Definitions & History of Meanings Background of Modern Churches How to Identify False Translations		Print Article

37. All that the Father is giving (present active indicative) Me shall come (future active indicative) to Me; and him that is coming (present deponent middle participle) to Me I will in no wise cast out (aorist active subjunctive).
38. For I came down from heaven, not to do Mine own will, but the will of Him that sent Me.
39. And this is (present active indicative) the Father's WILL which hath sent (aorist active participle) Me, that of all which He hath given (perfect active indicative) Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
40. And this is being (present active indicative) the WILL of Him that sent me, that every one which is seeing (present active participle) the Son, and is believing (present active participle) on (eis, for the purpose or result of) Him, is having (present active subjunctive) everlasting life: and I will raise (future active indicative) him up at the last day.

As you ponder the full context of verse 37 and its further explanation into verse 40, it will be apparent that the action of the Father "giving" (verse 37) is dependent upon the action of those "coming,present continuous tense" (middle deponent voice). Although this is not explicit in verse 37, Christ specifies exactly who is the "all" that the father is giving to Him in verse 37 by describing His Will concerning those "seeing, hearing and having," (in active voice, not passive voice) in verse 40. They are the present tense seeing and believing ones who are present tense having everlasting life in Christ's indwelling at present time. These are the ones given by the Father in verse 37.

"All that the Father is giving to me (those seeing and believing in verse 40) shall be coming to Me."  This context is self explanatory.  There is no reason in these scriptures to insist that those that "come to Me" are first and primarily inscrutibly Zapped to come to Him because these verses clearly describe the Father's Will in whom "He is giving", those who are seeing and are believing for the purpose of Him.  There is no justification here to assert that "the Father is giving" by a fictional decree making them come, unless one is a fanatical master at circular deductive thinking (Calvinists), denying all rational exegetical reasoning.

Additionally, the perfect active indicative [a completed action with a continuing result at the time of the speaker or writer (not reader)] stated in verse 39 as "hath given", indicates that it is the Father's Will that Christ lose none of those so "given," described as those who are continuing in "believing." These "given" are those described in verse 40 as the present tense ones, indicating foreknowledge of God, not a direct proactive Zapping before the foundation of the world. See article, Greek, for an explanation of the verbs used.

There is no indication that their present tense activities are due to the direct giving by the Father. Indeed, the giving by the Father is described as dependant upon the "seeing, believing, and having" ones in present time. Indeed, the sense of the plain language would support this and the underlying Greek would demand this.

Let us examine context farther. Perhaps, in few places can the difference between Calvinists and Arminians be seen so clearly as in their understanding of these verses. The Calvinist infers from verse 37, "the action of 'is coming' is dependant upon the 'is giving' by the Father. The Arminian reads the context (verse 37-40) as, "the action of 'is giving' (verse 37) or "have given" (verse 39) is dependant upon the 'is coming' by the believer, described as the Father's requirement (will) in verse 40.. The reader can afford himself an opportunity to here decide for himself what this scripture plainly says.

From their asserted view, Calvinists from verse 37 have said, "see,All whom God has "elected" will come to Him," or "All whom God elected will come to a knowledge of him." Now how they can by rules of logic assert this is what it says is quite incomprehensible.  All it says is, "All that the Father is giving (present tense) to Me, is coming to Me (present deponent middle), and I shall (future tense) raise up." Look at the verb tense as to the meaning when you read it. It does not mention election. One cannot apply this to election by any definition.

And if one tried,  such an election by these scriptures, they could not apply to a past act intending a directly caused future outcome, as the Calvinist claims.  They can deductively assert it, but there is no evidence in the Greek present tense morphology or syntax that that is supported.

Additionally, in verse 37, there is no logical warrant to assume that those coming, here spoken of as given by the Father, constitute all those who may have ever been coming.  But the Calvinists assert that one must have been given (past tense) by the Father before they are among the total group of the coming.  And this total group of the those thus being given (present tense--now, continuously, active voice-present reality) and also are coming (present tense--now, continuous action, middle voice--voluntarily on own behalf) shall be those raised up.  This statement only says that those being given by the Father are coming (in present tense--now, continuous action, middle voice--voluntarily on own behalf) and will be raised up.  Nothing more.

