The Five Points of Calvinism

[FreeGrace]

Not, the statements themselves are not ambiguous. It's about application. This statement isn't ambiguous either,

6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me. (Joh 14:6 NKJ)

Everyone who has believed has been sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise FOR the day of redemption (Eph 1:13,14, 4:30), and given eternal life (Rom 6:23), which is an irrevocable gift (Rom 11:29).

Suppose I said, no one living before or after Jesus could come to the Father and presented this passage.

Then you would be unambiguously in error.

 

[WIP]

Perhaps that is explained with the expectations that the disciples and indeed most Jews had about who the Messiah (Christ) would be. In that many of them were expecting him to overthrow the Roman occupation and liberate Israel.

Which is why they quarreled over who would sit on his right hand and left hand when he came into power. Many of them desired the power that came with being associated with a leader who could topple the Romans and put them in a position of power themselves. However, as it became increasingly obvious that Jesus was not setting out to accomplish this and become a military leader, Judas likely became disenfranchised with the movement. Whether or not he believed Jesus was truly the Messiah, or was a true disciple and follower of God never is indicated. I think arguing that he was a genuine believer who fell away is ultimately a losing battle, and there are better texts that express this point.

This would be a good place to share those texts.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

First off, I'm not sure if I know what you mean "it's applied to". Are you saying that "they also" is a reference to other believers or to the 'close disciples'? although actually, it doesn't matter to my point, one way or the other.

It is a reference, that is a reference that is applied to the close disciples.

Is it your position that verse 23 is a prayer still for the 'close disciples' or not? I thought when you said he transition back, that you had already observed that verse 23 was a prayer for other believers, not so much the 'close disciples'.

v.24 is when he transitions back to the close disciples, but v.20-23 are a reference to believers, and in v.23 in particular that their unity will bring about revelation of God to more and more people in the world.

I just went with your original analysis and observations 1-9 and Obs 1-2 of them.
In other words, I thought you had already agreed that verse 20-23 was a prayer for the others (those besides the ‘close disciples’) so I limited my discussion to just what’s prayed for in verse 23.

That is correct, that the prayer is now for those who will believe through their word.

It don’t see why you are even discussing 24 and beyond, frankly. Unless you think that somehow changes what you already stipulated in your original post with your observations laid out 1-9 and 1-2. (which BTW is a listing of words/phrases bolded and underlined taken from WITHIN the context of the passage, so I’m a little taken aback as to why you think other’s can’t do the same thing for clarifying purposes. I’m not taking anything out of context.

I was addressing your remarks about "they also," and my conversation about v.24 is to state clearly the transition. Also, I would disagree that what you did is exactly the same as me, as I will assert you haven't fully exegeted the passage, but just extracted key components without bringing them together to make a coherent understanding of the text.

I just thought we’d already agreed on the broader context issues so I’m focused merely on v3 and v23.

The root of the issue/debate here between you/me is really quite simple.
Verse 3 defines Eternal Life. Clearly. I thought you had already agreed to this (not to mention that’s what the verse says).

[Frankly, I have no idea why you’d think the last part of the verse isn’t just as integral as the first part of it. But that doesn’t even matter right now.]

Please substantiate that the belief that the Father sent Jesus is integral to "eternal life," remember we're not talking about what must be believed to have eternal life, but the qualitative meaning that is eternal life, fellowship and union with the Father and Son.

And I thought you’d agreed that verse 23 is Jesus’ prayer NOT about the close disciples, but other believers. Do you agree with this or not? I thought you did, previously.

It is about believers in general, but he elaborates on the purpose of their unity (well A purpose), is to reveal God's love to the world.

Okay, let’s just stipulate that it’s the ‘main thrust’ of Eternal Life and move on.
If yes (which is the correct answer, just read verse 23) then Jesus just prayed for Eternal Life for the other believers. Poof! That’s my point.

No, he prayed for unity for existing believers, who have eternal life.. since those who believe have eternal life. Then he explains the purpose of that unity, which is so that world may believe, it doesn't state that they will believe.

Nothing in John 17:23 indicates the following.

1) That the believers are promised eternal life, as they already have it as believers, which he substantiated that in v.20.
2) That eternal life is something that can be lost or forfeit. The preservation or perseverance of believers is no where discussed with regards to believers in general. The only reference to people not being lost is done earlier in the text in reference to the disciples, when he says "not one of them has been lost."
3) That the world will obtain eternal life, which is indicates by the subjunctive mood, which expresses merely a desire not an actuality.

