Contradiction with Romans 10:13
This verse states, "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved," suggesting that salvation is available to anyone who calls on the Lord, whereas John 6:65 implies that only those enabled by the Father can come to Jesus.
Romans 10:13: For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Contradiction with 1 Timothy 2:4
This verse mentions, "Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth," indicating God's desire for all to be saved, which contrasts with John 6:65's implication of selective enabling.
1 Timothy 2:4: Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
Contradiction with 2 Peter 3:9
It states, "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise...not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance," suggesting universal opportunity for repentance versus the selective enabling in John 6:65.
2 Peter 3:9: The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Contradiction with Matthew 11:28
"Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest," which offers a universal invitation, differing from the selective coming to Jesus described in John 6:65.
Matthew 11:28: Come unto me, all [ye] that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
Contradiction with Revelation 22:17
"And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely," indicates the offer of salvation is open to anyone who wills, contrasting with the selective process in John 6:65.
Revelation 22:17: And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.
Paradox #1
John 6:65 might seem to contradict the idea of free will. The verse suggests that coming to Jesus is only possible if it is granted by God. This challenges the belief that anyone can choose to follow Jesus on their own, creating a theological tension with the concept of humans having the freedom to make their own spiritual decisions.
Paradox #2
John 6:65 is often interpreted as emphasizing that belief in Jesus is enabled by divine intervention or grace. A potential contradiction or inconsistency could arise when comparing this idea to doctrines emphasizing free will, where individuals independently choose to believe. Some might argue there's tension between divine initiation and human choice in the process of faith.
Paradox #3
Some people see a contradiction between the idea in John 6:65, that God enables people to come to Jesus, and the concept of free will, which suggests that individuals have the ability to choose to believe or not believe on their own. This can lead to discussions on whether faith is a result of divine intervention or personal choice.
Paradox #4
John 6:65 can present a contradiction or inconsistency in the context of the concept of free will. The verse suggests that belief or coming to Jesus is dependent on divine intervention or being "granted" by the Father. This might conflict with the belief that individuals have the free will to choose their faith independently.