Understanding God’s election

[Rufus]

So, as I understand you:

• "all [men]" is a universal term
• We must determine if all [men] is being stated:
  • in the distributive sense meaning, let's say all "mankind" wherever, whenever.
    • Is this the "without exception" that you say Jesus is not speaking about?
  • In the limited sense, let's say some group - all [men] in a group you'll identify for us and why you identify this group.
    • Is this group of all [men] the '"all" without distinction" and meaning simply Jews and Gentiles?
• Jesus doesn't mean all men/mankind because the Pharisees were being hyperbolic when they said, "the whole world"?

I'm not sure what your point is about Satan and the world and how that tells us something about 12:32. Would you clarify?

All in the distributive sense = all without exception, quantitatively. All in the limited sense = all without distinction, qualitatively.

I brought up the the Pharisees use of hyperbole since it was conveniently in the passage. There are many here who naively see phrases like "the whole world" and immediately assume it should be understood in the distributive sense, which can lead to some pretty absurd interpretations.

When Jesus said he would draw "all" to him, he meant in the limited sense. He would draw all without distinction. Does not John 12 teach us that both JEWS (lots of 'em, apparently) and a few GENTILES sought Jesus out? From a biblical and Jewish perspective, there only two kinds of people in the world: Jews and everyone else (i.e. Gentiles). Does the text teach that every single Jew alive at that time sought Christ out? Or did every single Gentile seek Christ out? It's revealing that Jesus didn't make his comment in v. 32 until AFTER his two disciples informed him that there were a few Gentiles who wanted to see him. It was only AFTER they informed him of this fact, did he start speaking and then eventually told everyone that when He is lifted up, he will draw "all" to him, i.e. Jews and Gentiles who "coincidentally" were already seeking him out (on a microcosmic level compared to this New Covenant economy) at that particular time due to his big Lazarus miracle and the nearness of Passover.

Satan fits in beautifully because his being chained up at the bottom of the abyss is limited to one specific purpose: That he cannot deceive the [collective] nations any longer re the gospel. But his "great chain" doesn't stop him from deceiving the unregenerate, generally, i.e. individual people. His chain does, however, facilitate the dissemination of the Gospel to the nations of the world.

 

[Rufus]

Silly.

Always with the rhetoric and implications that no one does the detail of study you do. I do see you attempting to learn how to use some Greek tools. I commend you for that.

Will you provide a word study of every use of helkuō in the Text and prove to me and anyone reading that it's appropriate to use "drag" as a definition in John6:44 and I assume John12:32 also?

It's an interesting study as the word is used for inanimate objects like swords, as well as for people. When it is used for people, we find reasons to see the involvement of human will in the sense of being or becoming willing (drawn) or unwilling (dragged). When you do the study even with your Herculean presuppositions you should be able to grasp some of this.

The only time I use Strong's is when I want to see the root word(s) a word I'm studying stems from. There are better and more current lexical tools. I have a very useful version of Strong's resident on computer that I procured decades ago after finding a guy online who had done a massive amount of work putting such reference works together in a very usable form. I'm currently using it to help find all the details and overlaps and parallels to the word translated as "raise" in John6:39. It's actually a massive study to track all the references and implications of Jesus raising "things."

I'm just saying that "helko" means LITERALLY to drag. I get it that translators also translate the word "draw".

When you do a word usage study for "helko", whatever is being "dragged" or "drawn" is passive. God is active; the object being drawn or dragged is passive. Even when Peter drew his sword from his sheath, that sword didn't have any will to resist. The sword was passive. It was acted upon! And that's how it is with "helko" in the eight times that it's used in the NT, as far as I can tell. Or a fish net is passive when it's tossed into the water and dragged behind a boat, etc. Or when Paul was dragged by the angry crowd he wasn't able resist them even though he likely didn't take kindly to physical force, etc.

 

[PaulThomson]

Judas was never a believer. And Jesus choosing Judas so that he would willingly play the role for which he was created actually supports my claims and the Doctrines of Grace. Judas was a lump of clay created for ignoble purposes (Rom 9), whereas the other 11 were lumps created for noble purposes.

Furthermore, Judas didn't come to Jesus; rather Jesus chose him! No one can come to Jesus spiritually apart from the Father "dragging" them to Him. ("To drag" is the literal rendering of the Gr. term "helko", cf. Strong's 1670, which is rendered "draw" in Jn 6:44.) All manner of people can corporeally come to Jesus under the influence of their own flesh, but none can spiritually come to Him under the influence of the Spirit, apart from God's enabling, causal power.

