John 12.end
September 28th 2014
Welcome – Let’s pray.
Sing the word
Silence
Come back, pick our verse by verse study back up at John 12:37.
Prayer
Sing the word
Silence
Alright, last week we left off with Jesus having a discussion with a group of Jews who wanted to know who the Son of Man was that He was describing to them – one that would suffer crucifixion.
Then we read that He departed from them and John added some words of Isaiah, saying:
John 12:37 But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him:
38 That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?
39 Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again,
40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
41 These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him.
Let’s cover these passages before moving forward and trying to complete the chapter.
In verse 37 John tells us that even though Jesus had done many miracles before them they did not believe on Him.
From this alone we might suggest that they had merely refused to see Him for who He was – because they were obstinate, hard-hearted and the like.
But suddenly we are presented with Old Testament teachings that say “God blinded them so that they could not believe.” How are we to understand this?
On the one hand we have scripture ripping those who rejected Him and telling them that they are evil and going to experience tremendous punishment for their rebellious hearts.
But on the other hand we have passages like these that seem to clearly and plainly suggest that God blinds some so that they CANNOT believe.
Passages like these have divided believers like no other causing some to say, “God is in total control and He will allow some to believe and He will not allow others.”
This perspective is maintained by the Calvinists.
Others say, “There’s no way I can believe in a God who operates this way.” They are known as Arminianists. But how do they respond to passages like this.
We have to begin by looking at all of scripture – not just some to build our arguments.
The first thing to admit is that the scripture is full of warnings and curses for those who reject the Lord and refuse to listen to Him.
If they are refusing Him because God won’t allow them to accept Him, and they are punished for their refusal we have a real problem with other descriptions of God (like the ones that call Him merciful and just, right?)
Now the Calvinist would say that He is God and He does whatever He pleases and if He pleases to blind people so they can’t respond, and then chooses to punish them eternally for this – THAT’S okay! He’s God.
To me this makes it impossible to justify so many other passages of scripture that suggest He is love and good and desires that all be saved, etc.
So if the Calvinistic perspective is off, and the Arminianist view is better how can we understand passages like the ones we just read?
We examine context – we look at what is said, what arguments are being presented, the place and events that are being used to compare, and taking all things into account we are generally able then to take ALL scripture and establish a reasonable take on what is being said.
So let me try and do that for us right now.
We first note that John said of these Jews (in particular) at the time of Jesus:
John 12:37 But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him:
The signs and works had been done before them and yet, John explains, they still did not believe on Him, right?
We then look at Jesus reaction, over the course of His ministry to their blindness – He was always amazed at those who were blind and He always rejoiced over those OF THE HOUSE of ISRAEL who believed, right?
We remember that scripture tells us that the fullness of God dwelled in Jesus bodily and we also know from scripture that this fullness did NOT enter Him processionally but was fully present and with that being the case we would have quite a paradox in that Jesus is preaching and teaching and doing miracles (and is amazed that the people are so blind) all the while God is blinding them because He doesn’t want them to believe on Him!
Makes no sense.
But here is an approach that makes real sense – and will help us understand passages like this.
The miracles were done, they didn’t believe, and so John says:
38 That the saying of Isaiash the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?
Why does John first cite this passage? Because at the time of Isaiah, during His day, he was sent to preach – and it was not easy or readily received.
This was the same thing that Jesus was experiencing.
(LISTEN) This does not mean that the Pharisees were rejecting Christ in order that the prophecy of Isaiah should be fulfilled.
It only means that when these Jews rejected Jesus the same thing took place in the time of Isaiah.
Isaiah’s message was despised by the nation and he was put to death.
All John is saying here is the same thing was happening now to Christ as it happened to Isaiah – for the same reasons, by the same people, from the same nation.
So when Isaiah rhetorically asked:
“Who has believed our report,” he was asking, “who will believe our speeches, or the things we preach” and/or, “to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed?”
“Who of this group will the power of God,” Isaiah asks, “be recognized?”
This is the same question Jesus could have asked and it’s the same point John is making.
The arm of the Lord (which is another way to say, the Power of God) had been revealed through Christ by His miracles, but the people still refused to see.
John cites Isaiah because he experienced the same thing as Christ – only hundred of years prior.
Then John pulls from another set of passages from Isaiah to make a parallel between the Lord’s experience here and Isaiah’s experience then. So he reiterates the point, saying:
39 Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again,
40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
41 These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him.
The line, “Therefore they could not believe,” is interpreted by some early church fathers (like Augustine and Chysostem) “they could not because they would not.