Let's even grant for a moment that Jesus says (hypothetically), "I pray to you Father that you would grant those who believe through their word eternal life," I would have no problem with such a verse as I think that all believers have eternal life. No where would this indicate that OSAS is true either, unless they inferred something particular to their understanding of "eternal life," which would then require that understanding be supported.

So?

I point that out, because I have never seen it tried to be used to support the idea of OSAS.

This might be a helpful exercise.

Can you take v.23 and state it in your own terms, then we can compare that summary to the text itself to understand what your perspective is, and then more clearly indicate where our differences lie.

I know you asked for elaboration, but I actually think simplification is called for. This is about as simple as I can ask:
Did Jesus pray for this ‘main thrust’ of Eternal Life for the other believers in verse 23 or not? Yes or no?

No, he prayed for as deep a union as he has with the Father, why would he pray for eternal life for a group of believers who already have eternal life?

I am simply am comparing Jesus’ definition of Eternal Life given in verse 3 (I'll even just go with your definition of what's the main/bolded part within it, though I don't really agree with you there) to is prayer in verse 23. This is not that complicated.

You don't think the main thrust of eternal life is fellowship and union with God and Jesus Christ?

Also, following up to your summary, please elaborate how this would "prove OSAS." To me this Scripture is very irrelevant to the issue at all.

In my eyes it is about 1) deeper union with the Father and Christ, 2) for the purpose of revealing God's love to the world, so that they might believe.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Sure,

23 Now there was a man in their synagogue with an unclean spirit. And he cried out,
24 saying, "Let us alone! What have we to do with You, Jesus of Nazareth? Did You come to destroy us? I know who You are-- the Holy One of God!"
25 But Jesus rebuked him, saying, "Be quiet, and come out of him!" (Mar 1:23-25 NKJ)

10 For He healed many, so that as many as had afflictions pressed about Him to touch Him.
11 And the unclean spirits, whenever they saw Him, fell down before Him and cried out, saying, "You are the Son of God."
12 But He sternly warned them that they should not make Him known. (Mar 3:10-12 NKJ)

14 Then the Pharisees went out and plotted against Him, how they might destroy Him.
15 But when Jesus knew it, He withdrew from there. And great multitudes1 followed Him, and He healed them all.
16 Yet He warned them not to make Him known,
17 that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Isaiah the prophet, saying:
18 "Behold! My Servant whom I have chosen, My Beloved in whom My soul is well pleased! I will put My Spirit upon Him, And He will declare justice to the Gentiles. (Mat 12:14-18 NKJ)

The unclean spirits acknowledge Him as the Son of God and He rebuked them and told them to be quiet and not make Him known. Those too, who He healed He told them that they should not make Him known. I surmise from this that it was not yet time for Jesus to be revealed as the Son of God. If that is the case then it would seem to me that the only way anyone (other than the demons) could know that He was the Christ, the Son of God, is if He or the Father revealed it to them.

The statement that John made,

31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name. (Joh 20:31 NKJ)

Was written many years later, well after it had been revealed to the world who Jesus is. John in His gospel tells us that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. The Scriptures have given us the evidence to evaluate. Therefore, I don't believe that it is necessary today for God to reveal to people that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. However, keep in mind that I am not denying the Holy Spirit's influence on every human being. In John 12:32 Jesus said, 'if I am lifted up I will draw all to me.'

Does that make it clearer?

I guess that makes it clearer, and I think the counter argument to your bit about demons is that they claimed to be "angels," (see Revelation 19 and 20, etc.) and that they would have then at one point been in the presence of God, thus they would know who Jesus is as they would recognize him and his authority.

I also would say that my estimation is that the Spirit works through the hearing of the gospel, so that when John writes about informing us on this matter, there is a spiritual act happening in that. (See Romans 10:17).

What do you think?

 

[Chopper]

I didn't really get into why Judas was given, my point revolves around John 6:39 and those given to Christ. According to Jesus Judas was one of them.

