Theo1689
Well-known member
John 6:44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. 45 It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me—
When we come to Scripture, we must make certain that we are trying to determine what the AUTHOR intended to say, rather than what we WANT it to say to conform to our theology. Anti-Calvinists twist Scripture to preserve "free will" and to try to defend God from seeming like (in their eyes) some monster, and they say we're the ones who twist Scripture.
John 6:44 is an embarrassment to "Free-willers", and they would be much happier if it wasn't in Scripture. But it is, and so they have to deal with it, somehow. So they invariably try to use the next verse to nullify v.44. Now let us see why this not only does not work, but further study of the passage only gives more certainty that the Reformed view is the correct one.
John 6:44 No one can come to me ...
Jesus begins this part of his sermon with a statement of inability. "No man can come to me." This is the default position for sinful mankind. We are dead in trespasses and sins, and UNABLE to come. And left to our own devices, we never will (which is why Howie expressed how glad he was that God drew/dragged him). But this is a clear refutation of "free will". So free-willers have to turn this phrase on its head, and basically make it mean the exact OPPOSITE of what Jesus said, "ANYONE/EVERYONE can come to me, all they have to do is..." But that is NOT what Jesus said. He said, NO MAN can come. Fortunately, He provided an exception, so let's look at it.
John 6:44... unless the Father who sent me draws him.
Our "default" position is inability to come to Jesus. But God decides to show mercy and compassion, and out of the entire population of sinful humanity, God has chosen to elect a people to himself, and He will "draw" ("helkuo") them to the Son. This is the action of the FATHER, nor our own action.
And if you will note, I highlighted the word, "him", because it's a place-holder for the group of people God draws, and the passage will further inform us about this group of people. We're going to do an exercise called "follow the pronouns', which is very important for correctly understanding Scripture, or any other text. We need to know as we go from one phrase to another, and from one sentence to another, whether a passage is continuing to speak about the same person or group, or whether it's changed to another person or group.
Those of us who have been in Bible studies for many years have learned an expression, "What is the 'therefore' therefore?". "Therefore" is what we call a "linking word", and connects what follows with what just came previously. Other linking words are, "since", "because", "for", etc. And this is the way language works, whether spoken or written, that meaning flows from one clause or sentence to the next, usually with a constant subject.
John 6:44... unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.
We have seen that the first occurrence of "him", is referring to someone the Father draws ("the Father ... draws him"). And by extension (IMO), it refers to all whom God draws. Then we read the promise, "And I will raise him". And we have nothing in the context to suggest that the second "him" ("raise him") is anyone different from the first "him" ("draws him"). Indeed, Dr. James White likes to point out (correctly so, IMO) that in the Greek, the two occurrences of "him" are only separated by two words:
John 6:44 ... ἑλκύσῃ αὐτόν, κἀγὼ ἀναστήσω αὐτὸν ...
John 6:44 ..... draws .. him, .and-I ..will-raise . him ...
There is literally nothing inbetween the two occurrences to "him" to introduce a new object for God to be speaking of. They HAVE to be referring to the same person or group. What this means is that the same group that the Father draws, is the same group which will be raised up. There's no place for the person/group to change, no place for individuals to be added later, or to be removed.
Edit: I'm just copying-and-pasting a statement I wrote further below, because it emphasizes the point I made above:
"I don't think he's interrupting his own sermon to give a commercial."
I don't think any reasonable person would ever want to argue that "He" and "His" are referring to two different people, since there is no contextual reason to believe so.
John 6:45 It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’
While there is no explicit linking word in the text, I think a reasonable person can conclude that Jesus is quoting from the prophets (Isa. 54:13), to support his immediately previous statement. (I don't think He's interrupting His own sermon to give a commercial for Isaiah.). So it is reasonable to conclude that the "they" in Jesus' citation is referring to the same group, "him", that He was referring to being "drawn" and "raised up".
It's also important that "they will all be taught" is in the passive voice. Again, God is the one doing the action. God is teaching "them", and in fact God IS teaching "ALL" of "them".
