Mark 4:10 And when he was alone,; And as soon as He was alone--NASB; Then when they were by themselves--Phi; when they had him to themselves--Rieu; they that were about him with the twelve; the Twelve and others who were round him--NEB; His followers, along with the Twelve--NASB; his close followers and the Twelve--Phi; asked of him the parable.; asked him concerning the parables--RSV; began asking about the parables-- Mon; And /when he was alone\ they who were about him with the twelve, questioned him, as to the parables; And when he was alone, those about him, with the twelve, did ask him of the simile, TRNTyeagerV223 - Kai hote egeneto kata monas, Arwtwn auton hoi peri auton sun tois dwdeka tas parabolas. Kai (continuative conjunction). hote (temporal conjunction introducing a definite temporal clause). egeneto (3d.per.sing.aor.ind.of ginomai, constative). kata (preposition with the accusative, general reference, adverbial). monas (acc.pl.fem.of monos, adverbial). Arwtwn (3d.per.pl.imp.act.ind.of erwtaw, inceptive). auton (acc.sing.masc.of autos, direct object of Arwtwn). hoi (nom.pl.masc.of the article introducing the prepositional phrase, subject of Arwtwn). peri (preposition with the accusative of place description). auton (acc.sing.masc.of autos, place description). sun (preposition with the instrumental of association). tois (instru.pl.masc.of the article, association). dwdeka (numeral). tas (acc.pl.fem.of the article in agreement with parabolas). parabolas (acc.pl.fem.of parabolA, object of Alwtwn). Translation: "And when they were along, those who surrounded Him, along with the twelve, began to ask Him about the parables." COMMENT: Note kata here with the accusative used adverbially. This is sometimes called general reference. Jesus escaped the crowd and was along except for a small group which included the twelve disciples. The vast multitude that almost pushed Him into the Sea of Galilee was gone temporarily. Note the inceptive imperfect in Arwtwn - "they began to ask Him...k.t.l." Those non-twelve disciples along with the Apostles, all of whom had remained by Jesus' side, after the multitude had dispersed, were eager to hear Jesus' further exposition of His teaching. Note the parallel passages in Mt.13:10 and Lk.8:9. T16 - Hoi peri auton means "his disciples" (cf. Lk.22:49). T26 - The plural tas parabolas means "the parable" (cf. TGr47). MARKitGNTwuest84 - "They that were about Him." These were not His kinsfolk of 3:21, the par' autou, those closest to Him, but the outer circle of disciples, the peri auton, that group from which the Twelve were chosen. "The parable." The best texts have this word in the plural number. Expositors says: "The plural, well attested, implies that the parables of the day had a common drift. To explain one was to explain all. Robertson remarks that the disciples asked the explanation of the meaning of the parables when they were alonewith Jesus, because they did not want the multitude to see that they did not understand His teaching. The construction in the Greek indicates that as soon as they were alone, the disciples lost no time in asking Jesus. NTC-MARKhendriksen150,1 - "When he was alone, those who were about him together with the twelve were asking him concerning the parables." Jesus was now alone in the sense that he had dismissed the crowds and had gone home. Nevertheless, he was not entirely alone. With him were The Twleve. But note: "those who were about him together with the twelve." The meaning must be that in addition to twelve well-known disciples there were present also some who belonged to the wider circle of constant followers. Mark pictures this combined group in the act of asking Jesus about the parables. The plural is significant. Though Mark, before describing Jesus as being now "alone" has related only one parable, that of The Sower, Matthew reports four parables-- The Sower, The Tares, The Mustard Seed, and The Leaven-- before telling the readers (13:36) that Jesus dismissed the crowds and went home (or "into the house"), where he was interrogated by his disciples. However, when we fix our attention on the wording of the incident recorded in Mark 4:10-12--the questioning done by the disciples and the answer given by Jesus--, we should turn again to Matthew 13, but this time to verses 10-17, especially verses 10,11,13- 15. Luke's report (8:9,10) looks like a very brief summary. Those who surrounded Jesus wanted to know two things: (a) why he used parables in