In John 12:37-40, John related that the people saw Jesus' miracles, but still did not believe on him.
John said this unbelief was a fulfillment of Isaiah 53 ("Lord, who has believed our report?"). Isaiah was saying, in a way, Lord, nobody believes what I'm preaching.
Then, in v.39, John says "Therefore, they could not believe", and referred back to Isaiah 6, where God told Isaiah to preach, but that no one would listen. God explained why they wouldn't believe. It was because he had blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts. God explained to Isaiah that this was so they should not see or understand.
Then God told Isaiah that he did this so they would not be converted. How would you like it if, when God called you to preach, he warned you that no one would ever be saved under your preaching?
If I read the book of Isaiah right, he preached for many years and never had a convert. He must have been frustrated because he cried out to God "they won't believe.!"
To me, the passage in John and the related passages in Isaiah do not say that God blinded and hardened because they would not believe. They say that they could not believe because of the blinding and hardening.
Okay, who wants to take a crack at explaining this passage further or explaining it away?
Please Explain John 12:37-40
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Tom Butler, Dec 15, 2006.
Page 1 of 4
-
-
Isaiah 53 is a prophetic book. He is prophesying regarding the rejection of the coming messiah. I don't believe he was speaking of his own rejection. Isaiah was not preaching for converts per se, he was delivering the word of God as given to him to God's chosen people. This makes John correct, the rejection of Jesus was the fulfillment of Is 53.
-
LeBuick, thanks.
I can accept the idea that Isaiah's prophecy was both of the Messiah and of the rejection of his own preaching.
I'm more interested in why John said the people could not believe, and cited Isaiah 6 to explain why, again in a passage with dual application.. -
It was Gods judgment on Israel as a Nation by which they would reject Him and that salvation would then go to the world. However Isreal is not set off to the side and discarded as there are multiple prophesies which state they were to be rejected by God but would again at a later time be accepted again (Hos 1 and Rom 10 and 11 of the top of my head). but we know just as Christ stated many Jews came to know Him personally but they did not recieve Him not as a Nation. (John 1:10) But God has stated that Israel will be saved (not every Jewish person but the Jews as as a National body) Something they were not (a Nation) long before Paul spoke of it or even the prophets when Israel no longer was a Nation (that being God saving them as a Nation) and still were not until the 1947. (Not bad for an over 3000 year old prophesy huh?) -
-
What I see here is an instance in Isaiah 6 where God actually takes steps to prevent repentance and faith. Blinding and hardening them, and clouding their understanding.
In John 12:37-40, John says the people could not believe the the same reason--and cited Isaiah. Saying, in effect, just as God blinded and hardened the people Isaiah preached to, he is doing the same thing to prevent them from believing in Jesus as Messiah.
It also seems clear to me that in each case, God caused the blinding and hardening, and that's how he foreknew that the children of Israel would not respond to Isaiah's preaching. And John makes the same point. The reason the people wouldn't believe is that they couldn't.
I'm really not trying to interpret these passages. They seem pretty straightforward to me. Not that I'm particularly enamored by these passages--in fact, they're somewhat disturbing. But they're there. Now what do we do with them?
Does the Bible actually tell of God, who wants all to be saved, but actually acts to prevent some from exercising saving fath, or evening wanting to? That doesn't compute. -
-
I found this in Life Application notes which gives something to consider. I still want to stew on the concept of God hardning hearts. I dealt with this a few years back but I can't recall what my critical studies concluded...
HARDENED
People in Jesus' time, like those in the time of Isaiah, would not believe despite the evidence (12:37). As a result, God hardened their hearts. Does that mean God intentionally prevented these people from believing in him? No, he simply confirmed their own choices. After a lifetime of resisting God, they had become so set in their ways that they wouldn't even try to understand Jesus' message. For such people, it is virtually impossible to come to God—their hearts have been permanently hardened. Other instances of hardened hearts because of constant stubbornness are recorded in Exodus 9:12; Romans 1:24-28; and 2 Thessalonians 2:9-12.
—Life Application Bible Commentary -
I thin Allan had a pretty good explanation, but I don't think it proves Calvinism per se. Hope I was wrong about my assesment. -
I'm not really trying to prove Calvinism. This is a difficult passage for me. I am a Calvinist and hold to spiritual inability which requires an act of the Holy Spirit to enable one to come to Christ in repentance and faith.
My general view is that all are condemned by their sin, and God, for reasons we don't know, chose to save some out of lost humanity. And leaving the rest to their deserved fate.
In John 12 and Isaiah 6, however, we have an act of God to harden and blind for the very purpose of preventing people from heeding the call of the gospel. The hardening and blinding appear to be the cause of their unbelief, not the result.
