Response to Dr. Leighton Flowers video "John 6:44 in its True Context"

This is a response to Dr Leighton Flowers' 6 minute 42 second video entitled "JOHN 6:44 In Its TRUE CONTEXT"

In summary, Dr. Leighton Flowers argues that in John 6:44, the term "draw" should be understood as "enable" or "invite" rather than "compel" or "effectually bring." He contends that God lovingly invites all people to come to Christ, but not all will accept this invitation because they choose to (i.e. due to their free choice). Flowers contrasts this with the Calvinist view, which he believes mistakenly interprets "draw" to mean an irresistible compulsion that only applies to the elect. In an attempt to prove this, he highlights John 12:32, where Jesus says He will "draw all men" to Himself when lifted up, arguing that if "draw" means "compel," it would lead to universal salvation, which he believes is clearly not Jesus’ intent. Instead, Flowers sees "draw" as God's enabling grace, an invitation that can be either accepted or rejected, placing the responsibility for rejecting this grace squarely on the individual's refusal rather than on a lack of divine enablement. This interpretation, he argues, preserves both God's loving desire for all to be saved and the individual's freedom to choose or reject salvation.

Response: 
To truly grasp the meaning of John 6:44, we must begin by examining it in its immediate context and leaving his interpretation built on shaky ground. Let’s explore why understanding the context matters and how this inconsistency leads to his erroneous view of the text. 

In John 6:44, Jesus says, “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.” This is a strong statement about the inability of man and the necessity of God’s intervention in salvation. If this verse is read faithfully in its immediate context, we must also include its sister verse, John 6:37, where Jesus says, “All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.”

Taken together, these verses show a seamless connection between the Father’s drawing and the guaranteed response of those who are drawn. John 6:37 establishes that all whom the Father gives to the Son will indeed come to Him—none will fail to respond to this effectual drawing. Thus, it is not a mere invitation or enabling, but a sovereign and effectual act of grace that ensures salvation for those whom the Father draws.

Let's break this down syllogistically to make the biblical argument even clearer:

Premise 1: No one can come to Christ unless the Father draws him (John 6:44).

Premise 2: All whom the Father gives to the Son will come to Him (John 6:37).

Premise 3: All who come to Christ will be raised up on the last day (John 6:44).

Conclusion: Therefore, all whom the Father draws will come to Christ and will be raised up on the last day.

This syllogism demonstrates that the Father’s drawing is not an ineffectual invitation, but a decisive act that guarantees salvation for those whom He draws. Any interpretation that minimizes this by suggesting that the drawing is merely an enabling invitation fails to account for the totality of the passage’s context. 

The Irony of Flowers’ Appeal to Context

Flowers claims to interpret John 6:44 "in context," yet he skips over a crucial verse in its immediate context that directly undermines his interpretation—John 6:37, which says, “All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.” Instead, Flowers jumps to John 12:32 to support his claim that "draw" in John 6:44 means "invite" and applies universally. However, John 12:32, in context, speaks of Jesus drawing all kinds of people (both Jews and Gentiles) to Himself through His crucifixion, not every individual without exception. In this passage, Jesus is addressing a different crowd (both Jews and Greeks) and highlighting the universal scope of His redemptive work in contrast to its perceived limitation to Israel. Ironically, Flowers accuses Calvinists of taking John 6:44 out of context but then himself turns to a different chapter, with a different context altogether, as the main support for his failed argument.

To address those who attempt to connect the word "draw" in John 6:44 to "draw" in John 12:32, leading to the Provisionist interpretation that "draw" simply means "invite" or "enable" all people equally, it’s essential to examine the context, meaning, and theological implications of both passages. While the same Greek word (helkō) is used in both verses, the contexts and audiences of John 6 and John 12 differ significantly, which is crucial to understanding the intended meaning of "draw."

