2 Calvinists leave Christianity Romans 9

[TedT]

Oh I agree with you. I left Calvinism myself but could never leave Christ. My salvation is not based on my theology but the Person and work of Christ alone.

Indeed! Theology does not save. Christ saves. Faith in a theology to save smacks of magic, we are saved by our own depth / strength of faith in our belief. Faith in Christ saves even if your theology is wrong!

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

Oh I agree with you. I left Calvinism myself but could never leave Christ. My salvation is not based on my theology but the Person and work of Christ alone.

Plus your free will decision. About which you can, and do, boast.

 

[Behold]

God is not the author of evil … God does not compel people to fake “Christianity”, God merely permits the tares to grow for a season until their true nature is inevitably exposed. (I think I read that somewhere in the Bible. )

Reader,

Who would create a Theology...
That teaches..
That God caused Adam and Eve to sin, so that sin would enter humanity, and hell with it, and then, after God caused this, He sent His only begotten Son, to die for only for SOME, ..,.YET... God caused ALL to be in this situation to begin with ?

What madman created that "Theology"?

Its the same one who created the idea that the Devil is asleep in a hay barn, while God is busy, busy, busy... causing all the EVIL in the World.
That Satan is on Vacation, since Adam and Eve, and God is busy causing Rape, incest, hatred, lies, murder, abortion, WAR, poverty....worldwide, since the fall of man.

So, this same person gives all the credit to GOD....as having done, and is still doing.... the DEVIL's work.

And people create "christian forums" and "denominations".... to try to indoctrinate you into this one Man's Theological Madness, and millions are infected with his Theological insanity.

 

[civic]

Plus your free will decision. About which you can, and do, boast.

God gave me a free will

 

[Johann]

- YouTube

Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.

www.youtube.com

- YouTube

Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.

www.youtube.com

Liberating! I am still wounded by the teachings of Calvin-to this day and find it difficult to believe God loves ME and that Christ died for ME.
Thank you for this podcast brother-I am learning so much in this short period of time I'm here and book mark almost every link you so graciously share @civic.
Thank God this Forum is radically different from the others!
Shalom to you and the Admins.
Johann.

 

[atpollard]

Who would create a Theology...
That teaches..
That God caused Adam and Eve to sin, so that sin would enter humanity, and hell with it, and then, after God caused this, He sent His only begotten Son, to die for only for SOME, ..,.YET... God caused ALL to be in this situation to begin with ?

What madman created that "Theology"?

You are the only person that I have seen express that “Theology”.

Particular Baptists believe:

• God is not the author of sin. [James 1:12-18]
• All men sin and are guilty before God (no exceptions). [Romans 1-3]
• Jesus is the only “way” to the Father … the Father draws and gives to the Son, the Son gives “whosoever believes” (all who come to Him / all that the Father gives) eternal life, and the Holy Spirit seals the saved and makes intercession with groans beyond words. [John 3, John 6, John 10, etc.]
• All who believe are not judged, and all who do not believe are already condemned. [John 3:18]

 

[Behold]

You are the only person that I have seen express that “Theology”.

Have you read any John Calvinism?

Have you never read a Calvinist post that says..>"God created Evil"?
So, if God causes Evil, then is the Devil sunbathing in Hawaii, for the last 6000 yrs?

Have you ever dealt with a John Calvinist who says that you dont have free will?
If not, go back and read carefully a lot of posts on this very forum.

So, that's my previous post to you.
Thats the "MAN" Himself., who created all that stuff.

 

[TibiasDad]

Some things are awkward to describe to those that were not there. A decade ago, I would have refused to protect people still living, but now most are dead.

What I will speak of is that I engaged at various points in gangs, interstate drug smuggling, arson, burglary and came closer than is prudent to joining the ranks of McVeigh and Kaczynski. It was after searing my conscience and recognizing that I was within a few years of death by cop, by gang or by life in prison that I chose the time, place and method of my death as a final act of defiance against the universe.