I would much prefer to believe LeBuick's view that God simply confirmed their choices, but I don't think these passages are saying that..
What we have on one side is the view that God wants all to come to repentance, that human beings are given the power of free will from birth, and there exists no barrier to salvation except man's own choice not to believe. On the other is this scripture that for some, God has in fact erected a barrier.
LeBuick mentioned the hardening of Pharoah. Several times in Exodus, it is recorded that God hardened Pharoah's heart. On other occasions, Pharoah hardens his own heart. Elsewhere in the Bible we read of Satan's hardening hearts So we get no real help here.
I think the harshest judgment God can impose on a sinner is to simply leave him alone. It doesn't sound like this is what happened in John 12 and Isaiah 6. Not only does God not leave them alone, he purposely blinds and hardens them, and even further, clouds their understanding for this purpose: "that they should not see with their eyes nor understand with their hearts, and be converted." ( John 12:40).
I concede that this whole thing fits better into the Calvinistic system and creates problems for the non-Cals. But I have no hidden agenda here. I can understand God's leaving someone alone. Where I seek light is the idea that God actively moves to prevent conversion. -
Tom thanks for your clarification on your post and it looks as though I have mis-spoken and offer my apology to you for the wrong assessment.
However, I would say that what is happening is that you are applying passages of Scripture that don't have anything to do with eternal salvation and trying to make them fit into a doctrine of eternal salvation.
The conversion that is being spoken of is not a conversion of going from eternally damned to eternally saved. This passage of Scripture is concerning the offer of Christ's kingdom, which is a separate issue from eternal salvation.
You have eternal salvation and then you have the offer of the kingdom. Calvinism as well as most of non-Calvinism combines these two separate issues. So instead of having apples and oranges you have applanges :)
So to get a correct read on what is going on we must keep the context of eternal salvation and the context of the kingdom separated as they were intended lest we find at the end of the road an unBiblical doctrine.
Just some thoughts to ponder . . . -
-
J. Jump has given us a possible explanation a couple of posts earlier. I'm going to look more closely at his viewpoint.
You are pointing out the same paradoxes that I actually wrote about earlier. Rather than just label something as an error of reformed theology, would you care to give us your read on the passage in question?
I said earlier that John 12:37-40 seems to fit better with the Calvinist system. I did not say it fit perfectly. Would you take a stab at making it fit with your system? -
-
LeBuick quoted Life Application lessons:
People in Jesus' time, like those in the time of Isaiah, would not believe despite the evidence (12:37). As a result, God hardened their hearts. Does that mean God intentionally prevented these people from believing in him? No, he simply confirmed their own choices
Allan's thoughts on hardening and blinding in Isaiah 6 and John 12:
Note FIRST please that God did this AFTER their refusal to listen to God pleading with them to turn. God did not blind anyone at the first or before Christs ministry (as no Jews would be saved) but after ward, that they would be sealed in their own choice of unbelief that He was the Christ as a Nation.
J. Jump offered this explanation:
The conversion that is being spoken of is not a conversion of going from eternally damned to eternally saved. This passage of Scripture is concerning the offer of Christ's kingdom, which is a separate issue from eternal salvation.
J. Jump, your view is one that fairly new to me, so I'll need to read up on it.
Now, regarding Allan's and LeBuicks comments, I confess that what follows may not be on the money, so I'm looking for feedback here. My thought is that both these brothers accept the principle that God blinds and hardens. We don't see the order alike, but agree in principle.
They both see blinding and hardening as locking in rebellious unbelief; and that they are a judgmment from God that makes it impossible for them to savingly believe. Their destiny is set. Because they would not believe, God fixed it so they couldn't believe.
So if I read their comments right, God can blind and harden, as a Sovereign act of judgment, they are marked for hell, and even the fervent prayers of righteous man for their salvation are useless.
So this begs a couple of questions:
1. Except for the order, how is the outcome different from the one in my reading of the passages ?
2. Why did God bring this judgment on some and not on others who deserved the same thing---------people like us?
Now I don't want to put words in anybody's mouth, so if I've misrepresented what LeBuick and Allan and any others believe, feel free to clarify. -
How you 'seem' to look at the passages is that it does not matter whether they rebelled or not God did it cause He could.
And He can but God never does anything without a purpose and the scriptures are very plain that the hardening was due to their rejection of God or rebellion towards God and He gave them over as a Nation.
-
I don't believe the Bible has conflicts and hardening their hearts in the since we think of the words today would conflict with;
Romans 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
I don't know if this is an idiom or what but I don't believe it is as we think today. -
-
-
There are at least a couple of people that I know that are Calvinistic in their beliefs that still believe in the kingdom.
Page 1 of 4