The question that we must ask ourselves is, "When are those that are among the coming continuously (middle voice--on their own volition), being continuously given (present tense--now, continuous action,) by the Father?"   The Calvinists first and foremost assert, without any scriptural warrant, that the presesnt tense "giving", is a past action, precedes the foundation of the world, and all that happens thereafter is an accomplished fact.  Then, arguing upon this first unwarranted assertion from the verb tense, the coming must follow the "before the foundation" giving (past action, according to them).   But there is nothing in this 37th verse that indicates this.  Especially, since it does not speak to all the total category of those who may have been coming.  They insert an assertion from their only means of understanding Greek or anything, an assertion of "Sovereign election".

Calvinists also argue that the giving comes first because in the verse, it precedes the coming in the sequence of the sentence.  Anyone who willingly swallows "this" has also presently "willed" preceding the presence of the substance in their throat that they just swallowed.  This is a foolish argument, arguing Truth from the sequential order of a sentence.  A little Greek kid, especially,  would laugh his head off at this argument. The Greek says that all that is being swallowed, is coming into the throat, nothing more.

Also, "all" that are being given, shall come (future tense), and "he that is coming" defines how all those in the future come, in the present continuous tense.   To say that the initial "those" that are being given is defined by the future tense, because it also follows in the sentence sequence is again grasping at invented assertions without logical reasoning.

Amazingly, Calvinists quickly think in reading this 37th verse that it refers to the inexorable zapping of God to directly make a few robots destined for His Home, and this is all one needs to see. This assertion is their only means of interpreting anything. They do not consider that the "is giving" by the Father could be temporally looking by foreknowledge to those who "shall be coming to me" in the future "and him that is coming (present deponent middle participle) to Me I will in no wise cast out (aorist active subjunctive). It could be saying just exactly what it is saying in plain English. Now read verse 37 again for yourself.²

All that the Father is giving (present active indicative) Me shall come (future active indicative) to Me; and him that is coming (present deponent middle participle) to Me I will in no wise cast out (aorist active subjunctive)." A very simple statement to a child. It means nothing else than what is plainly says.

To illustrate this, let us turn to the man said to have been the "Prince of Preachers," Charles Spurgeon, also a boasting Calvinist, like many today.  These quotes are taken from The Sum and Substance of All Theology, Delivered by C. H. SPURGEON, Delivered at Bethesda Chapel, Swansea On June 25th, 1861. From Sword and Trowel.   (bolding mine for noting)

"Take the first sentence of my text: "All that the Father giveth Me shall come to Me." What a weighty sentence! Here we have taught us what is called, in the present day, "High Calvinistic doctrine",the purpose of God; the certainty that God's purpose will stand; the invincibility of God's will; and the absolute assurance that Christ "shall see of the travail of His soul, and shall be satisfied."

The Father gives certain persons to His Son, and the Son says, "All that the Father giveth Me Shall come to Me." I take it that the meaning of the text is this,,that, if any do come to Jesus Christ, it is those whom the Father gave to Christ. And the reason why they come,,if we search to the very bottom of things,,is, that the Father puts it into their hearts to come. The reason why one man is saved, and another man is lost, is to be found in God."

Do you now understand where the Calvinist gets his thinking of which he is so proud.  He doesn't understand the Greek scriptures like a little Greek child.  Simple verb tenses are very important to understand any language and intended meaning. The Calvinist reads all sorts of memorized Election doctrines into the scriptures, turning the present tenses into past tenses, to make the scriptures say what his memorized Doctrines say.  Deductive thinking.  Additionally, in doing this they fail to see that the classes in their logical syllogisms are not as necessarily all inclusive as they assert, nor are their logical syllogisms factual to the plain words as only they think. 

And the interesting mystery of all this is that the Calvinist may be a teaching Professor of Greek in a Bible school.   Do you think they will ever see this, or even admit it?   Wrong!  They are deductive thinkers.  They cannot hear or see facts except to make them support their starting assertions.  They can only accept facts that support their starting assertions.  This is the biblical definition of blind.  Yet they are our brothers in Christ.  (?)

