Then we return full circle to the verses you have yet to even analyze in any way. That is, when Christ explains the unbelief of the Jews, He does so by explaining that the reason why they do not believe is because it was not granted to them to believe. "That is why I told you," saith He, "no one can come to me unless my Father grants it." If it had been "granted" them to believe, it is a contradiction to explain the reason for their unbelief as it not having been granted.
That is OK. I consider it intellectual laziness to want someone to hand type long arguments for you instead of going to a link and reading.
So not only are you incapable of scriptural exegesis for inconvenient verses, you do not know how to use copy and paste? But I know what Arminians say about the verses I have brought against you: Nothing, or, at least, nothing substantial, and that is why you will not post any relevant passages that might answer my points to you. There's simply nothing to post. I have read Biblical commentaries by Arminians, scriptural arguments from Arminians, and when it comes to verses like what we find in John 6, there is a sudden and mysterious lack of depth and detail in their commentaries. Barnes, for example, does not even have an entry for verse 65! This compared to ancients like Augustine who, reading it, has no problem concluding after entire pages on this chapter carefully analyzing each verse, "there is whom He draws, and there is whom He draws not; why He draws one and draws not another, do not desire to judge, if you desire not to err" (Augustine, Tractate 26). This is the only legitimate response one can have.
“There’s simply nothing to post. I have read Biblical commentaries by Arminians, scriptural arguments from Arminians, and when it comes to verses like what we find in John 6, there is a sudden and mysterious lack of depth and detail in their commentaries.”
Given your refusal to read what I have provided or the links, I am skeptical of your claim.
As for John 6, you continue to read Calvinism in to verses that say nothing of the sort, so I must conclude that careful reading of the scripture isn’t your strong point either. The text does not say what you want it to say, and specifically says something else:
“For this is 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.”
We are saved by grace thru faith, and gain entrance to grace thru faith, as scripture says - not via election or a secret will of God.
“If you are suggesting that there will be salvation outside of Jesus Christ for those who have never heard the Gospel, you would be horribly wrong.”
What I have said is that God is just, and I am content to leave it there. If you consider that wrong, then I suggest you reconsider.
“So Jesus answered them, “Do not grumble among yourselves. Nobody comes to me unless he is drawn to me by the Father who sent me, and I will raise him up when the last day comes. In the prophets it is written—‘And they shall all be taught by God,’ and this means that everybody who has heard the Father’s voice and learned from him will come to me...I assure you that the man who trusts in him has eternal life already.”
Who comes to God? “everybody who has heard the Father’s voice and learned from him” - which is simply a rephrasing of what I said.
“There is no thought here of force or magic. The term figuratively expresses the supernatural power of the love of God or Christ which goes out to all (12:32) but without which no one can come (6:44). The apparent contradiction shows that both the election and the universality of grace must be taken seriously; the compulsion is not automatic.
What is rather ironic in all of this discussion is that the above definition coincides beautifully with the Wesleyan-Arminian doctrine of prevenient grace — a doctrine that R.C. Sproul denies that the Bible teaches (pp. 123-125). Wesleyan-Arminians believe that divine grace works in the hearts and wills of every person to elicit a faith response or as Thomas Oden states so well, “God’s love enables precisely that response in the sinner which God’s holiness demands: trust in God’s own self-giving” (“The Transforming Power of Grace,” p. 45).”
http://evangelicalarminians.org/does-john-6-44-teach-irresistible-grace/
“The disagreement between Calvinists and Arminians would be over the meaning of the word draw in John 6:44; whether this divine drawing or assistance is irresistible or resistible, and whether it extends to all people as John 12:32 suggests, or just to some people. We need to keep in mind that there is a huge difference between being irresistibly compelled or forced to believe in Christ and being graciously enabled to believe...
...I have surveyed every available Lexicon, Exegetical Dictionary, and Greek-English Dictionary, that I could find in bookstores, Seminaries, and College libraries available to me. Here is a sampling of the evidence:
• A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, says helkuo is used figuratively “of the pull on man’s inner life. . . . draw, attract J 6:44” [Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, Danker, p. 251].
• The Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament, states that helkuo is used metaphorically “to draw mentally and morally, John 6:44; 12:32” [William Mounce, p. 180].
• The Greek-English Lexicon to the New Testament has, “met., to draw, i.e. to attract, Joh. xii. 32. Cf. Joh. vi. 44” [W.J. Hickie, p. 13].
• The Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament by Timothy Friberg, Barbara Friberg, and Neva F. Miller says, “figuratively, of a strong pull in the mental or moral life draw, attract (JN 6.44)” [p. 144].
• Calvinist Spiros Zodhiates, in his Hebrew-Greek Key Study Bible, says, “Helkuo is used of Jesus on the cross drawing by His love, not force (Jn. 6:44; 12:32)” [New Testament Lexical Aids, p. 1831].
I could cite at least eight more reference works but it is unnecessary because not a single one of them defines draw in John 6:44 as “compel or force.” Clearly, R.C. Sproul has not done his homework.”
http://wesley.nnu.edu/arminianism/the-arminian-magazine/issue-1-spring-2001-volume-19
“form of the verb heko is in the future, active, indicative, 3rd person, singular form and indicates that someone/something will come. Again, a brief examination of our lexicons offers no surprises. Those who are being given to the Son will come to Him, that is, to be present with him. What we need to be cautious in doing with a word like this is not to freight it with our desired meaning or read theological implications into it. In the majority usage within the NT, the usage of heko (and its forms) is to simply come, to be present. To draw out a theological meaning takes more than a single word, verse, or sometimes even a passage.”
http://evangelicalarminians.org/the-honest-reading-canard-john-6-37-40/