Butch old Buddy, I'd like to suggest that Judas was prophesied in the Hebrew Scriptures that he would betray Jesus. In the psalms we see some, Psalm 41:9; 69:25; 109:8. The way I'm thinking is because Judas was prophesied to betray Jesus, he was never a real disciple, just one of name only....John Calvin has something to say about this in his book, Institutes of the Christian Religion. p. 644.

"Christ says, that none is lost but the son of perdition (John 17:12). The expression is not strictly proper; but it is by no means obscure: for Judas was not numbered among the sheep of Christ, because he was one truly, but because he held a place among them. Then, in another passage, where the Lord says, that he was elected with the apostles, reference is made only to the office, "Have I not chosen you twelve," says He, "and one of you is a devil?" (John 6:70). that is, He had chosen him to the office of apostle. But when He speaks of election to salvation, He altogether excludes him from the number of the elect, "I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen" (John 13:18), Should any one confound the term elect in the two passages, he will miserable entangle himself; whereas if he distinguish between them, nothing can be plainer.."

 

[Butch5]

Everyone who has believed has been sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise FOR the day of redemption (Eph 1:13,14, 4:30), and given eternal life (Rom 6:23), which is an irrevocable gift (Rom 11:29).


Then you would be unambiguously in error.

I've bolded your statement above. Do you see my point? You see the same Scriptures in a different way. Therefore we cannot use the Scriptures to remedy the difference. We must look at the methodology that is bringing us to the conclusions were are drawing.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Butch old Buddy, I'd like to suggest that Judas was prophesied in the Hebrew Scriptures that he would betray Jesus. In the psalms we see some, Psalm 41:9; 69:25; 109:8. The way I'm thinking is because Judas was prophesied to betray Jesus, he was never a real disciple, just one of name only....John Calvin has something to say about this in his book, Institutes of the Christian Religion. p. 644.

"Christ says, that none is lost but the son of perdition (John 17:12). The expression is not strictly proper; but it is by no means obscure: for Judas was not numbered among the sheep of Christ, because he was one truly, but because he held a place among them. Then, in another passage, where the Lord says, that he was elected with the apostles, reference is made only to the office, "Have I not chosen you twelve," says He, "and one of you is a devil?" (John 6:70). that is, He had chosen him to the office of apostle. But when He speaks of election to salvation, He altogether excludes him from the number of the elect, "I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen" (John 13:18), Should any one confound the term elect in the two passages, he will miserable entangle himself; whereas if he distinguish between them, nothing can be plainer.."

I agree with all of that except that the election referenced in John 13:18 being particularly of salvation. I do think that the apostles were elected and were determined to be saved, but I disagree that this is the primary element of that election. I think the purpose to which they were elected is far more important, as John Calvin will just bunch this election in with the rest of his doctrine on the matter, and doesn't to my knowledge distinguish the election of the disciples with the election of the body of Christ.

 

[Butch5]

Butch old Buddy, I'd like to suggest that Judas was prophesied in the Hebrew Scriptures that he would betray Jesus. In the psalms we see some, Psalm 41:9; 69:25; 109:8. The way I'm thinking is because Judas was prophesied to betray Jesus, he was never a real disciple, just one of name only....John Calvin has something to say about this in his book, Institutes of the Christian Religion. p. 644.

"Christ says, that none is lost but the son of perdition (John 17:12). The expression is not strictly proper; but it is by no means obscure: for Judas was not numbered among the sheep of Christ, because he was one truly, but because he held a place among them. Then, in another passage, where the Lord says, that he was elected with the apostles, reference is made only to the office, "Have I not chosen you twelve," says He, "and one of you is a devil?" (John 6:70). that is, He had chosen him to the office of apostle. But when He speaks of election to salvation, He altogether excludes him from the number of the elect, "I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen" (John 13:18), Should any one confound the term elect in the two passages, he will miserable entangle himself; whereas if he distinguish between them, nothing can be plainer.."

I understand that it was prophesied, the question is, was it known by God that he would do that or did he do that because he was destined to do it? I submit that Judas had a choice.

Regarding Calvin's statement I believe he misses the boat when he says "election to salvation." I believe he imposes his own ideas on the text. In that passage Jesus is not speaking of electing people or being saved.

 

[Butch5]

I guess that makes it clearer, and I think the counter argument to your bit about demons is that they claimed to be "angels," (see Revelation 19 and 20, etc.) and that they would have then at one point been in the presence of God, thus they would know who Jesus is as they would recognize him and his authority.