Let’s take a detour into the philosophy on the afterlife. (It is important to understand who I was to understand why the “Billy Graham” model of making a decision could never fit what actually happened.) I viewed any god or afterlife as a statistical improbability approaching zero percent. However, as one prepares to die, it becomes impossible to not consider the possibility that one is wrong (Pascal’s Wager in philosophical terms). My atheism was not born from “science” but from “The Problem of Evil”. Since most people are familiar with the arguments, I will only post the 4 possible conclusions:

1. God is powerless to stop evil [no god]
2. God is ignorant of evil [no god]
3. God is too busy to stop evil [no god]
4. God can stop evil and chooses not to [god is evil]

So the two basic conclusions are either there is no god, or god is evil. It was far easier to accept that there is no god than to redefine an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent evil creator. However, since I was planning to discover first hand whether there was an afterlife or not, I had to at least entertain the remote possibility that I would face the creator. In that case, I was forced to conclude that I deserved damnation. Hell would be the appropriate place for me … because in hell I would be with beings that hated our creator as much as I did. Any god that had the power to stop the evil and suffering and chose to do nothing about it was not deserving of worship … such an evil being should be opposed by all of its created beings. THAT is the definition of Hell. Does this sound to anyone like someone that is “seeking god”?

The Charismatics shared their “Gospel” with me and unlike the lukewarm social Methodists that I had been exposed to as the child of “Submarine Christians” (surfacing twice a year at Easter and Christmas), the Charismatics had a genuine faith in their “invisible unicorn” (but needed their meds adjusted). It was after encountering them, as I neared completion of my “project”, that God literally appeared to me and spoke to me [there was no vision, but you knew that you were in the presence of God … when the prophet says in scripture “I am undone, because I am a man of unclean lips and I dwell among a people of unclean lips” … I KNOW exactly how he felt.]. I would say I spoke with God, but it would be more accurate to say that God spoke and I listened. The message was not for public consumption … it was personal … but the gist was that effective immediately, I belonged to Him. Period. End of discussion.

As I said, I immediately quit the gang and the life and from that day to this, I belong to Him. That cannot be reconciled with “prevenient grace” or a “free will decision” to follow. I was NOT seeking Him, when He claimed ownership of me. I started reading the Bible since I figured that I should probably read the manual and learn about this God that just claimed me. So I LOVE Wesleyan Theology - I just cannot affirm it in my salvation.

Does this sound to anyone like someone that is “seeking god”?

Not in this particular instance, but perhaps there might be a logical error in your thinking, for this has not been the only or even the usual manner of experience in either scripture or real life.

To assume such a protocol does, in my opinion, severe damage to any scripture that speaks of seeking. (Isa 55:6, Matt 7:7, especially Acts 17:27)

that God literally appeared to me and spoke to me [there was no vision, but you knew that you were in the presence of God … when the prophet says in scripture “I am undone, because I am a man of unclean lips and I dwell among a people of unclean lips” … I KNOW exactly how he felt.].

Fair enough. Did you hear an audible voice?

I would say I spoke with God, but it would be more accurate to say that God spoke and I listened. The message was not for public consumption … it was personal … but the gist was that effective immediately, I belonged to Him. Period. End of discussion.

I certainly do not doubt the fact of your experience, I have had encounters with God that I’m sure others would scratch their heads at.

That cannot be reconciled with “prevenient grace” or a “free will decision” to follow. I was NOT seeking Him, when He claimed ownership of me.

May I inquire as to your reasoning why? I mean prevenient grace, grace that goes before, is preparation grace that is working behind the scenes in a largely silent and irresistible manner. For instance, why did someone like you even consider the slim chance of God being real; was that ever something you would have considered? I doubt it, based on your description of yourself. That was God’s grace preparing you, going ahead of you.

So I LOVE Wesleyan Theology - I just cannot affirm it in my salvation.

Again, it appears to me that you are predicating your theology solely upon your own experience. The first converts in Acts 2, after Peters sermon, “were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?”

This is an aspect of God calling, through the gospel, and man seeking to respond to him. “What shall we do?” is man seeking to obey what they have from God seeking them! And Peter’s response says that there is something that man must first do to be saved, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” (See Acts 2:37-38)

Acts 17:27 tells us, as I said above, that all that God has done has been done “so that men might seek him, and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not very far from any one of us.”

God is certainly able to do what he did in your case, and like in Paul’s case, but that is very rare. The “Billy Graham” model is very much akin to Acts 2, I think the only difference is that the “altar call” is just answering the question of “what must we do to be saved” before it would be asked.

