You've got it backwards, brother. Your anti-Calvinist prejudice is not even allowing you to accurately and responsibly engage with the position. "Pre-programmed robots"? Really? Again, your criticisms simply dismiss any discussion of the relationship between God's decree and precepts, or concurrence of primary and secondary causes. They are grounded in a caricatured view of the position which you cannot seem to see past. No, that does not justify your animosity.
Now, do you have anything to offer in way of response to the argument provided?
First, there is no justification for comparing a student in a teacher-student relationship to a glass that must be etched. No one who has ever been a teacher has ever reached into a student's heart and changed him from being incapable of learning to incapable of not learning. And there is no evidence that John (or God) intended John 6 to go beyond what is normally understood to be true for teacher-student relationships.
The evidence to the contrary that God's "teaching" penetrates all human hearts, including especially the lost, and enters their understanding is overwhelming. We need look no further than Romans 1:
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.
24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.
[The New King James Version (Ro 1:18–32). (1982). Thomas Nelson.]
The underlined phrases in the passage above make it clear that 1) God's "teaching" penetrates the understanding of the lost, and 2) they purposefully choose to not go along with Him. They clearly "see" and "understand" and "know" God, but they "supress the truth" and refuse to "glorify Him as God" and are "unthankful", and for these reasons they "are without excuse". They "know" full well that those who practice evil are worthy of eternal condemnation, nevertheless they "not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them".
Second, there is no getting around the fact that God has determined that He will save all those who believe in Jesus. See, for instance, 1 Corinthians 1:21 -- "For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe". In addition, there is no getting around the fact that God is involved evangelically in every salvation experience. Per the discussed verses in John 6, God draws people to Jesus, teaching them (among other things) that they are sinners in need of a Savior, that Jesus has the power to save them, and that they need to trust Him and go to Him. Per point number 1 above, there is no reason to say that God must reach into a person's heart to "automate" them for the chain-reaction to 1) "hear" God, then 2) "learn" from God, then 3) "trust" God, then 4) "go to Jesus for salvation", then 5) "get salvation from Jesus".
Not only does this sound robot-like, it contradicts all the Scriptures that tell us plainly that the life-altering change of heart that aligns us in all respects to God is the result of salvation, not the cause of salvation. For, when we first put our trust in Christ, He comes to live in us and we are born of God, we become His children (His offspring). We become new creatures, "created according to God in true righteousness and holiness" (Eph 4:24). We become one spirit with Him because we are joined to Him (1 Cor 6:17). Now that we are children of God, we are led by the Spirit of God (Ro 8:14). But even now, we are not automatically doing everything He desires, but we must choose to walk in lock step with the Spirit in order to avoid fulfilling the lusts of the flesh (Gal 5:16). One day, eventually, we will be free of the flesh so that we will not be dragged into sin by it any more.
So no, it is not true that my "anti-Calvinist prejudice is not even allowing you to accurately and responsibly engage with the position". I am not prejudiced (defined by web dictionary: "preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience") against Calvinism, because my opposition to it is reasoned and is based on many decades of actual experience. I accurately understand the practical implications of the Calvinist position and I am responsibly exposing and opposing them.
You should know that my criticisms do not "simply dismiss any discussion of the relationship between God's decree and precepts, or concurrence of primary and secondary causes". My criticisms expose the improper application of those concepts to God's evangelism of the lost. For example, it is clear that God is "not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance" (2 Pe 3:9). This shows us the heart of God and His desire for all people to be saved, but it clear from other passages that not everyone comes to repentance and that some will perish. But it is wrong to apply the same reasoning to God's evangelism of the lost. For instance, when Jesus said, "While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become sons of light" (Jn 12:36), He was not expressing His heart's desire for everyone to be saved, knowing full well some would not. He was telling them to take advantage of their current situation so that they may become offspring of God and escape His condemnation. Otherwise, He would have said something like, "I really want all of you to come to me now so that you may have life, but I know that there are some of you (and I know who you are) that I will not change your heart to enable you and cause you to do so. There's no hope for you." So, just because I don't engage on one subject or another, that does not mean that I don't understand the issue, or that I'm not addressing it, or that I dismiss it. It just means I choose to go to the heart of the matter to expose the error instead of dealing with the jargon.