Key Points of Clarification

1. The Context of John 6:44

   • In John 6:44, Jesus is addressing a Jewish audience and speaking specifically about God’s sovereign work in salvation. He says, “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up on the last day.”
   • The context makes it clear that Jesus is speaking about a specific group of people whom the Father draws, and this drawing is effectual. In John 6:37, Jesus says, “All that the Father gives me will come to me,” confirming that those who are drawn by the Father will certainly come to Christ and be saved.
   • The drawing here is not merely an invitation that can be resisted but a sovereign, irresistible act of grace that results in salvation. The context supports this: those who are drawn are also the ones who are raised up on the last day (i.e., saved).

2. The Context of John 12:32

   • In John 12:32, Jesus says, “And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.” The context here is different from John 6. In John 12, Greeks (Gentiles) come seeking Jesus (John 12:20-22), signaling the broadening of Jesus' redemptive mission to include not only Jews but Gentiles as well.
   • The phrase “all people” here refers to all kinds of people (both Jews and Gentiles), not every individual without exception. The term "all" is frequently used in this way in Scripture, as seen in passages like Revelation 5:9, which speaks of Jesus ransoming people from every tribe and nation, not every single person. 
   • Therefore, the "drawing" in John 12:32 is a reference to the universal scope of Jesus’ atoning work, extending beyond Israel to include people from all nations. It does not refer to an individual, effectual drawing of every person to salvation.

Demonstrating that Flowers' Provisionist Interpretation is Incorrect

The Provisionist interpretation often asserts that "draw" in both John 6:44 and John 12:32 refers to a general, resistible invitation to all people, allowing for human free will to decide whether to respond. However, several key points show that this interpretation is inconsistent with the text:

1. John 6:44 Context Shows Effectual Drawing

• In John 6:44, the drawing of the Father is clearly effectual, not resistible. The verse explicitly states that no one can come to faith in Christ unless the Father draws him, and in John 6:37, we are told that all who are so granted by the Farther to the Son will come to faith in HIm and be raised up on the last day.
• There is no room in the text for the idea that someone could be drawn by the Father and yet fail to come to Christ. This effectual drawing is incompatible with the Provisionist view that the drawing is merely a general, resistible invitation.

2. The Greek Word Helkō Indicates Compelling, Not Mere Invitation

• The Greek word helkō (translated "draw") means to "drag" or "pull" with force, often used in contexts where a person or object is moved by an external power. For example, in John 21:6, the disciples “drew” a net full of fish—clearly not inviting the fish but pulling them in with power.
• Similarly, in Acts 16:19, Paul and Silas are "dragged" into the marketplace (helkō), indicating forceful compulsion.
• The word helkō implies a compelling force, not merely an invitation that can be accepted or rejected. Therefore, in John 6:44, this drawing is not merely an invitation but the effectual, sovereign work of God in bringing sinners to Christ.

3. "All People" in John 12:32 Does Not Mean Every Individual

• The Provisionist interpretation assumes that "all people" in John 12:32 means every individual without exception. However, as we’ve seen, the context shows that Jesus is referring to all kinds of people—both Jews and Gentiles. This is confirmed by the presence of the Greeks seeking Him in John 12:20-22.
• Throughout the New Testament, "all" often refers to all types or classes of people, not every individual. For example, 1 Timothy 2:4 says God desires all people to be saved, but the context shows that Paul is referring to all types of people (e.g., kings, those in authority, Gentiles, etc.), not every person without exception.
• Therefore, "all people" in John 12:32 does not contradict the specific and effectual drawing of God described in John 6:44.

To summarize, while the same Greek word (helkō) is used in both John 6:44 and John 12:32, the contexts of these passages are different. John 6:44 refers to the effectual drawing of the Father that brings specific individuals (the elect) to Christ, while John 12:32 refers to the broader scope of Jesus' redemptive work, extending to both Jews and Gentiles. The Provisionist interpretation conflates these distinct contexts and misunderstands the nature of the drawing described in John 6:44. When examined in context, John 6 teaches God's sovereign, effectual work in salvation, while John 12 emphasizes the global scope of Christ’s redemptive mission.