They can explain the Who, What, When, and Where to any lost soul and by the Holy Spirit they can be brought to salvation because the listener will not know what their deceptive redefinitions of these terms are; but when it comes to the WHY and HOW of "understanding," the Godhead, they are given to the primitive paganized Catholic Augustinianism of John Calvin--blind as a door knob.  If they have the Holy Spirit, Who leads us into all Truth, how can this be?   Read "Our Warfare" under 3. Fundamental Integration section for explanation.

The Pharisees were certainly the professors of Hebrew in their day, but they didn't understand the plain OT Hebrew either.  Know what they did?   Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli did the same to people who disagreed with them also, just like the Catholics who preceded them and followed them.  The only thing that brought us out of the State Catholic World Wide Church was a momentary initial glimmer in their minds as to what "faith" is in Truth.  After they died it (what little understanding of what 'faith' is) was immediately lost again; even to the Synod of Dort.

Christ said that all it takes is a little child.  Yet it seems to take all the powers of Heaven to get an adult to understand what was written for a little child.

40. And this is (present active indicative) the Will of Him that sent Me, that every one which is seeing (present active participle) the Son, and is believing (present active,themselves doing the action-- participle) into (eis, for the purpose or result of) Him, is having (present active subjunctive,Subjunctive of Purpose) everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day."

The Father's Will is that Christ will raise those who are present tense, continuously believing, those persevering in their own behalf (active voice). There is no mention that all who are saved will persevere. It implies that the Father's Will is to give to Christ all that persevere, the continuously present tense, active voice (they are doing the action themselves) believing ones, and that He is to raise them up at the last day.

Verse 39 and 40 could easily be explained as verse 39 is expressing a fact of the Father's will for those He has given His Son (by foreknowledge, verse 39), and verse 40 is describing the Father's will and those whom the Father has given to the Son. This seems to be the simple context of the statements since verse 40 further describes His will stated in verse 39, and thus explains who it is that He "is giving" to the Son in verse 37 or "has given" (verse 39). It is obvious that those whom the Son is given and should lose none of and raise up in the last day are the continuously present tense believing ones. It only speaks to the perseverance of saints whom Christ will raise up. That is all.

It says nothing about a particular election or limited atonement or "all who are once saved are always saved." Those given to Christ by the Father are only those who persevere to the end, the continuously believing ones, and these are whom Christ will raise. That is the Father's Will. That is all it says. There is nothing as a proactive direct election by a fictional decree to anyone stated here. The Father gives the Son to raise up in the last day only those who themselves continuously believe to the last day. The Greek verbs are very plain about this.

The typical Calvinist interprets this verse of John 6:39 without reading the immediate context which explains who it is that the Father gives to the Son Who will lose none of them. This is so simple a reading that I think this is a great example of their deductive thinking that they do with great freedom in everything they read. The Calvinist is such a rapid deductive reader that it never occurs to him to wonder, "W ho are those the Father gives and what is the Father's Will?" "After all," their shallow reasoning goes, "God is Sovereign, He does whatever He wishes."

Further, as in 1 Tim. 2:3-4, "For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; who will have all men to be saved and to come unto the knowledge of the truth," A Calvinist denies this verse, and denies the plain scriptures repeatedly. They invent redefinitions of plain words that a little child has no difficulty understanding, like: all, all men, any, whosoever, all the world, everyone, predestined "according to" foreknowledge, elect, called, and others.

God does not always get His direct Will in Love¹ only.  Love gives choice.  Love is best demonstrated by deliberately not making everyone your puppet, selfishly forcing your will upon them, if the greatest good, conforming to Love, Truth, Holiness, and Wisdom, can be accomplished otherwise.   Also, choice is Love's sweet savor.   How can one have true Love without choice?  Without choice there can be no expression or presence of Love.   Any child or reasonable adult knows this instinctively.

"For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse" (Rom 1:20).

It is true that the Greek word in 6:44 for "drawn" indicates a strong and persuadive drawing as being "dragged" or "compelled" in some instances.  But in Jn 12:32, the same word is used when Jesus says, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me."  This certainly means a strong drawing, but it nevertheless is obviously capable of being resisted, unless the Calvinist would like to redefine the "all" to mean only certain ones, without any contextual or linquistic warrant.  This they will immediately do without any compunctions.