Isa. 54:13 All your children shall be taught by the LORD,
This is the verse from Isaiah that Jesus was quoting. I think it's very interesting, and very telling.
Jesus doesn't quote, "all your children", He paraphrases it with "they". And relating back to his previous statement, that would be referring to the group which was "drawn" and then would be "raised up".
I think it's also interesting that Isaiah says, "All your children shall be taught by the LORD", rather than, "all who are taught by the LORD shall become your children". Teaching is not the "cause" of being children, but being their children is the reason they ARE taught. It also says that "ALL" the children shall be taught, and so this cannot be referring universally to all humanity (since not all are taught), but must be referring to a select group. Hey, might that select group be the ones the Father chose to draw? I think so.
John 6:45 Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me—
Now here is where the "free-willer" tries to SMUGGLE in "free will". They want to say, "Well, there were some who CHOSE to take advantage of the opportunity to hear and learn", and because they made that choice, that's why God chose to draw them. But that is NOT what the passage says. While it is true that "heard" and "learned" are in the active voice, the reason they ended up hearing and learning is because of what Jesus said, namely that they were TAUGHT BY GOD. "Learning" is simply the result of God teaching us. No rational person says, "I am choosing to hear". No rational position says, "I am choosing to understand". Either we hear or we don't. Either we understand or we don't. It's not a matter of "choice" or "will".
John 6:44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.
John 6:45 Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me—
Let's look more closely at these two verses, and see how similar they are. I believe it is reasonable to assert that v.44 can be reworded as, "Everyone who has been drawn by God comes to me". So let's compare:
John 6:44 Everyone who has ........... been drawn by God .............. comes to me
John 6:45 Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me—
I think it is quite clear that these are parallel sentiments, and that the "drawing" is not a second and consequent action from the "heard and learned", but that they are referring to two aspects of the same action.
The "hearing and learning" is not the "reason" they are drawn by God.
The "hearing and learning" (under God's control/action) are the MEANS by which God draws them to His Son.
When we come to Scripture, we must make certain that we are trying to determine what the AUTHOR intended to say, rather than what we WANT it to say to conform to our theology. Anti-Calvinists twist Scripture to preserve "free will" and to try to defend God from seeming like (in their eyes) some monster, and they say we're the ones who twist Scripture.
John 6:44 is an embarrassment to "Free-willers", and they would be much happier if it wasn't in Scripture. But it is, and so they have to deal with it, somehow. So they invariably try to use the next verse to nullify v.44. Now let us see why this not only does not work, but further study of the passage only gives more certainty that the Reformed view is the correct one.
John 6:44 No one can come to me ...
Jesus begins this part of his sermon with a statement of inability. "No man can come to me." This is the default position for sinful mankind. We are dead in trespasses and sins, and UNABLE to come. And left to our own devices, we never will (which is why Howie expressed how glad he was that God drew/dragged him). But this is a clear refutation of "free will". So free-willers have to turn this phrase on its head, and basically make it mean the exact OPPOSITE of what Jesus said, "ANYONE/EVERYONE can come to me, all they have to do is..." But that is NOT what Jesus said. He said, NO MAN can come. Fortunately, He provided an exception, so let's look at it.
John 6:44... unless the Father who sent me draws him.
Our "default" position is inability to come to Jesus. But God decides to show mercy and compassion, and out of the entire population of sinful humanity, God has chosen to elect a people to himself, and He will "draw" ("helkuo") them to the Son. This is the action of the FATHER, nor our own action.
And if you will note, I highlighted the word, "him", because it's a place-holder for the group of people God draws, and the passage will further inform us about this group of people. We're going to do an exercise called "follow the pronouns', which is very important for correctly understanding Scripture, or any other text. We need to know as we go from one phrase to another, and from one sentence to another, whether a passage is continuing to speak about the same person or group, or whether it's changed to another person or group.
