to be born God haters who could only willingly reject his own Appeals for reconciliation ie total inability of course not this audience is being judicially hardened or cut off for their unbelief despite God's love and longing for Israel as seen in all of those texts listed there they had rejected his teaching for so many years that they had grown blinded to it and thus could not even recognize their own Messiah to suggest that the reason most people were refused to come to faith in Christ is because God salvific aliy hated or rejected them before the world began is not the intention of Jesus or the tension attend the teaching of any Scripture that I'm aware of we cannot conflate the condition of the hardened Jews of this day with the natural condition of all people from birth dude to some secret divine sovereign decree never expanded upon in this or any other passage in all of Scripture consider Cornelius as just one example one may also consider the fact that when Jesus came onto the scene in the first century world there were those present who had listened and learned from the father consider the story of Cornelius recorded for us in Acts chapter 10 as just one example at Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius a Centurion in what was known as the Italian regiment he and all his family were devout and god-fearing he gave generously to those in need and prayed to God regularly one day at about 3:00 in the afternoon he had a vision he distinctly saw an angel of God who came to him and said Cornelius Cornelius stared at him and fear what is it Lord he asked the angel answered your prayers and gifts to the poor have come up as a memorial offering before God now send men to Joppa to bring back a man named Simon who is called Peter now clearly Cornelius is not under the curse of this total inability as described by the T of pulip systematic as some Calvinists suggest he sincerely feared God he worshiped him faithfully even though he had not heard the Gospel appeal or been in dwelled by the Holy Spirit so picking up in verse 29 the text goes on to say may I ask why you sent for me Cornelius answered three days ago I was in my house praying at this hour at 3:00 in the afternoon suddenly a man in shining clothes did before me and he said Courtney alias God has heard your prayer and remembered your gifts to the poor in other words God heard him okay you know this doesn't sound like somebody that God you know that's born you know completely and totally morally incapable of responding to God or fearing him or responding to the light of revelation that he's been granted this is this is somebody who God has heard he's heard the prayers of this person he's remembered the gifts to the poor send a japa for Simon who was called Peter he's a guest in the house of Simon the Tanner who lives by the sea so I sent for you immediately and I was good for you to come now we are all here in the presence of God to listen to everything the Lord has commanded you to tell us then Peter began to speak I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism but accepts from every nation the one who fears him and does what is right that implies there that anyone from any nation may fear him and do what is right okay now stop there does that mean that Cornelius has earned his salvation no if he did then why did Jesus need to die in other words even even if he feared God even if he did what was right some of the time he still fell short of God's glory he's still sin he's still needed the blood of Jesus so just because Cornelius feared God believed in him genuinely does not mean he's earned or merited his salvation by believing the otherwise there would be no need for Jesus nobody's a reason for the cross okay the the fact that he fears God and he does what's right does not mean he's perfect does not mean he's just like when it says job was a righteous man or Enoch was a righteous man or a simian was a righteous man throughout the scripture and then you come to John 6 and it says no one's righteous no not one oh well Paul just contradicted many passages throughout scripture that talked about Jobe and Enoch and Simeon being righteous no there's two different forms of righteousness even goes on in John chapter I mean Romans chapter 4 to say Abraham was credited as righteous Paul's not contradicting himself he's talking about two different types of righteousness a righteousness which comes by law not attainable no one is perfect no one can earn or merit their own righteousness through the works of the law and then there's her righteousness which comes by faith which he's already introduced in Romans chapter 1 verse 17 when he says the righteous will live by faith there are righteous people and who are the righteous people the ones who live by faith not the ones who attain it through perfect living and for perfect righteousness because all have fallen short of the law no one can merit or earn salvation through good works that does not mean that no one can believe so as to be declared righteous by the grace of God who's going to imputed of Jesus onto their account because he's gracious not because it's owed to them not because they've earned it or merited it but by grace he is chosen to show favor to show grace to those who humbly admit that they need his grace humbly confess their sin and believe and trust in him and so you've got to understand the the context of the scripture is that Cornelius is not earning or mareting salvation by fearing and trusting and doing what is right instead God is showing him grace by bringing him Christ and bringing him the message of redemption so by by which he may know the means of his salvation and being dwelled by the Holy Spirit you know the message God sent to the people of Israel Peter continues announcing the good news of peace through Christ Jesus who is the Lord of all you know what has happened throughout the Providence province of Judea beginning in Galilee after the baptism that John preached how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power and how he went around doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil because God was with him we are witnesses of everything he did in the country of the Jews and in Jerusalem they killed him by hanging him on a cross but God raised him from the dead and on the third day caused him to be seen he was not seen by all the people now this is important because this is this is what I was talking about with Jonah and the other apostles he was not seen by all the people but who was he seen by by witnesses