No person can come to Christ by their own freewill !

[Spiritual Jew]

Yeah Jn 12:32 is all about Christ wiil Notice

32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.

What is your point? You need to learn how to communicate more clearly. It says He draws all people to Him. So, why aren't all people saved then? To me, the reason is clear. It's because we have free will and some choose not to accept the gospel and not to put their faith and trust in Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior. That places the blame entirely on those who reject Him rather than giving them an excuse that they didn't believe in Him because they supposedly couldn't believe in Him due to supposedly being totally depraved.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

He was only lifted up for them He would convert to Himself all of them. Isaiah calls them His seed Isa 53:10

10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.

You seem to not be understanding what John 12:32 says. It says that Jesus would draw ALL PEOPLE to Himself. Why are you trying to change that to not refer to all people when it clearly does refer to all people? People can be drawn to Christ by the preaching of the gospel and the Holy Spirit speaking to their hearts, but the Holy Spirit can be resisted (Acts 7:51). That's the explanation for how He can draw all people to Himself without all people being saved.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Good day, SJ

The grammar does not support an "and" clause... no matter how much you wish it did.

He said this to show by what kind of death he was going to die.

Thayer Definition:
1) that (thing), this (thing)
Part of Speech: pronoun
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: neuter singular nominative or accusative case of G3778


Sorry.

In Him,

Bill

I'm sorry that you are not addressing my argument. Are you talking about some other verse? Look at the text.

John 12:32 And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.”

Only the first part of this verse refers to the type of death He would die. The second part of the verse says He would draw all people to Himself. Do you just ignore that part or is it missing from your Bible or what? What do you think it means for Him to draw all people to Himself? You can't act as if it doesn't actually say that if you want to be taken seriously.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Good day, SJ

I would like to see that... I do believe that God is love and loves every one he just does not love every one the same.

Why would that be? Show me the scripture which teaches that God is partial like that. I don't believe you will find it. Scripture teaches that God loved the world so much that He gave His only Son to die for the sins of the whole world so that whoever believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life (John 3:16, 1 John 2:1-2). Looks to me like God loved everyone equally by doing the same thing for all people. So, what is your opinion based on? It does not appear to be based on scripture.

The loving merciful God loves those he chooses to adopts as His own in one way.
Those that are not His children he loves just not in the same way.

I love my Mom in a different way than I love my sister
I love my neighbor lady in a different way than I love my Gram.

You might find this useful

God's Love and God's Hatred | Reformed Bible Studies & Devotionals at Ligonier.org

Ligonier Ministries, founded by R.C. Sproul, exists to proclaim, teach, and defend the holiness of God in all its fullness to as many people as possible.

learn.ligonier.org

Is It Biblical to Say That God Loves Everyone?

In this brief clip from our 2017 National Conference, R.C. Sproul answers the question, “Is it biblical to say that God loves everyone?” Transcript "Often I hea

www.ligonier.org

snip" When we look at the concept of the love of God in Scripture, we see distinctions that have to be made. Historically and theologically we distinguish among three types of divine love. There is the love of benevolence, where God has a kind spirit to the whole world and His benevolent will, His benevolent love falls on everybody. But there's also the sense in which in the Bible the love of God is defined in terms of God's beneficence, that is that's not just simply what His attitude is towards the world but how He displays that goodness universally—the rain falls upon the just as well as on the unjust. And so that universal dimension of the love of God is manifest but usually when we're talking about the love of God in popular language, what we’re really talking about is what we call God's love of complacency. And that term, the love of complacency, is not used in the way in which we use the term complacency in our age, in our culture. Our term of complacency means smugness, self-satisfaction, that sort of thing."

So, you think that God loves the people that you believe He gave no opportunity to be saved and have eternal life and instead ensured that they would spend eternity in eternal torment and punishment? What kind of love is that? That seems like hate to me.

 

[Fervent]

That's a good point. Calvinists do not recognize that what Paul was talking about in Romans 9 was God having the right to bring salvation to the Gentiles as well, which many Jews objected to.

Romans 9:22 What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory, 24 even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

What Paul was talking about in Romans 9 has nothing to do with God supposedly having the right to choose, for reasons He only knows, to have mercy on and save some while hardening and withholding salvation from the rest. It has to do with God having the right to call Gentiles to salvation and not just Jews. Many Jews questioned God about that, but who are they to question God and who He can offer salvation to? He offers salvation to all people (Titus 2:11).

