John 12:40 question

[Tania11]

Did the people in John 12:40 have a chance to believe or is this a judicial hardening? The wording almost seems like they had a chance to believe. IDK

John 12:40, ESV: "“He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, lest they see with their eyes, and understand with their heart, and turn, and I would heal them.”"

 

[GospelS]

Maybe they were self-righteous and prideful.

Blessed are the pure in heart; for they shall see God. Matthew 5:8

 

[Radagast]

Did the people in John 12:40 have a chance to believe or is this a judicial hardening? The wording almost seems like they had a chance to believe. IDK

John 12:40, ESV: "“He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, lest they see with their eyes, and understand with their heart, and turn, and I would heal them.”"

When Jesus (or Paul) quotes the Old Testament like this, there's an assumption that people know the passage. So it's good to read the whole thing.

Isaiah 6:8: And I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” Then I said, “Here I am! Send me.” 9 And he said, “Go, and say to this people:

“‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand;
keep on seeing, but do not perceive.’
10 Make the heart of this people dull,
and their ears heavy,
and blind their eyes;
lest they see with their eyes,
and hear with their ears,
and understand with their hearts,
and turn and be healed.”
11 Then I said, “How long, O Lord?”
And he said:
“Until cities lie waste
without inhabitant,
and houses without people,
and the land is a desolate waste,
12 and the Lord removes people far away,
and the forsaken places are many in the midst of the land.
13 And though a tenth remain in it,
it will be burned again,
like a terebinth or an oak,
whose stump remains
when it is felled.”
The holy seed is its stump.

So this speaks of disbelief, and of a hardening by God, but it also promises the possibility of salvation in the future, after a time of trial has taken place.

 

[GospelS]

When Jesus (or Paul) quotes the Old Testament like this, there's an assumption that people know the passage. So it's good to read the whole thing.

Isaiah 6:8: And I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” Then I said, “Here I am! Send me.” 9 And he said, “Go, and say to this people:

“‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand;
keep on seeing, but do not perceive.’
10 Make the heart of this people dull,
and their ears heavy,
and blind their eyes;
lest they see with their eyes,
and hear with their ears,
and understand with their hearts,
and turn and be healed.”
11 Then I said, “How long, O Lord?”
And he said:
“Until cities lie waste
without inhabitant,
and houses without people,
and the land is a desolate waste,
12 and the Lord removes people far away,
and the forsaken places are many in the midst of the land.
13 And though a tenth remain in it,
it will be burned again,
like a terebinth or an oak,
whose stump remains
when it is felled.”
The holy seed is its stump.

So this speaks of a hardening by God, but it also promises the possibility of salvation in the future, after a time of trial has taken place.

Still others have followed Jesus when He was here while some other people rejected and hated Him. So I think the OP wants to know why was it that way that some were able receive and others were blinded.

 

[Radagast]

Still others have followed Jesus when He was here while some other people rejected and hated Him. So I think the OP wants to know why was it that way that some were able receive and others were blinded.

Two things are true:

1. Some people chose to accept Jesus; some rejected him temporarily but accepted him later; some rejected him permanently.

2. God is sovereign. It was always the case that "as many as were appointed to eternal life believed" (Acts 13:48) and "those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified" (Romans 8:30).

 

[eleos1954]

Did the people in John 12:40 have a chance to believe or is this a judicial hardening? The wording almost seems like they had a chance to believe. IDK

John 12:40, ESV: "“He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, lest they see with their eyes, and understand with their heart, and turn, and I would heal them.”"

non-repentant .... the Lord calls all to repentance through the work of the Holy Spirit ... consistent resistance of the Holy Spirt results in blasphemy ... the only unpardonable sin.

At some point (only God decides) as only He knows the heart ... He knows their heart will never change ... and He gives them over to the desires of their non-repentant heart.

so yes ... of course ... they had a chance to believe ... but chose not to.

 

[Minister Monardo]

Did the people in John 12:40 have a chance to believe or is this a judicial hardening? The wording almost seems like they had a chance to believe. IDK

John 12:40, ESV: "“He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, lest they see with their eyes, and understand with their heart, and turn, and I would heal them.”"

Jesus was asked by what authority he acted upon.

Matthew 21:24-27. And Jesus answered and said unto them, I also will ask you one thing which if you tell me, I likewise will tell you by what authority I do these things. The baptism of John, did it come from heaven or of men? They answered Jesus, we cannot tell. And He said unto them, neither do I tell you by what authority I do these things.