As a Wesleyan Arminian I would like to know how you can love Wesleyan Theology while thinking it doesn’t fit your religious experience. (I am glad you do love it, but it is hard to understand by your espousing Calvinism. I’m just trying to understand.)

Doug

 

[atpollard]

Have you read any John Calvinism?

Particular Baptists agree with the 5 Doctrines of Grace, and I posted what we believe. So "I think so." is the answer to your strangely worded question.

Have you never read a Calvinist post that says..>"God created Evil"?
So, if God causes Evil, then is the Devil sunbathing in Hawaii, for the last 6000 yrs?

No. I already said that. Did you actually read my post before responding to it?

Have you ever dealt with a John Calvinist who says that you dont have free will?
If not, go back and read carefully a lot of posts on this very forum.

Yes. I have also read secular philosophers that claim that ... there is an entire branch of Philosophy and Psychology dedicated to the idea that prior input determines our decisions and with COMPLETE data, all decisions could be predicted with 100% accuracy. Every action has a prior cause, so no action is truly "random".

The real issue is the definition one has of "FREE WILL" and the fact that when one speaks of "Calvinism", the discussion is exclusively limited to sotieriology (salvation). Can you choose God with a fallen nature?

So, that's my previous post to you.
Thats the "MAN" Himself., who created all that stuff.

Not quite true.

• God revealed TRUTH through Jesus.
• The Apostles (and friends) recorded that Truth in Scripture.
• Men distorted that truth over 15 centuries into something that was "not Truth".
• The REFORMERS (of whom John Calvin was only one of many and certainly not the first) rediscovered the Truth in Scripture and advocated the Church return to it.
• Gutenberg enabled Bibles to be mass produced and Translators returned scripture into the vernacular language so all people (an exaggeration) could read it for themselves.
• Those that chose to return to Biblical Truth became Protestants, and those that clung to Church Tradition over Scripture remained Catholic.
• In the early 1900's, someone invented a clever acronym "T.U.L.I.P." to help people remember the 5 points of the Doctrines of Grace created to refute the 5 Remonstrances of Arminius (which argues that salvation was a synergistic cooperation between God and men where men decide who goes to heaven and who goes to hell).

That is a brief history lesson for the Doctrines of Grace (what you call "Calvinism") that have their roots in the writings of John and Paul.

John 6:44

• No one can come to Me [Total Inability - no one can come!]
• unless the Father who sent Me [Unconditional Election - God chooses men, men do not choose God.]
• draws him; [Irresistible Grace - God DRAWS like fish in a net, not INVITES like we have a choice.]
• and I will raise him up on the last day. [Preservation of the Saints - Those the Father draws are all raised by the Son in the end; none are lost.]

 

[atpollard]

May I inquire as to your reasoning why? I mean prevenient grace, grace that goes before, is preparation grace that is working behind the scenes in a largely silent and irresistible manner. For instance, why did someone like you even consider the slim chance of God being real; was that ever something you would have considered? I doubt it, based on your description of yourself. That was God’s grace preparing you, going ahead of you.


Again, it appears to me that you are predicating your theology solely upon your own experience. The first converts in Acts 2, after Peters sermon, “were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?”

This is an aspect of God calling, through the gospel, and man seeking to respond to him. “What shall we do?” is man seeking to obey what they have from God seeking them! And Peter’s response says that there is something that man must first do to be saved, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” (See Acts 2:37-38)

Acts 17:27 tells us, as I said above, that all that God has done has been done “so that men might seek him, and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not very far from any one of us.”

God is certainly able to do what he did in your case, and like in Paul’s case, but that is very rare. The “Billy Graham” model is very much akin to Acts 2, I think the only difference is that the “altar call” is just answering the question of “what must we do to be saved” before it would be asked.

As a Wesleyan Arminian I would like to know how you can love Wesleyan Theology while thinking it doesn’t fit your religious experience. (I am glad you do love it, but it is hard to understand by your espousing Calvinism. I’m just trying to understand.)

Doug

Q. Why do I love Wesleyan Theology (even if I do not believe it to be correct)?

I admire the cleverness of the solution. One cannot honestly read scripture (and by 'honestly', I mean without dogmatic presuppositions) and not at least SEE that there are contradictions on the surface in how things are presented. Some books and chapters and verses clearly imply, if not virtually stating, that God desires all to be saved while other verses are just as clear that most will not be saved and God will even harden some [vessels created for the purpose of destruction]. The Bible is no "children's book" with simplistic answers to placate simple minds. Like LIFE and REALITY, it is complex and full of paradoxes that require effort to comprehend ... including some things that are incomprehensible [hypostatic union, anyone?]

