DISCLAIMER

The content of Yahoo!WebRing's advertising banners and links is solely the product of Yahoo!WebRing and their advertising clients. Yahoo!WebRing's banner advertising is not the product of, endorsed, or approved by The Christian Conservative Opinion Pages (TCCOP) or its webmaster. If you object to Yahoo! WebRing's banner ads, please complain to them.

Deke,
TCCOP Webmaster
ROCCS RingMaster


 
spacer
The Six Postulates

By Deke
spacer

Email: deke42000@yahoo.com

 

Return to the TCCOP Home page

Return to The Bible and Daily Living




Note to the reader:

Please take the time to read this entire paper. Anyone who wants to receive a reply about to their comments about this paper is expected to respond rationally, and in a whole Bible-consistent manner with relevant Scripture support for each position taken. Scripturally unsupported rhetoric and Biblically insupportable and unsupported personal opinion will be regarded as unworthy of a response. Simply believing something about Scripture isn't enough; that is the stuff of false doctrines and deception.
   

-- THE GROUNDWORK: FIRST PRINCIPLES --

Principle one: The Bible does not contradict itself. ALL Scripture must agree with all other Scriptures which address the same subject. If the subject is not the same, the Scriptures are not related and are irrelevant to the topic being examined. It is incumbent upon anyone taking a Scripture-based argument to present logically- and grammatically-related Scriptures rather than a hodgepodge of passages which have nothing in common.

Principle two: If a position is taken which causes the context, syntax, and grammar of two or more Bible passages to appear contradictory, that position and its proponent necessarily attributes a state of contradiction to the entire Bible -- but only from his perspective -- whether or not he denies that reality. God declares that He has breathed (theopneustos) all Scripture (2Timothy 3:16).  God also calls his people to reason with Him (Isaiah 1:18).  Loud cries of protest, circular reasoning, and acrid verbal smokescreens notwithstanding, it is a rational necessity and inescapable consequence of injecting whole Bible self-contradiction into any one Scripture that anyone taking a position which can be demonstrated to induce such contradiction also necessarily implies that the Bible is a corrupt and self-contradictory work: a fanciful work of ancient fiction.  Protests again notwithstanding, it is also a rational necessity when taking a theological position which induces Biblical contradiction to accept as inherent in that theology that the Bible is not and can not be the inerrant word of infallible Almighty God because it is flawed.  It then follows that anyone taking that position, despite their denial, thereby moves very close to siding with those liberal pesudochristian heretics who view the ancient Scripture as "flexible" according to the dictates of their seared consciences. God can not possibly have breathed any self-contradictory positions into Scripture because He is perfect and without shadow or flaw. God is not the author of confusion, contradiction, and error.  Either that, or the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob did not breathe the Holy Bible because it contains demonstrable error.

It is the responsibility of anyone whose theology or  personal belief induces conflict between any two original text Scriptures, or induces conflict between their ideology or theology and any original text Scripture, to rationally and precisely demonstrate (1) that the conflict does not exist, and (2) that their position is consistent with every other original text passage of the Scriptures which is contextually similar.  If they can not demonstrate that their position is consistent with all like Scriptures, and that their position does not induce conflict between any two contextually similar Scriptures, given the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy, their ideas are empty human-inspired philosophy which is based on, at best, unbiblical doctrines.


-- AN EXAMINATION OF TWO BIBLE PASSAGES --

Foreword

The following examination of John 6:37 and 44 uses the two First Principles, above, as its foundation.  It is vital to recognize as fundamental truth that (1) the Bible does not  contradict itself, and (2) no Bible passage or group of Bible passages contradicts  any other. Either the entire Bible agrees with these passages and is the  inerrant word of God, or these passages do not agree with the entire Bible, the entire Bible is flawed, and it can not be the breathed word of Almighty God.  

A logically consistent, rational understanding of Scripture  demands that all relevant Scriptures, necessarily, must be interpreted in  terms of these two passages - and vice versa - or the Bible is necessarily  self-contradictory and not the breathed-word of God (2Timothy 3:16). Just as He breathed in Isaiah 1:18(a): "Come now, and let us reason together," ... (NKJ), God expects us to use our minds to understand what He has revealed.
 