Because the chief priests and elders refused to acknowledge the ministry of John the Baptist as being sent from God, Jesus refused to answer their questions, though they had the authority to ask, for He answered to a Higher Authority.


Matthew 21:32. For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and you believed him not: but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and when you had seen it, repented not afterward, that you might believe him.

We can see here a fulfillment of the word spoken in John 1:7, that all through him might believe. The religious leaders were denied repentance even with the witness of mighty miracles of God, because they rejected John.


Luke 7:30. And all the people that heard him justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John. But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves (literally 'within themselves'), not being baptized by him.


John 10:41, 42. And many resorted unto Him and said John did no miracles but all things that John spoke of this man were true. And many believed in Him there.


So we see that those who received the baptism of John also remained to hear him preach. Jesus fulfilled the words spoken before by this prophet, which confirmed their faith. Those who rejected the baptism of John knew nothing of the word that he preached concerning Christ.

 

[GospelS]

Two things are true:

1. Some people chose to accept Jesus; some rejected him temporarily but accepted him later; some rejected him permanently.

2. God is sovereign. It was always the case that "as many as were appointed to eternal life believed" (Acts 13:48) and "those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified" (Romans 8:30).

Yes. This also:

Romans 11:8 The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened, as it is written, “God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that would not see and ears that would not hear.”

Romans 11:25 Lest you be wise in your own sight, I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.

Romans 11:28-32 But as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. For just as you were at one time disobedient to God but now have received mercy because of their disobedience, so they too have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may now receive mercy. For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Did the people in John 12:40 have a chance to believe or is this a judicial hardening? The wording almost seems like they had a chance to believe. IDK

John 12:40, ESV: "“He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, lest they see with their eyes, and understand with their heart, and turn, and I would heal them.”"

Yes, the meaning is encoded and (in my estimation) implies that people can choose to reach toward God and have Him reach back to them. Hence, the implication of the term 'lest.'

 

[Radagast]

Yes, the meaning is encoded and (in my estimation) implies that people can choose to reach toward God and have Him reach back to them. Hence, the implication of the term 'lest.'

I think that's the exact opposite of what the passage says.

 

[GospelS]

Matthew 13:10-17

Then the disciples came and said to him, “Why do you speak to them in parables?” And he answered them, “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. For to the one who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. Indeed, in their case the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled that says:

“‘“You will indeed hear but never understand, and you will indeed see but never perceive.” For this people's heart has grown dull, and with their ears they can barely hear, and their eyes they have closed, lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their heart and turn, and I would heal them.’

But blessed are your eyes, for they see, and your ears, for they hear. For truly, I say to you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I think that's the exact opposite of what the passage says.

Really? Then feel free to present your overall exposition on it and its context, brother Radagast, and I'll see if I agree. (And maybe see the post below #13 that I made to sister Gospels).

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Matthew 13:10-17

Then the disciples came and said to him, “Why do you speak to them in parables?” And he answered them, “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. For to the one who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. Indeed, in their case the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled that says:

“‘“You will indeed hear but never understand, and you will indeed see but never perceive.” For this people's heart has grown dull, and with their ears they can barely hear, and their eyes they have closed, lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their heart and turn, and I would heal them.’

But blessed are your eyes, for they see, and your ears, for they hear. For truly, I say to you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it.

Yes, but sister Gospels, do we want to say that the overall meaning of this passage, however very nicely cited by you, is self-evident as to what understanding of it we should immediately have of it, even with it sitting here disconnected as it is from further contexts above and beyond this alone?

I ask this question not to present a paring away of your quotation or your wonderful intentions to help out. Rather I'm intending to simply take a cue from Craig L. Blomberg (2010) and say that this citation doesn't fully tell us one way or the other, in full, how we should interpret these verses: should our interpretation immediately be one that comports with Reformed theology, or one that isn't quite that perhaps?

Reference
Blomberg, Craig. L. (2010). A Handbook of New Testament Exegesis. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.

 

[GospelS]

Yes, but sister Gospels, do we want to say that the overall meaning of this passage, however very nicely cited by you, is self-evident as to what understanding of it we should immediately have of it, even with it sitting here disconnected as it is from further contexts above and beyond this alone?

I ask this question not to present a paring away of your quotation or your wonderful intentions to help out. Rather I'm intending to simply take a cue from Craig L. Blomberg (2010) and say that this citation doesn't fully tell us one way or the other, in full, how we should interpret these verses: should our interpretation immediately be one that comports with Reformed theology, or one that isn't quite that perhaps?