Those of us who have been in Bible studies for many years have learned an expression, "What is the 'therefore' therefore?". "Therefore" is what we call a "linking word", and connects what follows with what just came previously. Other linking words are, "since", "because", "for", etc. And this is the way language works, whether spoken or written, that meaning flows from one clause or sentence to the next, usually with a constant subject.
John 6:44... unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.
We have seen that the first occurrence of "him", is referring to someone the Father draws ("the Father ... draws him"). And by extension (IMO), it refers to all whom God draws. Then we read the promise, "And I will raise him". And we have nothing in the context to suggest that the second "him" ("raise him") is anyone different from the first "him" ("draws him"). Indeed, Dr. James White likes to point out (correctly so, IMO) that in the Greek, the two occurrences of "him" are only separated by two words:
John 6:44 ... ἑλκύσῃ αὐτόν, κἀγὼ ἀναστήσω αὐτὸν ...
John 6:44 ..... draws .. him, .and-I ..will-raise . him ...
There is literally nothing inbetween the two occurrences to "him" to introduce a new object for God to be speaking of. They HAVE to be referring to the same person or group. What this means is that the same group that the Father draws, is the same group which will be raised up. There's no place for the person/group to change, no place for individuals to be added later, or to be removed.
Edit: I'm just copying-and-pasting a statement I wrote further below, because it emphasizes the point I made above:
"I don't think he's interrupting his own sermon to give a commercial."
I don't think any reasonable person would ever want to argue that "He" and "His" are referring to two different people, since there is no contextual reason to believe so.
John 6:45 It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’
While there is no explicit linking word in the text, I think a reasonable person can conclude that Jesus is quoting from the prophets (Isa. 54:13), to support his immediately previous statement. (I don't think He's interrupting His own sermon to give a commercial for Isaiah.). So it is reasonable to conclude that the "they" in Jesus' citation is referring to the same group, "him", that He was referring to being "drawn" and "raised up".
It's also important that "they will all be taught" is in the passive voice. Again, God is the one doing the action. God is teaching "them", and in fact God IS teaching "ALL" of "them".
Isa. 54:13 All your children shall be taught by the LORD,
This is the verse from Isaiah that Jesus was quoting. I think it's very interesting, and very telling.
Jesus doesn't quote, "all your children", He paraphrases it with "they". And relating back to his previous statement, that would be referring to the group which was "drawn" and then would be "raised up".
I think it's also interesting that Isaiah says, "All your children shall be taught by the LORD", rather than, "all who are taught by the LORD shall become your children". Teaching is not the "cause" of being children, but being their children is the reason they ARE taught. It also says that "ALL" the children shall be taught, and so this cannot be referring universally to all humanity (since not all are taught), but must be referring to a select group. Hey, might that select group be the ones the Father chose to draw? I think so.
John 6:45 Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me—
Now here is where the "free-willer" tries to SMUGGLE in "free will". They want to say, "Well, there were some who CHOSE to take advantage of the opportunity to hear and learn", and because they made that choice, that's why God chose to draw them. But that is NOT what the passage says. While it is true that "heard" and "learned" are in the active voice, the reason they ended up hearing and learning is because of what Jesus said, namely that they were TAUGHT BY GOD. "Learning" is simply the result of God teaching us. No rational person says, "I am choosing to hear". No rational position says, "I am choosing to understand". Either we hear or we don't. Either we understand or we don't. It's not a matter of "choice" or "will".
John 6:44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.
John 6:45 Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me—
Let's look more closely at these two verses, and see how similar they are. I believe it is reasonable to assert that v.44 can be reworded as, "Everyone who has been drawn by God comes to me". So let's compare:
John 6:44 Everyone who has ........... been drawn by God .............. comes to me
John 6:45 Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me—
I think it is quite clear that these are parallel sentiments, and that the "drawing" is not a second and consequent action from the "heard and learned", but that they are referring to two aspects of the same action.
The "hearing and learning" is not the "reason" they are drawn by God.
The "hearing and learning" (under God's control/action) are the MEANS by which God draws them to His Son.