whom who whom God had already chosen so God did choose his messengers he did choose Israel and he chose certain people from Israel to be his messengers does that prove God's also chosen who's going to believe that message no okay so proof that God has elected Israel to be the means by which the world would be blessed does not mean he has chosen who will and won't be blessed through faith okay so you've got to understand the distinction there and so he has chosen he's chosen us those who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead he commanded us to preach so he's talking about the Apostles he commanded us to preach to the people and testify that he is the one who appointed as the judge of the living and the dead and so yes he's chosen his messengers those who are going to preach and to testify that he's the one who appointed as a judge of living in the dead that does not mean he's chosen who will and won't believe that message that they preach okay all the prophets testify about him and everyone who believes in him so you got the prophets who testified those are chosen by God and sometimes compelled by effectual type means like big fish and blinding lights they're convinced dragged if you will if you want to call it that but that they testify the prophets testify that everyone who believes so in other words is your responsibility as to whether you believe what they testify to or not okay and so everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins so who receives forgiveness of sins those who believe in him through his name now while Peter was still speaking these words only Spirit came on Hall who heard the message so notice that God sees to it that the gospel appeal makes its way to the ears of Cornelius but not without reason in other words this is not an unconditional choice that God makes of Cornelius to hear the message of truth in other words God had heard his prayers he remembered his offerings and therefore had the gospel especially sent to Cornelius so as to enable him to believe and receive the gift of the Holy Spirit those who listen and learn from the father will likewise listen and learn from the son this is exactly what John 6:45 remember we started with John 6:44 we're just getting this the written verse okay this is what he said it is written in the prophets they will all be taught by God everyone who has heard the father and learned from him comes to me you see what he's saying if you listen to the father like Cornelius did you're gonna come to the son if you have refused the father's teaching and had grown calloused and hardened to it like the most of the Jews in the audience at that time had as Acts chapter 28 teaches as John chapter 12 teaches if you've grown hardened to the teachings of God then you're not gonna believe the son so do you see the difference so this is why you can't come it's not because of this inborn condition decreed by God for you to have because Adam sinned it's instead because he's talking to a Jewish audience who's grown calloused and hardened that's the condition of the audience there and that's the reason they won't listen and learn from the son is because they've grown calloused and hardened to the teachings of the father so why would Cornelius come to Jesus because he was chosen before the the the the world ever began and effectually caused to want Jesus as the Calvinistic system would have to interpret that or could it simply be because he has heard the father and learned from him the father certainly wants to draw compel teach Cornelius lead Cornelius to Christ due to the fact that he was already a god-fearing man and how does he do so by sending him the gospel the gospel is the means by which all are drawn to Christ once he is raised up he Commission's the gospel appeal to be sent to all people and thereby granting all to come to him through faith as we see in John 12:32 acts 1:8 Romans 10 12 through 16 while Jesus was here in the flesh however the gospel had not yet been sent to Cornelius and the other Gentiles Jesus was specifically coming to his own and his own received him not John 1:11 why didn't they receive him multiple choice okay why didn't they receive him multiple choice one because God Sally hey today will began having been sovereignly decreed to be born under the curse of the fall by which they could only desire to hate God and reject his appeals for reconciliation that again that may not be the how the Calvinist would want to word it to make it sound most appealing but that's ultimately what the Calvinist would have to check mark and say well yeah God Sulli according to salvation his election and salvation he rejected hated them before the world ever began not based on anything about them personally but he just rejected them he sovereignly decreed meaning he decided beforehand that they would be born under the curse of the fall and therefore they could only hate God and reject his appeals to be reconciled they would absolutely only reject the gospel because of their inborn nature that's the mark you have to check if you're gonna affirm Calvinism but what about this mark what about what about this is an alternative maybe this is the reason they didn't receive him okay because despite God's genuine love and provision for Israel as indicated in all these verses where it talks about he held his hands to them he longs to gather them like a mother hen gathers the cheeks of the chicks and all these other passages that talk about he's longing after and holding out his hands all day long to Israel despite his love and provision for Israel they have become calloused in self-righteousness by their own freewill mind you not by some fallen decree from birth that they couldn't control no they have grown calloused and self-righteousness their consciences have become seared their their old wineskins that can't receive new wine because they are calloused and hardened and set in their ways otherwise they might have seen they might have heard they might have understood and they might have repented as those passages we've already referenced clearly stated could that be the reason that they're not receiving the son because they've rejected the teachings of the father and grown calloused to his truth Israel has become like old wineskins that could not take the new wine this is not describing the condition of all people from birth but specifically of the Israelites who were calloused in their ways do not conflate Israel's hardened calloused condition with the condition of all humanity from birth as the Calvinists do