But that's what election means in the Bible: being chosen for some particular role. It is not a word used in the Bible to declare that someone was chosen to be regenerated so that they can believe and be reconciled to God. The thread is about understanding God's election of people. It is not titled "Understanding reformed election".

 

[PaulThomson]

Yup...the greedy little thief came to Jesus for all the wrong reasons.

And they all came because Jesus chose them. They did not choose him!

The motives for coming are irrelevant to whether the come. Redefining "come" to exclude all coming except "coming with faith in Christ" should ne necessary to make sense of the context. It shoukld not be done merely to make a text fit one's theological ideology.

 

[brightfame52]

@PaulThomson

Jesus called His disciples saying "Come, Follow me." And they came to Jesus. Even Judas came to Jesus.

And judas had no other choice but to come and fulfill what scripture had already determined of him before he was ever born. He had in the counsels of God been singled out as the man of perdition Jn 17:12

12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

So thats why he judas was called, and thats why he came, so that he would later do his dastardly deed and then go to hell.And all of our destinies have been predetermined by God.

 

[brightfame52]

@PaulThomson

It is not a word used in the Bible to declare that someone was chosen to be regenerated so that they can believe

Thats false, 2 Thess 2:13

13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:

Belief of the Truth is spiritual salvation, and they were chosen to it.

 

[studier]

All in the distributive sense = all without exception, quantitatively. All in the limited sense = all without distinction, qualitatively.

Thanks for clarifying.

One thing that I'd like to be clearer is what you are grouping into the limited-without exception-qualitatively classification. Do you mean all believers (the qualitative group) without distinction (Jews & Gentiles)? So "all" is "all believers" and not "all men/mankind", correct?

So, this is your Draw > [Come] (not mentioned in John12) = Believe concept like John6?

One housecleaning detail since you've referenced John12:19; keep an eye on your interlinear when using the NIV (more so than some other translations). The word "whole" is not in the Greek.

 

[PaulThomson]

I'm just saying that "helko" means LITERALLY to drag. I get it that translators also translate the word "draw".

When you do a word usage study for "helko", whatever is being "dragged" or "drawn" is passive. God is active; the object being drawn or dragged is passive. Even when Peter drew his sword from his sheath, that sword didn't have any will to resist. The sword was passive. It was acted upon! And that's how it is with "helko" in the eight times that it's used in the NT, as far as I can tell. Or a fish net is passive when it's tossed into the water and dragged behind a boat, etc. Or when Paul was dragged by the angry crowd he wasn't able resist them even though he likely didn't take kindly to physical force, etc.

Jas 2:6
But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw G1670 you before the judgment seats?

In the following texts, are the people involved being dragged irresistibly to the Lord for judgment.

Luk 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
Rev 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

Is there any person who will be able to resist being dragged before Jesus for judgment on judgment day?

So, Jesus was crucified, and through submitting to crucifixion was appointed as leader and judge over the human race? AS judge of the human race he will drag all men irresistibly to Himself, either for judgment or reward.

What in the context of Jesus statements in John 12:32, makes it conclusive that Jesus is claiming to be about to bring irresistibly some people to faith in Himself after His crucifixion, rather that that He will gain authority irresistibly to drag all to His judgment seat at the last day?judge all.

 

[PaulThomson]

Thanks for clarifying.

One thing that I'd like to be clearer is what you are grouping into the limited-without exception-qualitatively classification. Do you mean all believers (the qualitative group) without distinction (Jews & Gentiles)? So "all" is "all believers" and not "all men/mankind", correct?

So, this is your Draw > [Come] (not mentioned in John12) = Believe concept like John6?

One housecleaning detail since you've referenced John12:19; keep an eye on your interlinear when using the NIV (more so than some other translations). The word "whole" is not in the Greek.

The Not Inspired Version (NIV)

 

[PaulThomson]

I didn't even bring "clocks" into the conversation. Calendars were created long before clocks -- calendars that mark off days, weeks, months, seasons, etc. -- none of which would have been possible apart from Space and Matter. In fact, this universe is a TRIuniverse; and none of the three components that comprise this universe can exist apart from the other! Put this last thought in your hash pipe and puff on it for awhile.

And so what if the earth still rotates? While it's true that that Rev 21 doesn't actually say there will be no sun and moon, I frankly cannot see an all-wise, all-knowing God creating anything that would serve no practical purpose. For example, since the sun won't be needed, this must mean that life will thrive anyway apart from it -- perhaps solely by the light of God's magnificent glory. Yes, I'm aware of gravitational issues and so on, but in the eternal order there may not even be a need for gravity any longer. But one thing is for certain: There won't be any days, weeks, months, seasons or years in the New Order.