For me, this is a comfort rather than something bad. A "god" that was fully comprehensible would be too small to not be "man made". So I am aware of the ... let's call them "LITERARY CONTRADICTIONS" for lack of a better term ... within scripture, and admire the extra-biblical concept of "prevenient grace" as a hypothetical solution to the paradox. It allows God to be sovereign (sort of) and allows man to be both "fallen" and have a WILL "free" enough from sin to choose God - that is its strength. Occam's razor is its weakness: it adds extra-biblical complexity that is not revealed in God's word.

For me, the test of any Hypothesis or Law is its ability to describe empirical reality. A great THEORY that does not match actual field measurements is worthless. That same criteria was applied to THEOLOGY. Unfortunately, all data was subjective and I had only one certain point of reference. My salvation. I cannot objectively or subjectively evaluate or compare the unverifiable experiences of other people. I could only be certain of my own subjective impressions of my personal experiences. I told you already that I came across four truths from Scripture and my subjective experiences:

1. Deep down, people are just no darn good.
2. God does not ask permission, God just does.
3. Whatever reason God chooses to save us, it is because of Him … we certainly do not deserve it.
4. God finishes what God starts.

I concluded that these truths did not support the "Wesleyan Hypothesis" particularly well. Looking at just the first OBSERVATION:

Deep down, people are just no darn good.
Prevenient Grace would suggest that at some point, people would reach a state of moral neutrality. That is not what I observed in either myself or others. At their best, people rise to "hypocrisy" (even the saints) - knowing the "good" they should do, but doing it not. How then is such a "will" free to choose to please God? Why would we all not instinctively follow the example of Adam and Eve and attempt to cover our shame ourselves and run and hide from a Holy God? Prevenient grace proposes both fresh and salt water flowing from the same spring (good and evil flowing from our unsaved heart). Scripture and experience say that is not so. Only EVIL flows from the heart of men and good can only flow from the Spirit of God. Thus the spirit must "pierce our heart" (be INSIDE us) before we can repent and choose Christ.

I have concluded that there is no FREE WILL ... there is a WILL that is a SLAVE to either one master or the other. We are a slave to sin or a slave to righteousness ... and THAT cannot come from inside us.

Q.E.D.
Grace is not "prevenient" in the Wesleyan (universal) sense.

 

[civic]

Q. Why do I love Wesleyan Theology (even if I do not believe it to be correct)?

I admire the cleverness of the solution. One cannot honestly read scripture (and by 'honestly', I mean without dogmatic presuppositions) and not at least SEE that there are contradictions on the surface in how things are presented. Some books and chapters and verses clearly imply, if not virtually stating, that God desires all to be saved while other verses are just as clear that most will not be saved and God will even harden some [vessels created for the purpose of destruction]. The Bible is no "children's book" with simplistic answers to placate simple minds. Like LIFE and REALITY, it is complex and full of paradoxes that require effort to comprehend ... including some things that are incomprehensible [hypostatic union, anyone?]

For me, this is a comfort rather than something bad. A "god" that was fully comprehensible would be too small to not be "man made". So I am aware of the ... let's call them "LITERARY CONTRADICTIONS" for lack of a better term ... within scripture, and admire the extra-biblical concept of "prevenient grace" as a hypothetical solution to the paradox. It allows God to be sovereign (sort of) and allows man to be both "fallen" and have a WILL "free" enough from sin to choose God - that is its strength. Occam's razor is its weakness: it adds extra-biblical complexity that is not revealed in God's word.

For me, the test of any Hypothesis or Law is its ability to describe empirical reality. A great THEORY that does not match actual field measurements is worthless. That same criteria was applied to THEOLOGY. Unfortunately, all data was subjective and I had only one certain point of reference. My salvation. I cannot objectively or subjectively evaluate or compare the unverifiable experiences of other people. I could only be certain of my own subjective impressions of my personal experiences. I told you already that I came across four truths from Scripture and my subjective experiences:

1. Deep down, people are just no darn good.
2. God does not ask permission, God just does.
3. Whatever reason God chooses to save us, it is because of Him … we certainly do not deserve it.
4. God finishes what God starts.