Something most people don't seem to realize is that Calvinism is a philosophical system given Biblical dress through prooftexting. Which is why the only segments of Scripture that seem to matter to them are John 6, Ephesians 1, and Romans 9. The whole system depends on imposing a particular reading of those 3 chapters on the rest of the Bible, none of which are supported by understanding the chapters in their context. But the system is reinforced because it is easy to just quote proof texts and actually engaging in contextual analysis takes time and effort. So it appears to be Biblical to those who are unwilling to take the time necessary to do the exegetical work even though it is an imposed philosophical system.

 

[Fervent]

So, you think that God loves the people that you believe He gave no opportunity to be saved and have eternal life and instead ensured that they would spend eternity in eternal torment and punishment? What kind of love is that? That seems like hate to me.

Calvinism makes God double-minded. 2 wills, 2 gospels, 2 loves. What Calvinists don't seem to realize about their doctrine is that if God truly is that capricious then they have no basis for trusting His promises...because He is not required to honor His word.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Good day, SJ

I contend that if he wanted to have Mercy on all he could in fact choose to do that.

What do you mean "if" He wanted to have mercy on all? Scripture says He does. Did you not read the passage I referenced? Are you views based on scripture or something else?

Romans 11:30 Just as you who were at one time disobedient to God have now received mercy as a result of their disobedience, 31 so they too have now become disobedient in order that they too may now receive mercy as a result of God’s mercy to you. 32 For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

It's not a question of "if" He wants to have mercy on all people. He does. Scripture clearly teaches that. The question is why does He not have mercy on all people? We know it can't be because He doesn't want to. The only viable explanation is that He makes people responsible to choose whether to humble themselves and repent and believe or not in order to receive mercy. He doesn't force Himself on anyone. He demands that people repent willingly (Acts 17:30). How can it be genuine repentance any other way?

Do you believe he wants to and he is unable to do so?

No. He wants to and is fully able to do so, but He requires people to humble themselves and repent and believe in order to receive mercy.

Read this parable:

Luke 18:9 To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everyone else, Jesus told this parable: 10 “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’ 13 “But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’ 14 “I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.”

Notice here that the Pharisee and people like him "were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everyone else" including people like the tax collector. The tax collector, contrastly, had no confidence in his own righteousness and didn't look down on anyone. Instead, he humbled himself and acknowledged that he was a sinner while asking God for mercy. Then notice that Jesus said "For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.”". Read that again. It doesn't say "For those who can't help but exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who God humbles will be exalted". People are expected to choose to humble themselves. God doesn't do it for us. We are expected to acknowledge that we are sinners who can't save ourselves and need God's mercy. Your view that God has mercy on some and not on the rest for reasons that He only knows is not supported by scripture, including this parable. It's very clear how God decides who to have mercy on and who not to have mercy on. He has mercy on those who humble themselves. All people are required to acknowledge their sins and their inability to save themselves while trusting Jesus/God to save them instead.

I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy. Mercy is a verb he "wills" to do it.

That's right. But, how does He determine who to have mercy on? That's what you said nothing about here. Scripture tells us how He determines that. But, I would imagine you say it's just a mystery as to how He determines that. No, it is not. The parable in Luke 18:9-14 shows us how He determines that.

Now I guess it would be fair to say he has Mercy even to those he created that he knows he would condemn. Him waiting to do so and sustaining them would be an act of Mercy, would you agree?

That's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about salvation. We're talking about Him having mercy on people and saving them from the penalty of their sins. That is what the passages we're talking about relate to and not to Him having mercy on people in some lesser sense.

 

[A New Dawn]

I agree, it's not seeking. But Calvinism doesn't even allow for people to offer an authentic response, they have to be coerced. And it paints God as capricious, malicious, and untrustworthy in a variety of different ways. It is built on false philosophical premises, and then bends the Bible to suit those premises through proof texting and renders the entire Bible a sham because the God Calvinism portrays is the author of sin so nothing he produces is trustworthy not even the Bible.

That doesn't really say anything about the truth or falsity of Calvinism, as it is all of Christianity that proclaims that God takes the initiative. To say otherwise is Pelagianism, which the ancient church anathematized while maintaining the reality of free will.

Again, you speak about what you don’t know. There is not a thing in Calvinism that suggests that God has to coerce people to become believers. My conversion was the epitome of a Calvinist conversion, if ever there was one. When I was 21, I was running from everyone, including God, after a failed marriage resulting from physical abuse. When I was at my lowest, not seeking, not even wanting to be around anyone. But God reached down and turned my heart from the cold stone it was to one of flesh that He poured all his love and acceptance into. I wasn’t seeking, He didn’t ask me, He did it. He made me his in the blink of an eye and in that moment my old self was put away and there was not even a thought that I could, or would even want to, reject Him. He gave me faith, He has kept me safe in His arms since then.