Reading verse 40 in the English sounds like God made it impossible for them to believe, but the impossibility came about because they would not believe.
Let me explain.
If we go to Isaiah’s account, which is the account that John cites here in his comparison, we see the exact words of God to Him. God says to Isaiah:
Isaiah 6:9-10 And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not.
10 Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed.
In other words, ISAIAH, go and proclaim truth to them and in so doing the truth will blind them. Go and proclaim the law and the will of God to them and the effect will be they will harden their heart, and their eyes will be blinded.
Some would say that the net effect is the same – since God knew that the preaching of Isaiah or the miracles of Jesus would produce blindness it’s as if He was making them blind.
But we have to ask a couple of things here:
First, what did God use to blind them and harden their hearts?
Preachers, in this case, Isaiah and Jesus.
In other words God did not mystically blind them, they were blinded by real mean doing real good.
This brings us to another point – what was it that blinded and hardened the people? Again, not a mist or a mystical concrete, it was the TRUTH. Spoken words from God and genuine miracles.
So, while God knew that the sharing of truth and light would serve to blind them, it was truth that did the blinding and it was the very same truth that did illuminate and open the eyes of others!
So, yes, while God send His only begotten to save the world and do miracles and did send Isaiah to preach, and KNEW that this preaching of truth would serve to harden and blind them, it was their own proclivities toward darkness that allowed the truth to be rejected.
This is what John means when he wrote:
40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
To put it another way, let’s say there is a town full of people who, if exposed to beautiful singing they turn into blood-thirsty killers that seek to kill the singer.
And a person named Joe who has a beautiful voice is sent by God to sing His praises. And when Joe gets there and sings, the blood of most of the towns people boils up but a few hear the beautiful music and are changed – but the rest rise up and kill Joe.
Did God cause them to kill? Yes and no. Maybe the better question would be, “Is God responsible for their actions?”
No. They are. God just knew what would cause their blood to boil. And by sending Joe, he “blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart.”
Due to the relationship between Isaiah and Jesus (and this is what we can draw from to establish our views) it is clear that the mode specified is not a direct attack on agency but that He knew in presenting the truth to those who love darkness more than the light, most would become blind – and therefore killers.
To blame Him for his actions would be like blaming parents who tell their son that he cannot smoke meth for the fact that their son kills them in response.
Get it?
So when John writes that this was done by God that “that they should not see,”
It does not mean that it was the design of God that they should not be converted, but that it was just the effect of their being presented with truth.
John ends the reference to Isaiah with verse 41 by quoting the narrative of Isaiah found in Isaiah 6:1-10 and saying:
41 These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him.
Isaiah saw the GLORY of the LORD (in Hebrew, JEHOVAH) sitting on a throne and surrounded with the seraphim. This is perhaps the only instance in the Bible in which Jehovah is said to have been “seen by man,” and for this the Jews today, by their history, affirm that Isaiah was put to death.
Why? According to the law God had said (Exodus 33:20),
“No man shall see me and live;” and as Isaiah affirmed that he had seen Jehovah, the Jews, for that and other reasons, put him to death by sawing him apart.
Okay, let’s move on and try and cover the rest of the chapter.
Now, at verse 42 we have some passages that prove all we just said and completely support the idea that God did NOT blind them so that they could not believe. It’s frankly quite amazing the placement of it. Listen to what it says:
42 “Nevertheless” (in other words, in spite of what I just cited from Isaiah and the blindness of the Jews) “Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue:
43 For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.”
Okay, this brings us to a question that must be asked?
In verse 42 John writes, “Nevertheless (or in spite of all I have said about them being blind so that they could not believe),”
42 “Among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue:
43 For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.”
Now the Greek word for believe here is the same word for have faith in, to look upon and trust, particularly with reference to salvation.
In Romans 10:9 Paul said:
“That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.” The word for believe is the same – pisteuo.
Now I have a trick (but a rhetorical question) for you. We just read that there were those among the chief priests that there were those who “believed on Him,” but John continues on and adds:
“but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue:
For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.”
So the question I have for you is this – where those among the chief priests who believed on Him saved? His? If so, why? And if not, why not?
(beat)
I would suggest that, based on Romans 10:9 they were not saved because???
That’s right, John tells us that while they believed on Him they did NOT confess Him, (lest they should be put out of the synagogue for they loved the praise of God more than the praise of man) AND Romans says:
“That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.”
Now, maybe some of those there that believed on Him but were fearful of being put out of the synagogue later confessed Him with their mouths and believed that He had, in fact, been raised from the dead – God knows.