I concluded that these truths did not support the "Wesleyan Hypothesis" particularly well. Looking at just the first OBSERVATION:

Deep down, people are just no darn good.
Prevenient Grace would suggest that at some point, people would reach a state of moral neutrality. That is not what I observed in either myself or others. At their best, people rise to "hypocrisy" (even the saints) - knowing the "good" they should do, but doing it not. How then is such a "will" free to choose to please God? Why would we all not instinctively follow the example of Adam and Eve and attempt to cover our shame ourselves and run and hide from a Holy God? Prevenient grace proposes both fresh and salt water flowing from the same spring (good and evil flowing from our unsaved heart). Scripture and experience say that is not so. Only EVIL flows from the heart of men and good can only flow from the Spirit of God. Thus the spirit must "pierce our heart" (be INSIDE us) before we can repent and choose Christ.

I have concluded that there is no FREE WILL ... there is a WILL that is a SLAVE to either one master or the other. We are a slave to sin or a slave to righteousness ... and THAT cannot come from inside us.

Q.E.D.
Grace is not "prevenient" in the Wesleyan (universal) sense.

Does a slave have a choice to obey or not ?

A slave has no choice to be set free from its master. But a slave does have a choice to obey him or not, would you agree ?

 

[atpollard]

Does a slave have a choice to obey or not ?

A slave has no choice to be set free from its master. But a slave does have a choice to obey him or not, would you agree ?

When one speaks of human masters and human slaves, I agree.
When one speaks of "hearts" and the Holy Spirit and 'Powers and principalities' ... I am less sure of the rules.

Can an unsaved man (a slave to sin according to Paul) choose to disobey and live a sinless life?
I don't think so.

Can a Child of God (a slave to righteousness according to Paul) choose to disobey and live a reprobate life?
I don't think so ... and I think scripture says the same thing.

So I leave it to you to reason out.

 

[civic]

Can an unsaved man (a slave to sin according to Paul) choose to disobey and live a sinless life?
I don't think so.

This is where I see the bible makes it clear that the unregenerate whom Jesus called to Himself to follow Him and His disciples all chose to believe in Him and follow Him with their own willingness and nothing was coerced by Him.

I also believe that grace proceeds any of mans decision and that the Holy Spirit draws, convicts a man of their need. But is does not take regeneration first for this to happen since no one was regenerated or born again until Pentecost.

 

[atpollard]

Not in this particular instance, but perhaps there might be a logical error in your thinking, for this has not been the only or even the usual manner of experience in either scripture or real life.

To assume such a protocol does, in my opinion, severe damage to any scripture that speaks of seeking. (Isa 55:6, Matt 7:7, especially Acts 17:27)

I have a personal, but untestable, hypothesis that both "Calvinism" and "Arminianism" contain within them a kernel of truth. I do not advocate some form of "excluded middle" compromise that seeks to reconcile the two. Rather, I believe both fail in their claim to exclusivity.

In scripture, God can call out to an Andrew and Andrew can respond with a heart that chooses to follow. There are too many "whosoever believes" in scripture that look EXACTLY like "Billy Graham" making a call to "free will" hearts to choose and those hearts choosing Christ to continue to stand on our heads and deny that is how God saves SOME PEOPLE. At the same time, there are too many Lydias whose heart scripture tells us God specifically prepared to hear the word, or crowds in Acts 2 where SOME hearts were pierced and some hearts mocked at the same words and grace ... and Saul who was seeking to MURDER CHRISTIANS when called ... to deny that sometimes God CHOOSES and DRAWS specific individuals and not others.

I posit that in John 3, "whosoever believes" is not a "DRAW" vs "FREE WILL" either/or ... "whosoever" is a BOTH. That is why Scripture presents both and the debate rages on. God saves like an Arminian to prove (demonstrate) His love and God saves like a Calvinist to prove (demonstrate) His sovereignty.

 

[atpollard]

This is where I see the bible makes it clear that the unregenerate whom Jesus called to Himself to follow Him and His disciples all chose to believe in Him and follow Him with their own willingness and nothing was coerced by Him.

No one actually advocates "coercion". No one follows God unwillingly.