The Six Postulates: An Overview

It is suggested that the reader obtain a copy of Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible and/or a copy of the Greek texts of these passages before attempting argue any point that is about to be presented in the balance of this paper.

The word definitions, context, syntax, and original text grammar of John 6:37 and 44 places an impossible burden of proof on the shoulders of Christians who hold the freewill doctrine. When the passages are understood according to their sentence structure, and are not interpreted through a "theological filter," John 6:37 and 44 prove inescapably and in whole-Bible consistent context that man has no choice in his salvation.  That conclusion is easily understood if the syntax and grammar of John 6:37and 44 are examined rationally. 

John 6:44 reads: "NO ONE CAN COME TO ME UNLESS THE FATHER who sent me DRAWS HIM, and I will raise him up at the last day."  
 
The subject of verse 44 is "NO ONE" (Greek oudeis , meaning "not even one"). Oudeis is the subject of the verb "can come" in the independent clause, "No one can come to me..." The subject, "NO ONE, " is modified by the dependent clause "unless the Father who sent  me draws him." Reversing the two clauses by placing the dependent clause first - standard practice for analyzing sentences - reveals that God/Jesus is saying: "Unless the Father who sent me draws him, no one can come to me, ..." The meaning is crystal clear, unambiguous.
 
The structure of John 6:44's language is inescapable.  NOT ONE person can come to Jesus unless God draws them to Him. The subject  is not "some people ," or "all people," and it doesn't even say "a few people ." John 6:44 says, and God breathed with absolute clarity, "NO ONE. " The individual has absolutely nothing to do with his salvation, ONLY God draws those He gives to Jesus Christ . NO ONE can come to God on his own, period! That is, precisely, what the original texts of the Holy Bible say.  

Now, further examine John 6:44's Koine Greek foundation.  The Greek text is likewise consistent with God's solemn declaration of His timeless judgment of men in Malachi 1:2 and Romans 9:11-15. The Koine Greek word which God breathed in verse John 6:44, the word translated into English as "draw" is "helkuo." "Helkuo" means, literally, "to drag." It is clearly a verb that does not indicate any form of willingness to come to God. The picture here is one of great resistance, "kicking and screaming," not one of willing compliance. God must drag the sinner to Christ (the other Greek definitions of "helkuo" do not fit the context of verse 44). Neither is this a case of "grudging submission" . The only picture is one of resistance, not willingness. It is a picture of refusal, not willing acceptance. The sinner's resistance to salvation as pictured in John 6:44 must remain consistent with every other passage in the Bible or the Bible contradicts itself.   

The sentence structure of John 6:44 and the conclusions drawn from it are perfectly consistent with John 6:37 which Arminan freewill advocates also grossly misinterpret. John 6:37 reads:
 
"ALL that the Father GIVES me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away."

The subject of John 6:37's first independent clause is "All."

"All" is the subject of the verb "will come," with the propositional phrase "to me" as its modifier. "All" is modified by the verb phrase "the Father gives," which has "me" as its indirect object. The meaning of the second independent clause "... and whoever comes to me I will never drive away" is crystal-clear. This passage, however, does not stand alone; it must be consistent with the entire Bible. Therefore, it must be understood that John 6:37 is limited in its scope by John 6:44. "All" in John 6:37 is restricted to those God the Father has given to Jesus/God the Son. John 6:44 says, "All that the FATHER GIVES." The meaning is clear: God GIVES "ALL," not "Some," not "Most," and most emphatically, not "those who willingly decide to come to Him. Where they do come to him of their own volition, that would violate the restriction imposed by John 6:44, that God must "drag" them to Him (see 'helkuo', above ). Jesus declares in John 6:44 that "THE FATHER GIVES." Jesus does not say anywhere in that passage that anyone has any capacity to come to God on their own. Consistent with John 6:37, Jesus says "ONLY" those God draws/drags (helkuo) can come to Him. That is predestination and election. Their salvation is emphatically not the product of freewill. To the contrary, it is a perfect picture of the resistance presented by those enslaved to the Law of Sin and Death. They cannot know the things of God on their own (John 12:37-41; Romans 8:7, 9).