I also would say that my estimation is that the Spirit works through the hearing of the gospel, so that when John writes about informing us on this matter, there is a spiritual act happening in that. (See Romans 10:17).

What do you think?

I can see that. As I said, I didn't mean that the Spirit wasn't involved, I was referring to that mystical idea that people tend to think as spiritual. I think a lot of the time people equate spiritual with non physical. My point was that, believing that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, is a thing we do in the physical realm, it's not a mystical non material thing. Does that make sense?

 

[FreeGrace]

I've bolded your statement above. Do you see my point? You see the same Scriptures in a different way.

We sure do! 2

Therefore we cannot use the Scriptures to remedy the difference.

Again, we disagree. Scirpture is the ONLY remedy.

We must look at the methodology that is bringing us to the conclusions were are drawing.

The problem here is that there are many "methodologies", which is why we have so many different theologies. There is only one theology, and it is found in the Bible.

What is unambiguous is that the gift of God is eternal life (Rom 6:23) and God's gifts are irrevocable (Rom 11:29).

Now, how does any "methodology" conclude that eternal life can be revoked, given what has been written in Scripture? I can't imagine.

 

[Butch5]

Butch old Buddy, I'd like to suggest that Judas was prophesied in the Hebrew Scriptures that he would betray Jesus. In the psalms we see some, Psalm 41:9; 69:25; 109:8. The way I'm thinking is because Judas was prophesied to betray Jesus, he was never a real disciple, just one of name only....John Calvin has something to say about this in his book, Institutes of the Christian Religion. p. 644.

"Christ says, that none is lost but the son of perdition (John 17:12). The expression is not strictly proper; but it is by no means obscure: for Judas was not numbered among the sheep of Christ, because he was one truly, but because he held a place among them. Then, in another passage, where the Lord says, that he was elected with the apostles, reference is made only to the office, "Have I not chosen you twelve," says He, "and one of you is a devil?" (John 6:70). that is, He had chosen him to the office of apostle. But when He speaks of election to salvation, He altogether excludes him from the number of the elect, "I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen" (John 13:18), Should any one confound the term elect in the two passages, he will miserable entangle himself; whereas if he distinguish between them, nothing can be plainer.."

Hi Chopper,

I'm not arguing that Judas believed. I just don't think was can state categorically that he didn't. Judas presents a problem for Calvinism because if he was a believer then the doctrine of Perseverance of the Saints falls. I think it is on this basis that a claim is made that Judas never believed. It is my contention that this is an unsubstantiated claim. Is there evidence that suggests he didn't believe? Yes. Is there evidence that suggests he did believe? Yes. We simply don't know. So, while I tend to believe that Judas did believe and turned away I would not argue that point nor would I base doctrine on it.

People say that Simon the sorcerer didn't believe yet the Scriptures say,

13 Then Simon himself also believed; and when he was baptized he continued with Philip, and was amazed, seeing the miracles and signs which were done. (Act 8:13 NKJ)

He believed and was baptized, that's straight from the Scriptures.

 

[FreeGrace]

Hi Chopper,

I'm not arguing that Judas was believed. I just don't think was can state categorically that he didn't. Judas presents a problem for Calvinism because if he was a believer then the doctrine of Perseverance of the Saints falls. I think it is on this basis that a claim is made that Judas never believed. It is my contention that this is an unsubstantiated claim. Is there evidence that suggests he didn't believe? Yes. Is there evidence that suggests he did believe? Yes. We simply don't know. So, while I tend to believe that Judas did believe and turned away I would not argue that point nor would or base doctrine on it.

People say that Simon the sorcerer didn't believe yet the Scriptures say,

13 Then Simon himself also believed; and when he was baptized he continued with Philip, and was amazed, seeing the miracles and signs which were done. (Act 8:13 NKJ)

He believed and was baptized, that's straight from the Scriptures.

Here is the key. Luke says that Simon believed. No one ever said that Judas believed, or acknowledged Jesus as the Son of God.

 

[Butch5]

We sure do! 2


Again, we disagree. Scirpture is the ONLY remedy.

Scripture can only be the remedy when it's correctly understood. In order to understand it properly we must use proper methods of reasoning.

The problem here is that there are many "methodologies", which is why we have so many different theologies. There is only one theology, and it is found in the Bible.