addressing the crowds (cf. Matt. 13:10), and (b) what was the meaning of a certain particular parable; for example, that of The Tares (Matt. 13:36), or (here in Mark 4:13) that of The Sower. TNICotNT-MARKlane155,6 - The sequence of Jesus' parabolic teaching of the multitude is interrupted by Ch. 4:10-20. These verses illustrate the principle formulated in Ch. 4:33-34: Jesus spoke to the multitudes in parables, but he explained all things privately to his disciples. It must be assumed that the change of scene presupposed in verse 10 occurred on some later occasion, since Jesus is still in the boat in Ch. 4:36. At a time when the multitude had been left behind, a larger group of disciples [23] than the Twelve inquired concerning "the parables." It is not possible to discern the precise nature of their question (s), but from verse 13 it appears that they inquired specifically about the deeper significance of the parable of the sower. The disciples may also have asked Jesus why he did not express his thoughts to the multitude in a more direct way, without the use of parables, for this question seems to lie behind Jesus' word concerning the fulfilment of the sovereign purpose of God in verses 11-12. The plural form "parables" in verse 10 corresponds to the use of the plural in verse 2, and indicates that more lies behind their question than the meanong of the parable of the sower. [footnote 23] - Mark's unusual expression for the disciples in Ch. 4:0 (oi peri auton) should be compared with Ch. 3:34 (tous peri auton kuklw kathAmenous), where the context makes it evident that true disciples are in view. MARKj&d118,9,20,1,2,3 - COMMENT I. SPEAKING IN PARABLES, vs. 10-13 1. Disciples Ask an Explanation. Mk.4:10; Matt. 13:10; Luke 8:9. 2. The Reason for Parables. Mark 4:11,12; Matt. 13:11-17; Luke 8:10. II. WAYSIDE AND STONY GROUND, vs. 14-17 1. The Good Seed. Mark 4:14; Luke 8:11. 2. Wayside Hearers. Mark 4:15; Matt. 13:19; Luke 8:12 3. Stony Ground Hearers. Mark 4:16,17; Matt. 13:20; Luke 8:13. III. THORNS AND GOOD GROUND, vs. 18,-20. 1. The Seed Choked Out. Mark 4:18,19; Matt. 13:22; Luke 8:14. 2. Good Seed in Good Ground. Mark 4:20; Matt. 13:23; Luke 8:15. INTRODUCTION He privately retired to the margin of the lake, desiring probably to "rest awhile;" but no sooner had he taken his seat beside the cool, still water, than he was again surrounded by the anxious crowd. At once, to escape the pressure and to command the audience better when he should again begin to speak, he stepped into one of the fishing- boats that floated at ease close by the beach, on the margin of that tideless inland sea. From the water's edge, stretching away upward on the natural gallery formed by the sloping bank, the great congregation, with every face fixed in an attitude of eager expectancy, presented to the Preacher's eye the appearance of a plowed field ready to receive the seed. As he opened his lips and cast the word of life freely abroad among them, he saw, he felt, the parallel between the sowing of Nature and the sowing of Grace. Into that word accordingly he threw the lesson of saving truth. - W. Arnot. OUTLINE OF THE PARABLE OF THE SOWER - It will aid in understanding the lesson to have a clear outline in the mind of the application. This is the first parable the Saviour spoke as far as we have record. He spoke the parable to a vast audience in whose minds the story was lodged and left for reflection without an explanation of its meaning. He had sowed, in this illustrative way, the seed of the kingdom broadcast, and in many a heart it would live until it burst forth, full of meaning, to bear fruit. His apostles, not accustomed to this mode of teaching, come to him privately and ask the meaning. In order to understand the parable we must go with the other disciples and listen to the explanation given in verses 10-20. Christ is the great Sower, and all whom he sends forth to preach are sowers under him. The seed sown is his Word, the Gospel of the Kingdom. The soil where the seed is cast is human hearts. Four kinds of human hearts are described: 1. The wayside hearer; the light flippant, indifferent hearer upon whom no impression is produced. 2. The stony hearer; the heart that exhibits an evanescent feeling at the appeal of the gospel, but upon whom no permanent impression is made. 3. The thorny soil; the heart that takes in the Word, but is so full of worldly cares that these presently gain the mastery. This desribes the world-serving hearing. 