Rev 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
Rev 21:23 And the city [polis, feminine] had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it [en auTEi, dative feminine, in the city]: for the glory of God did lighten it [autEn, feminine, the city], and the Lamb is the light of it [autEs, feminine genitive, of the city) .
Rev 21:24 And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it [autEs, feminine, of the city]: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it. [eis autEn, accusative feminine, into the city]

House lights are not needed when it is daylight in Delhi. This does not mean that house lights are not needed at that same time outside of Delhi, say in New York. You have not shown that scripture says there will be no daytime or night-time on the planet outside of the city of God. You seem to be assuming that, in order to manufacture evidence for your theological position.

 

[studier]

I'm just saying that "helko" means LITERALLY to drag. I get it that translators also translate the word "draw".

helkō has a range of meaning. It would be helpful if you provide references for statements such as these.

The following is from the Greek Lexicon commonly referred to as BDAG. It'll show up on an online search, but I don't know of any way to view its contents online. I'm copying and pasting excerpts from one of my copies:

Bauer-Danker, Greek-English Lexicon of the NT (BDAG)​

​

[BDAG] ἕλκω​

​

gener. ‘pull, drag, draw’.​

​

1. to move an object from one area to another in a pulling motion, draw, with implication that the object being moved is incapable of propelling itself or in the case of pers. is unwilling to do so voluntarily, in either case with implication of exertion on the part of the mover τὶ someth. a sword​

​

2. to draw a pers. in the direction of values for inner life, draw, attract,​

​

3. to appear to be pulled in a certain direction, flow an ext. fig. use intr. flow along of a river​

​

Although I don't let these tools determine my theology, FWIW, BDAG classifies helkō under #2. IMO this is correct.

When you do a word usage study for "helko", whatever is being "dragged" or "drawn" is passive. God is active; the object being drawn or dragged is passive. Even when Peter drew his sword from his sheath, that sword didn't have any will to resist. The sword was passive. It was acted upon! And that's how it is with "helko" in the eight times that it's used in the NT, as far as I can tell. Or a fish net is passive when it's tossed into the water and dragged behind a boat, etc. Or when Paul was dragged by the angry crowd he wasn't able resist them even though he likely didn't take kindly to physical force, etc.

A few observations about your statements:

• Fortunately, we have the LXX which increases our information from the 8 NT passages to 33 including them.
• In the sense of God drawing (J6) and Jesus drawing (J12) they are in fact active - doing the drawing. And that would make those drawn be passive as you say. But this does not preclude an action by men in response to being drawn that takes into account the will of men. This is the difference between the sword and the man. This is the reason the translators typically say Paul was dragged (against his will) by the angry crowd, but God and Jesus draw.

A few preliminary observations about helkō in J6 and J12:

• As I said earlier re: J6, if we use "drag" there, then:
  • men are being dragged/enabled by force to come to Jesus 6:44
  • men are being dragged - forced - to hear and learn 6:45 in essence God's Word (teaching)
  • Ultimately, men are being dragged - forced - to believe 6:47
  • Read Isaiah 54 (referenced by Jesus in J6:45). This is a picture of God drawing/attracting with kindness and loyalty vs. dragging His bride back to Him.
    • Jesus is talking to Jews in J6. Compare this to Isa54.
  • "Draw" IMO is the better translation.
• I said earlier that John is known to use ambiguity and inferences.
• One reason we struggle with words and verses like this is John's uses of ambiguity and helkō has a range of meaning that also means some ambiguity.
• You've stated some of the J12 context you see re: interpreting "all [men". Here are a few more contextual observations re: draw vs. drag in 12:32:
  • The immediate context is judgment of the world and its ruler and of sin 12:31-32
  • The lifting up of Jesus 12:32 uses the same word used to depict the lifting up of the serpent 3:14 so there are some parallels to be considered.
  • John immediately focuses us on the type of death Jesus would die 12:33-34 (dealing with 12:32a)
  • John then focuses on belief vs. unbelief and eternal life vs. judgment (IMO dealing with 12:32b)
  • Back to the ambiguity of helkō and John:
    • IMO Jesus is talking about drawing men to believe or reject Him and what He accomplishes when He is lifted up.
      • Just a note but John has focused us on the cross, but later we deal with the same word (lifted up) being used for God exalting Jesus Acts2:33, 5:31.
    • IMO Jesus can also be alluding to dragging men to court at the judgment
    • All men will come to Him willingly or before Him unwillingly
      • All knees shall bow
  • If I was doing the translating, I'd use "draw" but would include a translator's note re: "drag".
  • If I was teaching this section of Scripture, I'd likely elaborate the above and open for discussion.