What is unambiguous is that the gift of God is eternal life (Rom 6:23) and God's gifts are irrevocable (Rom 11:29).

Now, how does any "methodology" conclude that eternal life can be revoked, given what has been written in Scripture? I can't imagine.

God is a God of order not chaos. Logic is order, God made man and He made man's mind. Logic is a creation of God. God made reason. The law of Contradiction is a creation of God, thus things can't contradict. It is this logic and reason that that is used to understand the Scripture. So, in the end it is God's methodology.

 

[Butch5]

Here is the key. Luke says that Simon believed. No one ever said that Judas believed, or acknowledged Jesus as the Son of God.

It's not recorded but that doesn't mean it wasn't said.

 

[chessman]

That is correct, that the prayer is now for those who will believe through their word.

thanks. That's what I thought all along. Just making sure you agreed.

I would disagree that what you did is exactly the same as me, as I will assert you haven't fully exegeted the passage,

My effort here has never been an attempt to exegete the passage. I used yours for that. Up till verse 24.

I simply added the definition of Eternal Life that is clearly given in v3 to your listing. You skipped right past verse 3, so I wouldn't get all accusative of me, with respect to what I'm choosing not to address in this passage or not. Or how I bold and underline stuff, since you do the same thing.

Please substantiate that the belief that the Father sent Jesus is integral to "eternal life,"

. K. That's easy;

John 17:3 (LEB) Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

...
it doesn't state that they will believe.

No it doesn't.

It's 'merely' Jesus praying that they will.

I see where you're at now. Thanks for your time.

 

[Chopper]

Hi Chopper,

I'm not arguing that Judas believed. I just don't think was can state categorically that he didn't. Judas presents a problem for Calvinism because if he was a believer then the doctrine of Perseverance of the Saints falls. I think it is on this basis that a claim is made that Judas never believed. It is my contention that this is an unsubstantiated claim. Is there evidence that suggests he didn't believe? Yes. Is there evidence that suggests he did believe? Yes. We simply don't know. So, while I tend to believe that Judas did believe and turned away I would not argue that point nor would I base doctrine on it.

People say that Simon the sorcerer didn't believe yet the Scriptures say,

13 Then Simon himself also believed; and when he was baptized he continued with Philip, and was amazed, seeing the miracles and signs which were done. (Act 8:13 NKJ)

He believed and was baptized, that's straight from the Scriptures.

I don't see any evidence that Judas was a believer at all. SO, I believe that he was lost from birth till death.

 

[Butch5]

I don't see any evidence that Judas was a believer at all. SO, I believe that he was lost from birth till death.

As I said, we're not told definitively. I think all we can do is speculate.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

My effort here has never been an attempt to exegete the passage. I used yours for that. Up till verse 24.

I simply added the definition of Eternal Life that is clearly given in v3 to your listing. You skipped right past verse 3, so I wouldn't get all accusative of me, with respect to what I'm choosing not to address in this passage or not. Or how I bold and underline stuff, since you do the same thing.

v3 was not integral to the point I was making, I skipped past v1 and other verses that didn't highlight information about the disciples. If this was meant to be a full exegesis of John 17, then it would have been a lot longer and a lot more in depth. I also would have reference "eternal life," as it is used elsewhere to compare it to here.

(Edited, ToS 2.4, Obadiah) Which is why I asked you to explain v3 and v23 in your own words, to see if this really matches the text.

. K. That's easy;

John 17:3 (LEB)Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

I already addressed this:

"Eternal life is not believing that Jesus was sent by the Father. Eternal life is knowing God and Jesus, let's look at the text.

"And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." John 17:3 (ESV)

The bolded is the main thrust of Jesus' statement, that they know God and Jesus Christ. The second portion is not apart of the main idea, but provides additional information about Jesus in his relationship to the Father, that he was sent by him. This is integral in what is to be believed, but it, knowing that Jesus was sent by God is not "eternal life." Post #131

Merely bolding the text doesn't substantiate your assertion, I did that, but in addition I provided a thorough explanation.

I will now give what I think will be the definitive exegesis of this portion of John 17:3, let's look at the Greek.