4. The good soil; the good and honest heart; the heart that receives and retains the truth. In such a heart the seed will grow and the new life will be manifest. Three things, then, are needful: 1. A Sower. 2. Good Seed; the pure word of God. 3. A good and honest heart. A dishonest man cannot be converted until he casts out his dishonesty. He who cavils at and deceiftully entreats the wordofGodwill notbeprofited. EXPLANATORY NOTES 1. SPEAKING IN PARABLES. - 10. When he was done This may have occurred after the public labors of the day were over and the multitude had been dismissed. By comparing with Matthew we learn that the Lord spoke seven parables in succession, and it seems to me more probable that the explanations were given in the quiet when surrounded only by the twelve and "they that were about him with the twelve," a number of his friends and disciples. Asked of him the parables. This language shows that the Lord had spoken more than once before the explanation was asked for or given. Though the parable was new to his disciples, it was not a new method of instruction. A number occur in the Old Testament, and it was frequently adopted by the Jewish rabbis. It differs from an allegory or fable in that its characters are real and it does not violate possibilities. It is an imaginary illustration of real truth. In this instance the Saviour stated some facts familiar to all the farming population of Palestine and made them the vehicle to carry spiritual truth. Perhaps from where the multitude was gathered a sower on the plain of Gennesaret was visible at work and pointed to by the Lord. Mark 4:11 And he said unto them,; And he was saying to them--NASB; He went on to say to them--Mon; He replied--NEB; Unto you it is given; To you is given--ABUV; To you has been given--RSV; To you has been intrusted--Gspd; to know the mystery of the kingdom of God:; the mystery...--ASV; the secret...--RSV; the open secret of the Realm of God--Mof; the secret of the reign of God--Gspd; but unto them that are without,; but for those outside--RSV; But to those who do not know the secret--Phi; all these things are done in parables:; all things...--ASV; everything is in parables--RSV; everything comes by way of parables--NEB; everything is presented in stories--Wms; and he was saying unto them-- //To you\\ the sacred secret hath been given, of the kingdom of God, whereas //to them who are outside\\ /in parables\ are all things coming to pass,--that and he said to them, 'To you it hath been given to know the secret of the reign of God, but to those who are without, in similes are all the things done; TRNTyeagerV223,4 - kai elegen autois, Humin to mustArion dedontai tAs basileias tou theou, ekeinois de tois exw en parabolais ta panta ginetai, kai (inferential conjunction). elegen (3d.per.sing.imp.act.ind.of legw, inceptive). autois (dat.pl.masc.of autos, indirect object of elegen). Humin (dat.pl.masc.of su, indirect object of dedotai). to (acc.sing.neut.of the article in agreement with mustArion). mustArion (acc.sing.neut.of mustArion, direct object of dedotai). dedotai (3d.per.sing.perf.pass.ind.of didwmi, consummative). tAs (gen.sing.fem.of the article in agreement with basileias). basileias (gen.sing.fem.of basileia, definition). tou (gen.sing.masc.of the article in agreement with theou). theou (gen.sing.masc.of theos, definition). ekeinois (dat.pl.masc.of ekeinos, personal advantage). de (adversative conjunction). tois (dat.pl.masc.of the article in agreement with ekeinois). exw (adverbial). en (preposition with the instrumental of means). parabolais (instru.pl.fem.of parabolA, means). ta (nom.pl.neut.of the article in agreement with panta). panta (nom.pl.neut.of pas, subject of ginetai). ginetai (3d.per.sing.pres.ind.of ginomai, aoristic). Translation: "And He began to explain to them, 'Unto you the mystery of the Kingdom of God has already been given; but to those who are outside these things are given in parables.'" COMMENT: Jesus began (inceptive imperfect in elegen) to explain to the smaller inside group. Not Humin in emphasis, to distinguish them from ekeinois de tois exw -"those on the outside." The perfect tense in dedotai is consummative. The gift has already been given and therefore it is now ours. The gift is their understanding of what to other less fortunate people is a mystery - a mystery about the Kingdom of God. Luke follows Mark with tAs basileias tou theou while Matthew use tAs basileias twn ouranwn. (Lk.8:10; Mt.13:11). This stubborn fact of the inspired text makes it difficult for those dispensationalists who imagine that there is always a difference between the two terms. The last half of the verse is adversative. Note postpositive de. To the outsiders (i.e. those who are not among the elect) the kingdom of God is truly a mystery and as such is presented in a mysterious fashion, i.e. in parables. Cf.