in their doctrine of total inability here's the conclusion I want to close by referring to this article by dr. Craig Adams who ultimately comes to the same inclusion that I do but he takes a different route getting there and so I want to take just a moment to read through this the context here has to do with the relationship of the Father and the son Jesus is claiming that the Jews are rejecting him because in actuality they have rejected the father so the context of this passage is is not a discussion of whether God has chosen to send the mass of humanity to eternal hell while choosing to arbitrarily save by compulsion dragged a few the context concerns why these particular Jews have not been drawn to Jesus as Messiah and son while others have and Jesus asserts here that it is because they have first rejected the father and the testimony of the scriptures Jesus denounces their claim to knowledge of the Father he asserts that their resistance to the father and the message of the Scriptures is the reason they have not subsequently been drawn to the son the point is made repeatedly and the father who sent me has himself testified on my behalf you have never heard his voice or seen his form John 537 you search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life and it is they that testify on my behalf John 5:39 how can you believe when you accept glory from one another and do not seek the glory that comes from the one who alone is God John 544 if you believed Moses you would believe in me for he wrote about me but if you do not believe what he wrote how will you believe what I say John 5 46 and 47 and earlier in the chapter in chapter 5 it is stated another way quote anyone who does not honor the son does not honor the father who sent me John 5:23 thus the point is that the Jews who are rejecting him are doing so because they have first rejected the father but Jesus asserts that those who acknowledge the father are drawn along into acknowledging the Sun again Cornelius being a good example of that if you acknowledge and fear the father then naturally it's going to follow that when you hear the message from Peter you're going to believe the son this is what John chapter 10 gets into as well when it talks about when Jesus says well you don't believe because you're not my sheep what does he mean by that well a Calvinist says well that means that you don't believe because God has eternally rejected you before the foundation of the world he hasn't chosen you you're not one of his elect ones you're not a sheep he's you're a reprobate you're not elect and that's why you won't we won't believe in me the son know what he's saying is he's using an idiom the sheep for the the first century Jew would have known the sheep as a follower they would follow their leader off a cliff without even looking they'd just fall right off the cliff because they're just followers that's what sheep do they just blindly follow and they just they they give all the following whoever their leader is their Shepherd and so what he's saying is you don't follow me the Shepherd because you're not a follower of the one who sent me you're not a sheep you're not one who's listened to Moses therefore you're not gonna follow me you're not gonna the reason you don't believe in me is because you didn't believe the father you're not a sheep you're not a follower of God like Cornelius Cornelius would follow me because Cornelius has been following the father and that's that's the point he's making in John chapter 10 same point he's been making all throughout John is that if you follow Moses if you follow the teachings of the father if you follow the the scriptures that you search through then you would listen and learn for me because they're the ones testifying about me and so those who listen and learn from the father will listen and learn from the son those who follow are a sheep of the Father will be a sheep of me and the reason you don't believe is because you're not a sheep you're not a follower of the father therefore you're not gonna follow me that's the meaning of the text and that's what he's getting at in John chapter 6 as well hopefully this has been helpful I know it's long it takes a while to unpack misconceptions and misunderstandings of the text and it shall help people see both sides and I pray that this has helped you to see both sides of the argument and to understand that God has not eternally rejected most of humanity for no apparent reason before the world ever began but instead he does genuinely love and provide for every man woman boy and girl that salvation is for every single person that he is atone for made atonement available for every single person just like the serpent that was lifted in the desert was for the whole group that whoever looked to the serpent for healing would be healed so to Christ is raised up and whoever looks to him for healing will be healed atonement has been provided for all and therefore all may benefit from that blessing brought to the entire world inclusively God has brought salvation to the world and all therefore may believe and be saved any sociological systemic that limits that it's not a biblical sociology it's just not it doesn't mean that those who are mistaken can't be Christians it doesn't mean that those are mistaken are demons that are out there trying to destroy the church they're simply misinterpreting and miss applying certain passages that are talking about oftentimes Israel's calloused hardened condition and applying it to their universal idea of the nature of man from birth being born completely you know as moral haters of God who can't do otherwise unless God irresistible effectually changes their nature to make them want to do differently and that's not what the scripture is teaching it's just not and so hopefully you understand that now and can take these things and help spread the word repost and rebroadcast these things help people to see that there's another side to this we don't have to be mean when we're confronting the Calvinistic doctrines but we can be firm speak truth and love and spread the good news of God's grace for all people blessing to you see you next time bye-bye you

Channel: Soteriology101

Views: 27,836

Rating: 4.7264438 out of 5

Keywords: Calvinism, Traditionalism, Arminianism, Predestination, Election, Bible Study, depravity, unconditional, atonement, soteriology, Leighton Flowers, Southern Baptists, Baptist, Southern Baptist Convention, John 6, 6:44

Id: J1Qxb16u2qc

Length: 66min 48sec (4008 seconds)

Published: Wed Feb 21 2018