NOR did Christ say, "All men are enabled continuously to come to Me." Carefully look at the verb tenses, particularly the present continuous tense in the passive voice of "is being able or enabled." [Notice that it is in the passive voice, thank you Father.] Jesus was saying, "Whoever (or He that) is enabled continuously to come to Me, the Father draws, and I will raise him up in the last day. Every Arminian and Calvinist would say "Amen" to this. But it does not say that all men are enabled to continuously to come to Jesus.  God only assists those (making passive tense) who come to Him through their voluntary continuous commitment (believing) to Jesus purposes in them.

As to the Jews in Paul's day, we may say that most who hear the gospel today or even of many professing people, "Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye" ( Acts 7:51). We must remember the many contingency "if" verses, and the many warnings against resisting, grieving, quenching, and doing despite to the Holy Spirit even to developing an evil heart of unbelief again. There is nothing of a particular election or unconditional security in any of these verses.

Now, lets sum it all up. John 6:44 says, "No man can ("is enabled"--present passive indicative--continuously) come ("to come"--aorist active infinitive) to Me, except the Father which hath sent Me draw ("might draw"--aorist active subjunctive) him: and I will raise him up at the last day."

John 6:44 speaks nothing of a particular election or "all that are once saved are always saved." Indeed, it says just the opposite. It simply says, "He that is enabled continuously to come to Me the Father draws, and I will raise him up at the last day." Like all the scriptures, it again states that all are drawn to Christ and only "the continuously believing (committing) ones" shall be raised up at the last day (to be with Jesus).

Clearly, the Calvinist approaches all questions in theology that all things are by the direct proactive effect of the Father. If you come it can only be by direct proactive action of the Father ONLY. Calvinists sum this up in what they call election,direct zapping. The whole effort and attributes of the Godhead are trivialized by this Augustinian paganization of God.  Despite their explaining about God changing our desires, the Calvinist sees nothing between the Father and the result, except an inexorable robot. How does this demonstrate the Love, Justice, and Holiness of God?

Here is a footnote that clearly exposes the above discussion of Jn 6:37-44 as done by Calvinists.⁴

The robot manufacturer (Augustinian theology of election) could just as well have other attributes, like Adolf Hitler producing tanks and planes. There can be no Glorification of a God of Love, Justice, and Holiness in this Calvinist adaptation of particular election. Incidentally, quite consistent with their theology, the Augustinian Catholics have never, in truth, censored Hitler or the Third Reich for their activities. Hitler was one of their particular elect, a Catholic.

The Arminian sees things directly opposite. Election is according to foreknowledge, not elect because of direct zapping. Man, created as a spirit being was given choice that was never taken away. In unimaginable totally efficacious and totally sufficient and totally efficient unselfish Love, only possessed by the Father and Son and Holy Spirit, as in the Garden, choice was given to man in the Wisdom of the Godhead. By this choice in this new creature, God would demonstrate with total efficiency to all eternity all His Attributes to His eternal Glory, and at the same time create to Himself a Holy possession, different than all living creatures before.

Election to Arminians is the Father by foreknowledge knowing who will persevere by His indwelling in the end. This is not accomplished by any works of man but by the continuous commitment (believing) of man to the "obedience of faith of Christ," (Rom 1:5 and 16:26) by the indwelling enabling mind of Christ within him. This "believing" (commitment) is the pleasing work to God that our Lord (John 6:29) and all the Apostles (Gal. 3:22) preached. None of this can really be understood unless one knows the difference between believing and faith as the scriptures use them. See articles on Believing and Faith.

To clearly and succinctly summarize the Arminian "responsibility of man" vs the "grace" of God, please study this footnote for a CLEAR SUMMARY, also contrasted to present-day apostate "grace" regardless teachings which are totally Pelagian and humanistic.  Footnote ³   This modern "grace" regardless apostasy is greatly derived from the Calvinistic Augustinian Unconditional Election teachings.

Continue to Next Article -»