There was no me seeking Him. There was no free will choice. There was God choosing me and acting on me and sustaining me.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Something most people don't seem to realize is that Calvinism is a philosophical system given Biblical dress through prooftexting.

Yes, but I'm well aware of that. That is something that is very clear to me. And to you, obviously.

Which is why the only segments of Scripture that seem to matter to them are John 6, Ephesians 1, and Romans 9. The whole system depends on imposing a particular reading of those 3 chapters on the rest of the Bible, none of which are supported by understanding the chapters in their context.

Exactly. They change the rest of scripture to fit their understanding of those passages. That's typical of false doctrine. It's typically based on cherry picked scriptures that they use to make the rest of scripture fit with their false understanding of those scriptures.

But the system is reinforced because it is easy to just quote proof texts and actually engaging in contextual analysis takes time and effort. So it appears to be Biblical to those who are unwilling to take the time necessary to do the exegetical work even though it is an imposed philosophical system.

Exactly. So, they delude themselves into thinking their doctrine is correct because there aren't enough people like us willing to take the time and make the effort to show how their understanding of those few passages contradicts many other passages in scripture.

 

[Fervent]

Again, you speak about what you don’t know. There is not a thing in Calvinism that suggests that God has to coerce people to become believers.

*Ahem* "regeneration" in Calvinism is coersion, as they have no say in the matter. It's not a free will decision, so it is a form of coersion.

My conversion was the epitome of a Calvinist conversion, if ever there was one. When I was 21, I was running from everyone, including God, after a failed marriage resulting from physical abuse. When I was at my lowest, not seeking, not even wanting to be around anyone. But God reached down and turned my heart from the cold stone it was to one of flesh that He poured all his love and acceptance into. I wasn’t seeking, He didn’t ask me, He did it. He made me his in the blink of an eye and in that moment my old self was put away and there was not even a thought that I could, or would even want to, reject Him. He gave me faith, He has kept me safe in His arms since then.

There's something that seems to be missing from your story...something very important.

There was no me seeking Him. There was no free will choice. There was God choosing me and acting on me and sustaining me.

So you didn't repent and believe?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Again, you speak about what you don’t know. There is not a thing in Calvinism that suggests that God has to coerce people to become believers.

How do you explain Paul reasoning with people and persuading people to believe then? If what you're saying was true, reasoning with people and persuasion would be completely unnecessary in order to convince people to believe.

Acts 17:1 When Paul and his companions had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a Jewish synagogue. 2 As was his custom, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, 3 explaining and proving that the Messiah had to suffer and rise from the dead. “This Jesus I am proclaiming to you is the Messiah,” he said. 4 Some of the Jews were persuaded and joined Paul and Silas, as did a large number of God-fearing Greeks and quite a few prominent women.

Acts 18:1 After this, Paul left Athens and went to Corinth. 2 There he met a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, who had recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had ordered all Jews to leave Rome. Paul went to see them, 3 and because he was a tentmaker as they were, he stayed and worked with them. 4 Every Sabbath he reasoned in the synagogue, trying to persuade Jews and Greeks.

If salvation was entirely up to God's choice and saving faith was the gift of God then there would be no need to reason with people and no need to persuade people to believe. Yet, as we can see here, reason and persuasion are factor in people believing or not.

My conversion was the epitome of a Calvinist conversion, if ever there was one. When I was 21, I was running from everyone, including God, after a failed marriage resulting from physical abuse. When I was at my lowest, not seeking, not even wanting to be around anyone. But God reached down and turned my heart from the cold stone it was to one of flesh that He poured all his love and acceptance into. I wasn’t seeking, He didn’t ask me, He did it. He made me his in the blink of an eye and in that moment my old self was put away and there was not even a thought that I could, or would even want to, reject Him. He gave me faith, He has kept me safe in His arms since then.

There was no me seeking Him. There was no free will choice. There was God choosing me and acting on me and sustaining me.

That is what you have fooled yourself into thinking happened because of your false understanding of scripture. Just because you don't even understand what happened in your experience does not nullify what is taught in scripture which is that God wants all people to be saved (1 Timothy 2:3-6) and genuinely offers salvation to all people (Titus 2:11) as evidenced by the fact that He sent His Son to die for all people (John 3:16, 1 John 2:1-2). Doctrine cannot be based on our own experiences which we can easily misunderstand as to what exactly happened or can even forget exactly what happened. It has to be based on scripture.

 

[A New Dawn]

Jesus calls all sinners to repentance and fully expects that all sinners are capable of answering His call. He said that sinners are sick and in need of the physician.