God breathed the Koine Greek word "didomi," in John 6:37. "Didomi" means "to give" or to "hand over." Inescapably,  we find the passage saying that The Father "hands over" people to Jesus for salvation ONLY by His sovereign will. They do not go willingly; they have to be "dragged" (John 6:44)and then "handed over" (John 6:37). There can be no other interpretation, and using the First Principles , no other passage in the Bible can say otherwise without the Bible becoming self-contradictory.

Arminians, Christian supporters of the freewill doctrine, have an insoluble problem with John 6:37 and 44. In fact, they have six insurmountable problems with those passages. Those problems are presented, below as Six Postulates. They are challenges which carefully examine the meaning of John 6:37 and 44. They demand a response from freewill ideologues which does not throw the validity or authorship of the Holy Bible into doubt.  It is held that a whole Bible consistent, rational proof of freewill is impossible.
 

-- THE SIX POSTULATES --

John 6:37 reads: "ALL that the Father GIVES me will  come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away."

1. If Arminian theologians are correct in claiming that people come to God by their own freewill, then the Arminians must hold that God/Jesus is in error in John 6:37. God/Jesus said, "... ALL the Father GIVES" (didomi) come to Him, but Arminian theologians must necessarily hold that He should have said, " ... ALL who give THEMSELVES to me . . . " The Arminian position must necessarily be that God/Jesus made a mistake when He said "ALL the Father gives" (didomi) in John 6:37. Arminian theologians must hold that Jesus/God didn't really mean that "the Father gives," but that God/Jesus really meant to say "Some," ... or "Many" ... or "Most" ... or "All" people give themselves to God. Therefore, it is implicit, necessary, and inescapble that Arminian theologians necessarily must hold that God/Jesus made a mistake and was in error when He breathed John 6:37.

2. If Arminians are correct in claiming people come  to God by their own will, then the Arminians necessarily   must hold that the Bible is in error in John 6:37.  Arminian theology demands that the Bible can not be correct when it says, "ALL the Father GIVES me will come to me" (didomi)  Instead, their theologians must inescapably and necessarily hold that God breathed and the Bible should have said something like, "Some . . . ," or "Most . . .," or "Many the Father gives to me will come to me, but the others will find their own way."  Despite confusing protests that appeal to other Scriptures, the Arminian position necessarily must be that the Bible is in error when it says "ALL the Father gives" " didomi" in John 6:37 because Arminian theologians hold that some or all men give themselves to God.  Therefore, implicitly, necessarily, and inescapably, all Arminian protests to the contrary notwithstanding, Arminians must accept as an unspoken consequence of their theology that the Bible contains grave error and is untrustworthy because it does NOT repeat what God/Jesus said and breathed in John 6:37.   

John 6:44 reads: "NO ONE CAN COME TO ME UNLESS THE FATHER who sent me DRAWS HIM, and I will raise him up at the last day."
 

3. If Arminians theologians and teachers are correct, then they also must accept the implicit, necessary, and inescapable consequence of their freewill theology that Jesus/God made a mistake when He breathed "NO ONE can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws/drags ( helkuo) him." Arminian theologians necessarily must hold that Jesus/God really meant to breathe and say, "ANYONE can come to me of their own freewill, the Father does not draw them ..." Arminian theology implicitly and inescapably holds (A) that John 6:44 is in error and is untrustworthy because it does not say, "Anyone can come to me through their own freewill ...,"  (B) that God also was in error because He breathed NO ONE, but He intended to breathe "anyone" into John 6:44, and (C) that as a terrible but necessary consequence of the constraints which are implicit in Arminian theology, neither God nor the Holy Bible are trustworthy sources of truth.  

4. If Arminian theologians are correct and sinful humans are possessed of a free will, then those theologians must necessarily and inescapably hold that God is not in error, but that Bible misquotes Jesus/God in John 6:44 where it is written, "NO ONE can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws (drags) him."  It is inescapably necessary that Arminian theologians hold as a fundamental but verbally obscured foundation of their theology that God did not breathe "NO ONE can come to me ..." in John 6:44.  Their theology demands that He really breathed,  " 'EVERYONE' or 'ANYONE' can come to Me . . ."  Despite their claims to the contrary, their theology necessarily and inescapably demands that the Holy Bible is tainted with error and is untrustworthy because John 6:44 is not true to what God breathed.  