"αὕτη δέ ἐστιν ἡ αἰώνιος ζωὴ ἵνα γινώσκωσι σὲ τὸν μόνον ἀληθινὸν θεὸν καὶ ὃν ἀπέστειλας Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν."
Holmes, M. W. (2010). The Greek New Testament: SBL Edition (Jn 17:3). Lexham Press.

The bolded portion is again what we are concerned with, and we can see a difference from the English translation, in that Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν is at the end of the clause, rather than "whom you have sent,"as it is in the English translation. The inclusion of "whom you have sent," as prior to Jesus Christ is for this purpose:

"Overspecification—The description of individuals or ideas that is more specific than required to identify the intended referent. This extra information is often ‘thematically-loaded’, connected to the theme of the context in some way. The overspecification prompts the reader conceptualize the referent in a specific way"
Runge, S. E. (2008). In The Lexham Discourse Greek New Testament: Glossary. Lexham Press.

The position of Jesus Christ in the clause is for this reason.

"Right-dislocation—Appositional information that is added at the end of a clause that further describes some previously-mentioned entity in the clause, and agrees morphologically with the previous mention."
Runge, S. E. (2008). In The Lexham Discourse Greek New Testament: Glossary. Lexham Press.

The theme of Jesus being the one the Father sent is extremely common in John, and this is merely another instance of that theme being present here. Indeed this use of discourse is used in the same sentence, with God the Father, who is said to be the "only true," which is an overspecification to further cement who is being referred to. The right of dislocation is seen from the fact that God occurs at the end of the clause and is directly preceded by "only true." We don't see the words "only true," as integral to the understanding of eternal life, which is why we don't see "whom you have sent," as central to the understanding of this text either. It is just a thematically infused overspecification to further clarifies who is being addressed in the discourse, which is about eternal life.

It helps when I am posting at home, and can use my resources.

No it doesn't.

It's 'merely' Jesus praying that they will.

The belief isn't on the basis of that prayer, but on the basis of witnessing the love and union shared between Christians and God.

 

[chessman]

(Post removed. Response to deleted portion of a post. Obadiah)

 

[chessman]

I ran out of time last night to complete my reply to your post so I thought I should complete it this AM. Otherwise, my reply would not be a completed answer to all your questions and reply to your points. You answered my questions and I appreciate that you did. But if I were to leave the questions that you posed to me unanswered, my reply would be lacking completeness. Kind of (not exactly, but kind of) like the 'close disciples' were not a complete set of all the believers that The Father gave to The Son. Thus, Jesus' prayer for other believers (future believers that is) to also come to believe in Him, through the 'close disciples' words (and the Holy Spirit of course). A prayer that I believe is being answered now. Like you, I was posting using my phone. So here goes:

the qualitative meaning that is eternal life, fellowship and union with the Father and Son.

I see your point and don't necessarily disagree. However, I'm addressing the quantitative meaning of Eternal Life (v3) as well as the qualitative meaning.

It is about believers in general, but he elaborates on the purpose of their unity (well A purpose), is to reveal God's love to the world.

Here I agree that unity is A purpose of His prayer but disagree that it's about "believers in general". Like you, I think unity is key (primary even) reason for His prayer, but not the only reason. He's talking about unity through completing/perfecting all the people that The Father gave to Him, in my opinion. [Yes, I understand that the phrase “all The Father gave Him” is applied to the ‘close disciples”. I agreed with your original point there, before you even made it.
But my point is in addtion to that point. The reason He prayed for the ‘close disciples’ then transitions to praying for others in like manner in the same prayer is very much for unity and “completeness”. Qualitatively AND quantitatively.
He even demonstrates that He's praying for specifically (not generally) only those that are given to Him by The Father through His exclusion of Judas as one of the 12.

No, he prayed for unity for existing believers, who have eternal life.. since those who believe have eternal life. Then he explains the purpose of that unity, which is so that world may believe, it doesn't state that they will believe.

Here I also agree yet disagree. His prayer is a prayer for people that will (future) believe thru the words of the 'close disciples', not just for the existing believers. When Jesus prayed v20-23, how many believing people do you think existed that day that did so thru hearing the words of the 'close disciples'? I think none at that time. Thus the prayer for others. But yes, I am aware of the present tense verb form for believe used in His prayer. See why, below.

Nothing in John 17:23 indicates the following.
1) That the believers are promised eternal life, as they already have it as believers, which he substantiated that in v.20.