Mark 2:16 And when the scribes and Pharisees saw Him eating with the tax collectors and sinners, they said to His disciples, “How is it that He eats and drinks with tax collectors and sinners?” 17 When Jesus heard it, He said to them, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.”

A sick person is fully capable of recognizing and acknowledging that they are sick and cannot heal themselves and instead need the physician to heal them. Since Jesus said sinners are sick, then that means sinners (all people are sinners - Romans 3:23) are fully capable of recognizing and acknowledging that they are spiritually lost and cannot save themselves and instead need Jesus to save them and His blood to cover their sins.

What you are saying comes only from your own imagination and is not taught anywhere in scripture. Which is why you didn't offer any scripture to back up what you said.

I have quoted lots of scripture to support my position but there comes a point in time when people come up with all sorts of fancy reasons why they can ignore them that it seems useless to continue doing it.

Jesus, while being compared to a physician, wasn’t a physician, and non-believers aren’t sick. They are dead in their sins. Dead people can’t make decisions, they can’t do anything. That is why it is God who has to make the first move.

 

[A New Dawn]

*Ahem* "regeneration" in Calvinism is coersion, as they have no say in the matter. It's not a free will decision, so it is a form of coersion.

There's something that seems to be missing from your story...something very important.

So you didn't repent and believe?

Sorry you missed the gist of the story. I was speaking about God saving me. HIS actions, HIS work, HIS salvation. Sorry God’s part of the process isn’t of interest to you.

 

[Fervent]

Sorry you missed the gist of the story. I was speaking about God saving me. HIS actions, HIS work, HIS salvation. Sorry God’s part of the process isn’t of interest to you.

The issue isn't God's part, it's that you don't seem to have any part in your salvation. No repentance, no believing. Just a victim of a cosmic lottery. Didn't even catch anything about the preaching of the gospel. You seem to think that being treated like an object is equivalent to love.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Calvinism makes God double-minded. 2 wills, 2 gospels, 2 loves. What Calvinists don't seem to realize about their doctrine is that if God truly is that capricious then they have no basis for trusting His promises...because He is not required to honor His word.

Right. They think that His will (supposedly to only save some) thwarts His own desires (to save all). It makes God look very bad and makes it look like He contradicts Himself. Calvinism badly misrepresents God's character and that's why it needs to be strongly refuted.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Sorry you missed the gist of the story. I was speaking about God saving me. HIS actions, HIS work, HIS salvation. Sorry God’s part of the process isn’t of interest to you.

He did not say that he was not interested in that. He's just saying he'd like to see the whole story. It looks like you're trying to come up with an excuse to not talk about your part of the process. Do you think you played no part in the process? If so, I wonder how you would answer someone if they asked you what they needed to do to be saved? Would you answer them the same way Paul and Silas answered the jailer in Acts 16:30-31?

 

[A New Dawn]

The issue isn't God's part, it's that you don't seem to have any part in your salvation. No repentance, no believing. Just a victim of a cosmic lottery. Didn't even catch anything about the preaching of the gospel. You seem to think that being treated like an object is equivalent to love.

I didn’t have a part of my salvation. It was all of God. That’s the whole point. Repentance is not part of salvation, it is the response to salvation. My repentance was turning from the sin that I was partaking in and turning my life to Christ. Totally and completely. That is part of sanctification, not part of justification.

 

[A New Dawn]

Right. They think that His will (supposedly to only save some) thwarts His own desires (to save all). It makes God look very bad and makes it look like He contradicts Himself. Calvinism badly misrepresents God's character and that's why it needs to be strongly refuted.

Gotta love watching two people who know absolutely nothing about Calvinism buddying up and high-fiving each other over their totally wrong synopses.

 

[Fervent]

I didn’t have a part of my salvation. It was all of God. That’s the whole point. Repentance is not part of salvation, it is the response to salvation. My repentance was turning from the sin that I was partaking in and turning my life to Christ. Totally and completely. That is part of sanctification, not part of justification.

Right, you have no part in your salvation. You're just a puppet with no choice in the matter

. And the Bible makes no distinction between sanctification and justification, that's a human doctrine arising in the 16th century.

Jesus sure could have simplified his response to the rich young ruler's question if He were a Calvinist. "What must I do to be saved?" "Be chosen by God, nothing you can do if you're not among those lucky few."

 

[A New Dawn]

Right, you have no part in your salvation. You're just a puppet with no choice in the matter

. And the Bible makes no distinction between sanctification and justification, that's a human doctrine arising in the 16th century.

Jesus sure could have simplified his response to the rich young ruler's question if He were a Calvinist. "What must I do to be saved?" "Be chosen by God, nothing you can do if you're not among those lucky few."

Wow. You are seriously deluded.