5. Arminian theologians must necessarily hold that Jesus/God did not intend to breathe and speak in John 6:44, "No one can come to me UNLESS THE FATHER WHO SENT ME DRAWS (DRAGS) HIM."  Denials notwithstanding, Arminian theologians must necessarily hold that men are NEITHER "dragged" (helkuo) NOR "drawn" to Jesus.  They necessarily and inescapably must hold that Jesus/God really meant to say and breathe "Anyone can come to me THROUGH THEIR OWN FREEWILL, the Father DOES NOT draw (drag) them ..." Arminian theologians must necessarily hold that Almighty God made a mistake when He breathed John 6:44.
 

6. Arminian theologians must necessarily and inescapably hold that Jesus/God did not breathe and speak in John 6:44, "No one can come to me UNLESS THE FATHER WHO SENT ME DRAWS HIM..." The Arminian theologians must necessarily hold that men are NOT "dragged" (helkuo) or "drawn" to Jesus. They must hold that the Bible should say, " ... the Father DOES NOT draw them, they come of their own freewill ..." Arminian theologians must necessarily hold that the Bible is in error and is, therefore, untrustworthy and not the word of Almighty God in Whom there is no error.
 

-- CONCLUSION -

It has been demonstrated in each of the foregoing postulates  that Arminian ( freewill) theologians must necessarily and inescapably accept as a direct consequence of their theology one of these two implicit  conclusions:

(1) God is perfect, without shadow or flaw.  Hence, the author of John 6:37 and 44 IS NOT Jesus/God because the author of those passages made mistakes in breathing and speaking the Bible. Man can come to God on his own, and is not "dragged" as John 6:37 and 44 declare. So, the Bible is not trustworthy because John 6:37 and 44 are in error; a little leaven leavens the whole loaf. Therefore, the Bible can not be God-breathed and is not trustworthy because Almighty God is not the author of corruption and error.

(2) Jesus/God IS the author of John 6:37 and 44, but there are errors in those passages because men can come to Christ on their own despite John 6:37 and 44's declaration to the contrary. It necessarily follows that Jesus/God was in error when He breathed John 6:37 and 44. Hence, Jesus/God who breathed John 6:37 and 44 is given to error and is not perfect. Therefore, neither the Bible nor its Author, Almighty God, is trustworthy because what He breathed in John 6:37 and 44 is in error.

Hence, if there are mistakes in the Bible, then the  author of the Bible is not God because God is without shadow or flaw. Conversely, if the Bible is in error it is not the word of God because God does not make mistakes. The only possibility left is that there are no errors in John 6:37 and 44, that Jesus/God breathed them, and that freewill is a false doctrine because the whole Bible which includes John 6:37 and 44 does not support it. Freewill was created from "whole cloth" by men who have rejected God's perfect and inerrant word, preferring instead to read into Scripture their own corrupt theological bias. Q.E.D.
 
 

-- THE CHALLENGE --

(1) If you can present a rational, Biblical Greek text-consistent, freewill-supporting rebuttal to the above six postulates WITHOUT running afoul of one of inescapable, Bible-negating conclusions forced by those postulates, (2) if you can shown how it is possible within the freewill theological constraints you have accepted, for the Koine Greek Biblical texts to remain in conflict while a freewill theology-based eisegesis of those texts keeps them intact and un-contradictory, or (3) when you accept that Arminianism's freewill doctrine forces Scriptural contradiction and you consequently accept a theological paradigm shift, only then will I be willing to respond to your comments. Just remember, the two simple First Principles used to develop the foregoing six postulates apply uniformly to every Bible passage. Those First Principles are the standards which I will relentlessly apply in any discussion, and with which I will relentlessly require your compliance IF you can meet the constraints of this challenge.
 
 

COPYRIGHT 2000, DEKE (a pseudonym)

Hosting by WebRing.