The issue is where does the desire to follow God originate ... our fallen heart or the Holy Spirit?
Put in human terms, why do you fall in love with someone? Did you choose to fall in love or did they "draw/attract" you and cause you to fall in love? [Both cases - you are still with them because of LOVE, not COERCION.]

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

God gave me a free will

According to that logic, God gave everyone a free will. Which means the difference between you and another is you made the right choice and the other poor sucker chose poorly. Which means you have something about which to boast.

 

[civic]

According to that logic, God gave everyone a free will. Which means the difference between you and another is you made the right choice and the other poor sucker chose poorly. Which means you have something about which to boast.

Yep the sinner loves his sin more than Jesus. I love Jesus more than my sin. I chose to follow Him not reject him and He saved me by giving me His Holy Spirit and a guarantee of my inheritance and sealed me with Him. I repented and believed, Jesus did not do that for me. Biblical theology calls that synergism.

 

[Behold]

• No one can come to Me [Total Inability - no one can come!]

Right, no one is "pre-destined" to come.
That's true.

• unless the Father who sent Me [Unconditional Election - God chooses men, men do not choose God.]

Right here is where the words of the NT have to be understood "in Light of the Cross", as your verse, was given to the House of Israel, before Jesus died on the Cross, for the "world". as John 3:16 and Corinthians 5:19

Calvin, didn't understand this.. Be we understand that once the Cross was Raised, then the Call of God, became This....

Jesus said...>"if i be lifted up (on the Cross), I WILL......draw all people (everyone) to me".
So, in John 6, you have God giving the Apostles to Jesus, and if you read a bit farther, you'll find the verses become very clear about who it is that God gave to JESUS, "out of the world", before Jesus died on the Cross for the "world" = John 3:16 .... 2nd Corinthians 5:19

• draws him; [Irresistible Grace - God DRAWS like fish in a net, not INVITES like we have a choice.]

Jesus said..."If i be lifted up, i will draw all (everyone) to me"..

Also..

Jesus Christ the righteous: He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.
1 John 2:2...

Notice that Jesus paid for the sin of the world, and not just the sin of the "elect", as John Calvinism tries to twist the bible to teach.

• and I will raise him up on the last day. [Preservation of the Saints - Those the Father draws are all raised by the Son in the end; none are lost.]

Everyone who is born again, is already "in Christ", and "one with God".

All the born again are "seated in Heavenly places".... right now.

All the Born again, are become this..

"As JESUS IS.... so are the BORN AGAIN..... in THIS World".

 

[atpollard]

Right here is where the words of the NT have to be understood "in Light of the Cross", as your verse, was given to the House of Israel, before Jesus died on the Cross, for the "world". as John 3:16 and Corinthians 5:19

Sorry, I reject the premise that God saved some people one way 'once upon a time' and another way 'today' so 99% of the Bible means absolutely nothing to us because God doesn't do that any more.

• God is the same yesterday, today and forever.
• No one comes to the Father except through the Son ... Jesus is the ONLY DOOR! (looking forward or looking back)

 

[atpollard]

Right, no one is "pre-destined" to come.
That's true.



Right here is where the words of the NT have to be understood "in Light of the Cross", as your verse, was given to the House of Israel, before Jesus died on the Cross, for the "world". as John 3:16 and Corinthians 5:19

Calvin, didn't understand this.. Be we understand that once the Cross was Raised, then the Call of God, became This....

Jesus said...>"if i be lifted up (on the Cross), I WILL......draw all people (everyone) to me".
So, in John 6, you have God giving the Apostles to Jesus, and if you read a bit farther, you'll find the verses become very clear about who it is that God gave to JESUS, "out of the world", before Jesus died on the Cross for the "world" = John 3:16 .... 2nd Corinthians 5:19




Jesus said..."If i be lifted up, i will draw all (everyone) to me"..

Also..

Jesus Christ the righteous: He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.
1 John 2:2...

Notice that Jesus paid for the sin of the world, and not just the sin of the "elect", as John Calvinism tries to twist the bible to teach.




Everyone who is born again, is already "in Christ", and "one with God".

All the born again are "seated in Heavenly places".... right now.

All the Born again, are become this..

"As JESUS IS.... so are the BORN AGAIN..... in THIS World".

I quoted Jesus (that is why the words are in RED) ... you are arguing against His words, not mine.
So have at it if you want, but I will choose to believe Jesus over you.

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.