I don't think in v20 he is talking about present tense believers that have already believed thru the words of the close disciples. If you take John's discussion back to the context of the type/quality of 'belief' he means in v20 to 5:44 (which I do) I think the reason he used the present tense verb form for believe (though it seems clear he's talking about later believers), becomes clear:
John 5:44-47 (LEB) How are you able to believe, if you accept glory from one another, and do not seek the glory which is from the only God? ... 47 But if you do not believe that one’s writings, how will you believe my words?”
Answer is given in Jesus' prayer in Ch 7, in my opinion. Notice that the same verb form is used here (present tense) though He's instructing them [Jews in Chapter 5] to seek it from the glory of "the only God". Very similar to His prayer in Chapter 7 for the other beleivers.

2) That eternal life is something that can be lost or forfeit. The preservation or perseverance of believers is no where discussed with regards to believers in general. The only reference to people not being lost is done earlier in the text in reference to the disciples, when he says "not one of them has been lost."

I'm a little taken aback by smart people that think Eternal Life is not eternal. I've never found one glimpse or any justification for that idea, myself. It seems contrary to common sense and Scripture. But some people are, I suppose, comfortable thinking Eternal Life is not eternal. I simply disagree with them based on common sense and Scriptures.

3) That the world will obtain eternal life, which is indicates by the subjunctive mood, which expresses merely a desire not an actuality.

I believe another member has already expressed their opinion that Jesus’ prayer might not have been or will be answered. I disagree. I think ALL Jesus’ prayers are answered and He never prayed for things that were not in accord with the will of The Father. (Heb 10:7)

Let's even grant for a moment that Jesus says (hypothetically), "I pray to you Father that you would grant those who believe through their word eternal life," I would have no problem with such a verse as I think that all believers have eternal life.

Me either. That IS my hypothetical point. I couldn’t have said it better myself. I recognize that’s NOT what the verse says directly, however. I believe that it’s the clear implication though. And as you say, “have no problem with such a verse”. I’m merely pointing out that if you take v3 and v23 as a coherent whole, what you say above comes very, very close to such a ‘verse’.

No where would this indicate that OSAS is true either, unless they inferred something particular to their understanding of "eternal life," which would then require that understanding be supported.

I will admit that I infer Eternal Life is eternal.

I point that out, because I have never seen it tried to be used to support the idea of OSAS.

Thus the reason for independent Bible Study, I suppose. Independent from commentator’s study results. I see nothing wrong with that.

Can you take v.23 and state it in your own terms, then we can compare that summary to the text itself to understand what your perspective is, and then more clearly indicate where our differences lie.

"I pray to you Father that you would grant those who believe through their word eternal life (see v3, for a definition of Eternal Life),"

No, he prayed for as deep a union as he has with the Father,

why would he pray for eternal life for a group of believers who already have eternal life?

I’m confused:

v.20-23 are a reference to believers, and in v.23 in particular that their unity will bring about revelation of God to more and more people in the world.

When you said earlier, about v 23, “more and more people in the world”, do you not think that future believers are not being prayed for?

You don't think the main thrust of eternal life is fellowship and union with God and Jesus Christ?

I don’t see that verse 3 says that, no. In fact, I think that the main thrust of Eternal Life is that it’s eternal. It includes fellowship and union with God and Jesus Christ (Christ being Messiah, i.e. God sent Him) sure. But to call fellowship the main thrust of Eternal Life is like calling the heart the main thrust of life, to the neglect of the lungs (breath).

Also, following up to your summary, please elaborate how this would "prove OSAS." To me this Scripture is very irrelevant to the issue at all.

It’s not irrelevant to me. It is my position that Jesus never prayed for anything outside of God’s will. If Jesus prayed for the Eternal Life of all believers (just as He did for the Eternal Life of the ‘close disciples’, which you admitted He did) then I think it’s God’s will that they also receive Eternal Life (on Earth and in Heaven).

In my eyes it is about 1) deeper union with the Father and Christ, 2) for the purpose of revealing God's love to the world, so that they might believe.

Okay. Me too. I also think it’s about 3) Eternal Life for not just the ‘close disciples’ (a stipulation you already agreed to) but for Eternal Life for all believers. A complete and perfect # of them. All in unity with each other and in Jesus and The Father. Umm, that’s what He prayed for in v23.