But my point in pointing this out to you is to make a point – belief is not enough.
We make some major issues of believing . . . “of believing and being saved.” But, again, taking the whole of scripture into account, while belief (faith) is the requisite and so vitally important to being Christian, it does NOT – it cannot stand alone.
I mean James puts it this way:
(James 2:19) “Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.”
The trouble with these men – taking John’s description at face value and assuming they do NOT grow from how John describes them – is that
“because of the Pharisees they did NOT confess Christ for fear they would be cast out of the synagogue, and John adds:
“For they loved the praise of Men more than the praise of God.”
For this reason, I believe, built into the Christian walk and hand in hand with belief comes confession – meaning to profess our faith and hope in Jesus.
Such confession takes our hidden faith that dwells and swells in quite safety of the heart and does a few things:
It shows that we love Him more than the things of this world.
It opens out professions up to scrutiny and the lives we live as well.
And it exposes our felt faith to challenges in His name – which God uses to strengthen faith – if we let Him.
We have to remember that Jesus said in Matthew 10:32:
“Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.”
I don’t believe there is any magic in confessing His name – like it some sort of alchemistic formula that joins with inner faith and saves us.
But I believe the confession is part and parcel to our walk, to our growth, and to our strength in Him – to REMAIN in Him – which is certainly a part of salvation.
Anyway, it could have been that the fact that there were those that believed on Him (but did not confess Him) that caused Jesus to say what He says next – and what He says next is really insightful,
Illuminating, and in my opinion shows how hard Jesus was trying to reach these people. So we read (at verse 44)
44 Jesus cried and said, “He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me.
45 And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me.
46 I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness.
47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.
49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.
50 And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.
KRAZO (kaw, kaw, raven screaming)
Alright, back to 44.
We really don’t know when this took place. I say this because in verse 36 John says that Jesus has departed (and we know that he went to Bethany) so when and where this took place remains to be seen.
Could it be that Joh inserts this part of his record here and the situation actually happened in another setting? I don’t see why not. Or it could have happened right here.
I like to think of it happening at this setting because it seems like the fact that some believed on Him but were reticent to confess it could have been the impetus that caused the Lord to say what He says – but who knows.
In any case . . .
44 Jesus cried and said, He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me.
The Greek word for Jesus cried is KRAZO – it’s the word assigned to the sound a raven makes and means to shriek or scream out.
From this we know the emphasis He was trying to put on what He was saying to them. And what does He take the time to say to them – something very important – as He says:
“He that believes on me believes NOT on me but on Him that sent me.”
How are we to understand this line He delivers to them? I consulted two forms of references in the multiple to try and assess what the scholars say.
In every translation I consulted (literal Greek or otherwise) none of them added any new words to the line of the Lord.
What I mean by this is they essentially agreed with each other and had Jesus saying:
“He that believes on me believe not on me but on Him that sent me.”
It is interesting because when I consulted all the different explanations of the passage all of the explanations paraphrased the line and had Jesus say:
“He that believes on me believe not on me (ONLY or ALONE) but (also) on Him that sent me.”
Here’s the gig – the original language does not support these explanations – that is why the various translations remain true.
But as a means to explain what Jesus could have POSSIBLY meant all the commentaries suggest that Jesus was saying, that when a person believes on Him they are also or additionally “believing on God who sent Him.”
I am going to try and stick NOT with what the commentators say but to try and stick with what the passage really says and explain it from this perspective.
I would then suggest that the Jews were having a hard time accepting the fact that He was the Messiah.
Maybe they looked upon Him or examined His friends or the apostles who were with Him and they were greatly unimpressed.
So He cried out to them and tells them
“Listen, if you believe the things I am saying its not like you are believing on me and what you are seeing but you are really just believing on Him that sent me.”
OR
Maybe they were blinded by His claims that He was sent by God to save them – and couldn’t get over the fact that He said He came from God. And so all He is doing here is reiterating the thing they have so much time accepting – that He was sent, and came from, and that His message represents God.
Whatever the intention I would suggest that what He is absolutely saying is that He (in spirit) is one with God, and that to believe on Him was not putting their faith in the flesh they saw but that they were believing in the one who sent Him – because He was one with the one who sent Him.
This message is repeated throughout scripture – Jesus indivisible unity with God and that is why we have read and heard Him say:
“He who believes on the Son believes on the Father,” and
“he who hath seen the Son hath seen the Father,” and
“he who honors the Son honors the Father.”
It was for this very message that they crucified Him so it could be that He was just making sure the message was loud and clear.