Without speaking for @PaulThomson, I'd assume from what he's previously said that this is at least in the ballpark of his view that ultimately, we're dealing with all men being resurrected to life or judgment.

 

[studier]

@PaulThomson



And judas had no other choice but to come and fulfill what scripture had already determined of him before he was ever born. He had in the counsels of God been singled out as the man of perdition Jn 17:12

12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

So thats why he judas was called, and thats why he came, so that he would later do his dastardly deed and then go to hell.And all of our destinies have been predetermined by God.

That's an interesting observation I've had thoughts about as well. I use similar reasoning to ask if John the Baptist could have been other than who he became. There are others we could also discuss.

The question, though, is this normative? IMO it's not but it does bring into the discussion how God can (and does) righteously and justly assert Himself into human history for it to ultimately go where He plans it to go.

IOW, He has at His disposal things He can do while we're getting stuck arguing as to whether it's just A or B or maybe in some sense a combination.

 

[studier]

The Not Inspired Version (NIV)

Not my preference and I rarely refer to it. When I was teaching, I'd have different versions in the room so would have to contend with questions from those using them. I mainly use the NKJ but only because I'm used to searching English in it and it is one of the more literal.

 

[brightfame52]

That's an interesting observation I've had thoughts about as well. I use similar reasoning to ask if John the Baptist could have been other than who he became. There are others we could also discuss.

The question, though, is this normative? IMO it's not but it does bring into the discussion how God can (and does) righteously and justly assert Himself into human history for it to ultimately go where He plans it to go.

IOW, He has at His disposal things He can do while we're getting stuck arguing as to whether it's just A or B or maybe in some sense a combination.

.And all of our destinies have been predetermined by God. Yes God is Just, Holy, Righteous in whatever He does friend.

 

[studier]

.And all of our destinies have been predetermined by God. Yes God is Just, Holy, Righteous in whatever He does friend.

Scripture reference?

 

[brightfame52]

Scripture reference?

When someone asks that, its a sure sign of unbelief, you should know that God is Sovereign.

 

[studier]

When someone asks that, its a sure sign of unbelief, you should know that God is Sovereign.

Or it's a sign of very deep belief and trust in God rather than in men who make intentional and unintentional misuse of His Word for some very bizarre purposes.

 

[Rufus]

But that's what election means in the Bible: being chosen for some particular role. It is not a word used in the Bible to declare that someone was chosen to be regenerated so that they can believe and be reconciled to God. The thread is about understanding God's election of people. It is not titled "Understanding reformed election".

Yup! Many have been elected to be vessels of honor while many others have been elected to be vessels used for ignoble purposes. And God has a role or purpose for all his saints that he has elected.

 

[Rufus]

helkō has a range of meaning. It would be helpful if you provide references for statements such as these.

The following is from the Greek Lexicon commonly referred to as BDAG. It'll show up on an online search, but I don't know of any way to view its contents online. I'm copying and pasting excerpts from one of my copies:

Bauer-Danker, Greek-English Lexicon of the NT (BDAG)​

​

[BDAG] ἕλκω​

​

gener. ‘pull, drag, draw’.​

​

1. to move an object from one area to another in a pulling motion, draw, with implication that the object being moved is incapable of propelling itself or in the case of pers. is unwilling to do so voluntarily, in either case with implication of exertion on the part of the mover τὶ someth. a sword​

​

2. to draw a pers. in the direction of values for inner life, draw, attract,​

​

3. to appear to be pulled in a certain direction, flow an ext. fig. use intr. flow along of a river​

​

Although I don't let these tools determine my theology, FWIW, BDAG classifies helkō under #2. IMO this is correct.



A few observations about your statements:

• Fortunately, we have the LXX which increases our information from the 8 NT passages to 33 including them.
• In the sense of God drawing (J6) and Jesus drawing (J12) they are in fact active - doing the drawing. And that would make those drawn be passive as you say. But this does not preclude an action by men in response to being drawn that takes into account the will of men. This is the difference between the sword and the man. This is the reason the translators typically say Paul was dragged (against his will) by the angry crowd, but God and Jesus draw.