The Broader Biblical Context: The Nature of Man and God’s Sovereign Grace

Flowers’ interpretation also fails to consider the broader biblical teaching about human inability and God’s sovereignty in salvation. Scripture consistently teaches that fallen men have no ears to hear, no eyes to see, no heart to understand (Deut 29:4, 1 Cor 2:14) and are spiritually dead and unwilling to come to Christ apart from divine intervention (1 Cor 1:29-31; 1 Thess 1:4-5). Romans 3:10-12 declares, “None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God.” If no one seeks for God, how can they respond to an invitation unless God does a prior work in their hearts?

Jesus Himself affirms this in John 6:63, 65, saying, “The Spirit quickens, the flesh counts for NOTHING...This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.” Here, Jesus is not describing a mere invitation but a sovereign granting of the ability to come. This granting or drawing is effective and results in salvation, as Ezekiel 36:26-27 promises that God will remove the heart of stone and give a heart of flesh, causing His people to walk in His statutes.

If we accept Dr. Flowers’ view that God’s drawing is merely an invitation, we would have to deny the biblical teaching that fallen man is spiritually dead and will not respond to God without being made alive first. Ephesians 2:1-5 clearly teaches that we were “dead in our trespasses and sins” and that it is God who “made us alive together with Christ.” Dead men do not respond to invitations; they must be made alive first.

Conclusion: The Effectual Grace of God

In conclusion, when examined in context, John 6:44 clearly teaches that God’s drawing is an effectual work of grace that guarantees salvation for those He draws. The surrounding verses (John 6:37, 6:65) affirm that all those whom the Father gives to the Son will come, and none can come unless it is granted by the Father. Dr. Flowers' interpretation, which litterally abandons the context which he claims to uphold, reduces "draw" (helkō) to a mere invitation, ignoring the biblical teaching of human inability and God’s sovereign grace. When properly understood in context, both the immediate passage and the broader witness of Scripture show that God’s grace is sovereign, effectual, and never fails to accomplish His saving purposes.

------

NOTE:

While Dr. Flowers emphasizes the individual’s responsibility to accept or reject God’s grace, those in the Reformed camp agree that humans are responsible for rejecting the gospel. The difference lies in the understanding of human nature. Calvinists affirm that, due to the Fall, human hearts are naturally hardened and hostile toward God (Romans 8:7-8, Ephesians 2:1-3). As a result, though humans make voluntary choices, they are enslaved to sin and will always reject the gospel unless God intervenes with regenerating grace.

2 Corinthians 4:4 teaches that the “god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ.” Our inability to come to Christ stems from our fallen condition, not from a lack of divine enablement. Left to our own devices, we will always choose sin over God. This is why God must sovereignly act in grace to give us new eyes to see, new ears to hear, and new hearts to respond.

In Reformed theology, God is not responsible for a person's refusal of the gospel; rather, He justly leaves some to their own sinful desires. When God chooses to show mercy, it is entirely of His grace. When He leaves people in their rebellion, it is a result of their own willful rejection of His truth. Romans 1:24 says, “Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity.” God is not forcing anyone to reject Him; rather, He allows sinners to follow their natural inclinations, for which they are fully accountable.

Thus, while both Calvinists and Provisionists affirm human responsibility, Calvinists recognize that without God’s effectual grace, no one would choose Christ. We are responsible for our rejection, and God's leaving us to our own sinful desires does not make Him responsible for our unbelief.

-----

"For you granted him authority over all people that he might give eternal life to all those you have given him." John 17:2

Related Resources
Flesh and Spirit: Contrasting Realities and Their Role in Salvation - John 6:63 @Monergism
The Doctrine of Monergistic Regeneration in John Chapter 6 @Monergism