Throughout John the message of Jesus oneness with the Father is manifestly repeated. And so He adds (verse 45)
45 And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me.
Now, again, we are NOT talking about physical seeing. We are talking about spiritual understanding when Jesus says this as the word here does not mean physically see but is better understood to comprehend – He who comprehends me and my message comprehends the one who sent me – God.
The verse is a strong confirmation of his equality with God in that “within His person” God dwelled.
How? What did this look like? We note that in the next verse Jesus does NOT describe Himself as a being or person that came down from heaven or the Father.
He describes Himself in a very different manner, but a manner that is consistent with the rest of scripture.
He has told them not to believe on Him but that to believe on Him is to believe in the one who sent Him – God.
And then, of all the ways He could have described Himself – I am the Son of God come into the world, I am the Word that is come into the world, I am the second person of the Trinity come into the world – Nope – none of it. He says (verse 46)
46 I am come a light into the world (and He returns to something He said seven verses earlier), that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness.
(beat)
We’ve talked about Him as the light of the world two weeks ago – but let me add to this discussion:
In scripture God is said to be:
Fire. Light. Love.
For God to become flesh, to become incarnate I would suggest that within Jesus – God’s only begotten Son – was Him . . . was fire, was light, was love.
And I would propose to you that this is why Jesus says here, of all the things He could have said, said:
“I am come a light . . . into the world.”
The light of God that dwells invisibly come to earth to illuminate, to save, to cleanse, to purify, to shine, and to make paths clear.
He is the light come into the world to reveal the invisible God of consuming fire and light of which no human can bear.
“I am a light that is come into the world” and then He adds (which I am going to read from the literal translation):
“that everyone who is believing in me–in the darkness may not remain.”
It is interesting that in verse 44 He seems to intimate that those who believed on Him were not believing on Him but on Him who sent Him.
Now He refers back to Himself – this is nothing but a clear indication that He was God in the flesh, one with the Father, full of consuming light.
And He says something really significant. He says: (from the literal translations)
“Everyone who is believing in me in the darkness they cannot remain.”
Note that the literal translation makes the believing a present active belief – “Everyone who is believing in me,” and not “everyone who has ever believed in me.”
And then He says, “Cannot walk in darkness.”
True belief in the true light that came into the world is a guarantee that the individual will not walk in darkness.
Jesus adds –
47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
In other words, if He was going to be rejected that was up to them – He was not there to condemn but to save – to save those who would hear.
He would come back with the judgment but for the time being, He came to preach the truth – it was up to the individuals of the light He shined onto their hearts would harden or soften them.
He adds:
48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.
This is an interesting concept being presented. Those who both reject Him and do not receive His words will have one that judges them.
What or who is the one that Jesus says will judge them?
The words He has said.
I am going to go out on a limb and suggest that Jesus will not need to say word one to the condemned.
They will carry their own condemnation – either by conscience or the words He spoke will echo in the heart, but condemnation, I believe will come from within, and not without.
I think from this we will see that a guilty conscience needs no accuser, that the words of Christ, and the messages of mercy which the sinner has rejected, will be remembered, that this will be the source of condemnation, and whatever sentence passed on the guilty and unforgiven will be obvious.
I think that this is part of what will make hell and the lake of fire so miserable – that a loving God will not need to say word one – the words have been said – and they will serve to condemn making the sentence almost unbearable because it will NOT be imposed on us by God – He is love – it will be assumed by the individual who will discover themselves totally deserving of whatever he or she faces.
Could be wrong. Just a thought.
Jesus goes on to explain why it is His very words spoken that will do the condemning, saying:
49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.
50 And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.
God’s commands are life everlasting. They were spoken clearly to the world through His Son, through His Word, by teachers and preachers, by believers.
God’s Words were written in stone. They are etched on the cosmos, they are written in the consciousness of every rational human being.
Those words are life eternal. To acquiesce to them is life eternal, to reject them is condemnation.
From His words we can see the import of sharing the Word – they are life eternal.
Yes, rejected, they bring condemnation. But shared they paradoxically bring faith, for faith comes by hearing of the word.
For this reason it is the duty of the preacher to preach the word, the teacher to teach the word, the believer to believe the word, and the hearer to hear the word.
Yes, they will serve to condemn all who refuse and reject them. But they bring light and life to those willing to hear. And so we preach.
I do not think that it is by mistake that these are, in fact, the last public words of Jesus (at least in John’s narrative).
And I do not believe it is by mistake that they were aimed at belief, at His true identity, and at the importance of hearing and believing on His Words.
Next week, chapter 13.
Q and A?