Reference
Blomberg, Craig. L. (2010). A Handbook of New Testament Exegesis. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.

Hello @2PhiloVoid Sometimes I just allow the scripture to speak for itself rather than adding more words because I trust the Spirit knows the exact thing to reveal and will minister to the OP's question more perfectly than i can interpret.

I think the context I was trying to cover to the OP's question is: "from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away".

So i did include some context above and below this verse.

 

[pescador]

The New English Translation, a.k.a The NET Bible says this...

“He has blinded their eyes [1]
and hardened their heart, [2]
so that they would not see with their eyes
and understand with their heart, [3]
and turn to me, and I would heal them.” [4]

Footnotes:

1. John 12:40 tn Or “closed their mind.”
2. John 12:40 tn Or “their mind.”
3. John 12:40 tn One could also translate στραφῶσιν (straphōsin) as “repent” or “change their ways,” but both of these terms would be subject to misinterpretation by the modern English reader. The idea is one of turning back to God, however. The words “to me” are not in the Greek text, but are implied.
4. John 12:40 sn A quotation from Isa 6:10.

Note: In the NET Bible the references are letters but when I cut and pasted things didn't copy correctly, so I changed them to 1,2,3, and 4.

I hope that this clears things up. The wonderful translators' notes of the NET Bible are one of the primary reasons that I use this excellent version. The latest version is 2.1

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Hello @2PhiloVoid Sometimes I just allow the scripture to speak for itself rather than adding more words because I trust the Spirit knows the exact thing to reveal and will minister to the OP's question more perfectly than i can interpret.

Alright, dear Sister. I'm not going to try to push against the Spirit on this. However, I'll just simply say that due to my experiences with some spiritual abuses made upon me and my wife by other Christians through some of their interpretive misapplications, I am somewhat wary (quite so, in fact) of leaving all of our interpreting of the Word of God up to our isolated intuitive impressions.

Sure. Maybe I don't have the Spirit in the same measure as some other Christians do, and I grant that that is always a possibility. But then again, one has to wonder when other Christians attempt to use scripture in abusive, controlling ways on other Christians, even denigrating ways, and then go on to cite certain Scriptures (like those commonly taken from the Gospel of John) that the Scriptures themselves, and all by themselves, give whatever Christians who wish to do so the license to interpret and apply those same Scriptures as they feel led to do.

Anyway, back to the verses you cited, which epistemologically are some of my favorite verses.

I think the context I was trying to cover to the OP's question is: "from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away".

Yes, that is an amazing statement, isn't it?

So i did include some context above and below this verse.

Well, yes and no. Blomberg, among other exegetical scholars, even those in the Reformed tradition, may very well say that there are several layers of context that go out even beyond that which you've alluded to in your posting of several successive verses. I don't say this to be contentious, but rather simply as something to consider overall.



Peace and Love in Christ,
2PhiloVoid

 

[GospelS]

Alright, dear Sister. I'm not going to try to push against the Spirit on this. However, I'll just simply say that due to my experiences with some spiritual abuses made upon me and my wife by other Christians through some of their interpretive misapplications, I am somewhat wary (quite so, in fact) of leaving all of our interpreting of the Word of God up to our isolated intuitive impressions.

Sure. Maybe I don't have the Spirit in the same measure as some other Christians do, and I grant that that is always a possibility. But then again, one has to wonder when other Christians attempt to use scripture in abusive, controlling ways on other Christians, even denigrating ways, and then go on to cite certain Scriptures (like those commonly taken from the Gospel of John) that the Scriptures themselves, and all by themselves, give whatever Christians who wish to do so the license to interpret and apply those same Scriptures as they feel led to do.

Anyway, back to the verses you cited, which epistemologically are some of my favorite verses.

Yes, that is an amazing statement, isn't it?

Well, yes and no. Blomberg, among other exegetical scholars, even those in the Reformed tradition, may very well say that there are several layers of context that go out even beyond that which you've alluded to in your posting of several successive verses. I don't say this to be contentious, but rather simply as something to consider overall.



Peace and Love in Christ,
2PhiloVoid

I agree. I wish i could do the exegesis stuff and all that. I really do. I'm watching and learning from you all. I hope someday I will excel in putting my thoughts into words. I'm teaching myself and taking my baby steps. Pray for me about that.

 

[Radagast]

Really? Then feel free to present your overall exposition on it and its context, brother Radagast

Already done that.

 

[Tania11]

Thank you everyone. I don't wish to cause disagreements among us. I appreciate your help and taking the time.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Already done that.

Where?