A few preliminary observations about helkō in J6 and J12:

• As I said earlier re: J6, if we use "drag" there, then:
  • men are being dragged/enabled by force to come to Jesus 6:44
  • men are being dragged - forced - to hear and learn 6:45 in essence God's Word (teaching)
  • Ultimately, men are being dragged - forced - to believe 6:47
  • Read Isaiah 54 (referenced by Jesus in J6:45). This is a picture of God drawing/attracting with kindness and loyalty vs. dragging His bride back to Him.
    • Jesus is talking to Jews in J6. Compare this to Isa54.
  • "Draw" IMO is the better translation.
• I said earlier that John is known to use ambiguity and inferences.
• One reason we struggle with words and verses like this is John's uses of ambiguity and helkō has a range of meaning that also means some ambiguity.
• You've stated some of the J12 context you see re: interpreting "all [men". Here are a few more contextual observations re: draw vs. drag in 12:32:
  • The immediate context is judgment of the world and its ruler and of sin 12:31-32
  • The lifting up of Jesus 12:32 uses the same word used to depict the lifting up of the serpent 3:14 so there are some parallels to be considered.
  • John immediately focuses us on the type of death Jesus would die 12:33-34 (dealing with 12:32a)
  • John then focuses on belief vs. unbelief and eternal life vs. judgment (IMO dealing with 12:32b)
  • Back to the ambiguity of helkō and John:
    • IMO Jesus is talking about drawing men to believe or reject Him and what He accomplishes when He is lifted up.
      • Just a note but John has focused us on the cross, but later we deal with the same word (lifted up) being used for God exalting Jesus Acts2:33, 5:31.
    • IMO Jesus can also be alluding to dragging men to court at the judgment
    • All men will come to Him willingly or before Him unwillingly
      • All knees shall bow
  • If I was doing the translating, I'd use "draw" but would include a translator's note re: "drag".
  • If I was teaching this section of Scripture, I'd likely elaborate the above and open for discussion.

Without speaking for @PaulThomson, I'd assume from what he's previously said that this is at least in the ballpark of his view that ultimately, we're dealing with all men being resurrected to life or judgment.

I have no problem per se with the translation "draw". I merely pointed out the most literal translation.

If men are being "dragged or forced" to hear, learn and believe, then this demonstrates God's loving, tender mercies toward helpless, self-deceived sinners who know no better. God rescues his NC people just as he rescued and redeemed the ancient Israelites from their hopeless situation in Egypt.

Secondly, man's will initially plays no role in God electing to draw any his chosen people to his Son. God sovereignly does this according to the good pleasure of his own will. This drawing is obviously effectual (Jn 6:37), for all people who were predestined to be given to the Son will in fact come to him in faith, and will be raised up to life on the last day! Is man's will involved in this process of "coming"? Of course, it is. The drawing by God makes them willing. Does this mean that at no point during this drawing process that some or even many won't resist? Absolutely not! In my own personal salvation experience, I started to resist strongly at one point during my search for the truth until God providentially sent a God-fearing, bible-literate pastor into my life to straighten my dumb butt out and deliver me from my self-imposed ignorance. Therefore, I can relate strongly to such passages as Act 16:19; 21:30 when Paul and Silas were "dragged" away against their will. And to this day and to my dying breath, by the grace of God, I will always remain thankful for God being merciful to a stupid wretch like myself by making me willingly in the day of his power.

Do, I believe that God gives and draws all men in the distributive sense to Jesus? Absolutely not! If he does, then according to Jn 6:37, everyone who was so drawn will come to Jesus in faith and be raised up by him. If "things" cannot resist God's will, then neither can people who are being drawn to Christ. Perhaps this is the entire point to why John wrote "all that the Father gives me...". It's a wee bit disingenuous, in my opinion, to arbitrarily admit that non-human things are passively drawn while simultaneously claiming that humans are not also passively drawn to Christ.

And for the record, this drawing of God's people to Christ never ends in this life! This ongoing "drawing" is how God keeps his people on the straight and narrow path to life. It's one of the ways he keeps us faithful and causes us to check our own hearts and motives for all we do. Just like this entire universe, moment-by-moment, runs orderly and perpetually by God's power, so too do all his chosen people run by the same preserving power.

 

[brightfame52]

Or it's a sign of very deep belief and trust in God rather than in men who make intentional and unintentional misuse of His Word for some very bizarre purposes.

Everything is worked according to Gods will Eph 1:11

11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:

Everything is according to Gods Purpose Ecc 3:1-8

To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:

2 A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted;

3 A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;

4 A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;

5 A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;

6 A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away;

7 A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;

8 A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.