Good answer.
Let's set aside the meaning you give to being drawn to Christ and look at what Jesus says it means.
Well, which is it? You did not call me a troll? Or your called me one on more than one occasion?
Questions don't answer questions. Are you presupposing that God in His sovereignty chose to give some of His sovereignty to men and angels? Or is that something the Bible tells us?
What makes you think you know more what the Bible says than I do? It seems to me in all these exchanges that you make the Bible mean what you want it to mean. And really not the Bible as a whole consistent unit, but only by way of certain scriptures that evidently don't need to find their meaning in context. You have demonstrated this again and again. But don't take my word for it, ask any Calvinist in this thread or the duplicate threads you made.
I don't have any way of responding to posts that can't get farther than nope, nope.
Nope.
Those who call on the name of the Lord are the elect and only the elect. Romans 8:28-30; John 6:35-65; John 6:37; John 17:24;John 10:29;John 1:12-13; Acts 13:48.
Statement 2:
You can't have it both ways. You can't say that nothing hinders/unhinders the ability to make a free decision (Statement 2) and also say a person must be drawn to Christ (statement 1). Your definition is invalid as it contradicts your statements or vise versa.
Again you use the word FREEDOM but don't define it. Free from what/who?
Who/what drew you to Christ? What power overcame your proclivity to reject Christ? What changed?
You said everyone without exception is drawn to Christ. My point was to show this cannot be true as not all people hear the gospel which is a prerequisite of salvation.
It is a guarantee because Jesus says those who are drawn will be raised up at the last day.
Only if you incorrectly say all are drawn to Christ, which Calvinism does not say, and sometimes seem to be saying not all are drawn.
If that is what John 12:32 means then why did Jesus say in John 6 that those drawn are the ones granted to Him by the Father?
It is only universalism if one thinks all men are drawn to Christ. And because you already believe that is what John 12 says, you then must look for a way to make John 6 not mean what it does mean. Does that entire discourse sound like it is discussing the resurrection of the dead in judgement? Or does it sound like He is telling those presente who He is and what He is going to do concerning His resurrection. Did He not say in the middle of it, 62 "Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before?" Did He say in verse 35. Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life; whoever comet to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst." 37. All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out." 39. And this is the will of Hm who sent Me, that I should lose nothing of all that He has given me, but raise it up on the last day. 40. For this the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in Him should have eternal life. and I will raise Him up on the last day."
You have laid a presupposition onto the scriptures for what you say is not actually in them.
No where in all of the NT do we see any form of the word choice or any reference to making a decision in any scripture that says any form of the words used to say what gives eternal life. They simply "believe".
Then you show that you completely ignore what is clearly shown you from the scriptures and in them, and show that you have no intention in ever backing off your stance, and no interest in learning anything. Therefore your reason for doing all this is insincere. I assume it's a case of one thinking they know all things because they think 1John 2:20 and John 16:30 were only written to/about them, therefore whatever they think a scripture means is what it means because there is no way they could be wrong.
That is because you use nothing but logical fallacies in your arguments. Do you even know what a logical fallacy is? There are many different types of them and I think you have probably covered the gambit.
There is nothing wrong with debating. What do you think forums are for? I already addressed those scriptures when you tried that tactic with someone else.
When are you going to start evangelizing?
A sentence that makes no sense. But jbf none of the several op's that you started began with anything edifying but only in tearing down. And you have continued in that vein throughout. I have had enough and I think everyone else has too. So I will put you on a three day vacation to cool down, gather your thoughts, take counsel with God as to your own behavior, give the rest of us a breather. If you come back, try and do better.
Distortion of what I said.
Right. That is what I said. You are trying to refute the truth and the reason you cannot is because you use the Bible wrongly interpreted and wrongly applied to attempt to do so.
My post required no response, especially if was not going to address what was done by you and instead defend yourself for doing it.
You called me a troll on more than one occasion; while according to the definition you have given above, I am not a troll.
Why then create them with the ability to feel the pain of that unless he is some sort of cosmic sadist?
I'm more open minded. I know from other verses that ALL can mean 'without distinction". ALL can at times mean "without exception". Rather than come to a conclusion based on verses with ALL, I use other verses where the meaning is clearer on a particular subject and use these explicit explanations to conclude one way or another what ALL means in less explicit verses.
All people are unhindered at whatever juncture that they are being drawn to Christ.
It was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt by @fastfredy0 that not all people are drawn to Christ. So why do you repeat that they are? And having done so state a non sequitur that does not address what he said.