#449 for the places where exw is used to denote the non- elect and unsaved - "The outsiders" - cf. especially Lk.13:25. The understanding of the mystery of the Kingdom of God is the possession of the saints - no thanks to them, since to them it was the gift of God's grace. To us it has been given and thus we now possess it. A parable presents truth but only for those who have been given the ability to discern its deeper meaning. Those without understand the story but fail to grasp the concept which the Author intends to convey. They hear, but not with spiritual perception. The reason God has chosen to conduct it this way is given in vs.21. The passage is intensely Calvinistic and hence difficult for babes in Christ, while, of course, it is taboo for sinners. M77 - en parabalais means "by parables" (instrumental en). [Ed. Somers: More likely locative of sphere]. MARKitGNTwuest84,5 - "The mystery." The Greek word is mustArion, from which we get our word "mystery." The word is derived from mustAs, "one initiated," and this word from muew "to close or shut." The mystery-religions had their secrets and signs as modern secret societies have today. Those initiated into these pagan cults, knew these secret signs. The word mustArion as used in Scripture means "the secret counsels of God which are hidden from the ungodly but when revealed to the godly, are understood by them." The mystery is not in the fact that they are difficult of interpretation, but that they are impossible of interpretation until their meaning is revealed, when they become plain. The disciples had been initiated into these secret things. There is another class of mystery,the meaning of which is not to be understood in this life nor perhaps in the next, such as the mystery of iniquity. But of this type, our Lord was not speaking here. "Unto you it is given." The verb is in the perfect tense, speaking of an act completed in past time having present results. The idea of permanency attaches to this construction. The disciples had been given, so as to be a permanent possession, the mystery of the Kingdom of God. They were initiates. They possessed the secret. It was now for them to come gradually into a clear understanding of the truth. "To them that are without." Vincent says: "The two latter words are peculiar to Mark. The phrase means "those outside our circle. Its sense is always determined by the contrast to it. Thus, in I Cor.5:12,13, it is non-Christians in contrast with me. In Col.4:5, Christians contrasted with people of the world." Robertson finds this contrast, not in the common people, but in the Pharisees. Our Lord explains that His parables are open to His disciples, but shut to the Pharisees with their hostile minds. Translation: "And He was saying to them; To you the mystery of the kingdom of God has been given, and it is in your permanent possession. But to those who are outside, in the form of parables are all these things done,..." MARKmcgarvey284 - "to them that are without." --Here Jesus distinguishes his disciples from "them that are without," showing that there was a sense in which the former were within. Some have argued from this that the Chruch must have been then in existence, and that one class were within and the other without the Church. This conclusion would follow, if the terms without and within in this connection could apply to nothing but the Church. But it is clear that the terms may have been used with different reference. The unbelievers were without the circle of the disciples, and those whom Jesus was addressing were within that circle, whether we regard the disciples as organized into a church, or as still in an unorganized condition. The argument, therefore, contains an undue assumption. TCGTC-MARKcranfield152 - to mustArion. It is often assumed that the use of mustArion here is evidence of the influence of Hellenistic religious ideas on the formation of this saying: mustArion, it is argued, must mean a mystery which only the inititated are intended to understand, as in the contemporary pagan mystery cults. The saying is then declared to be not an authentic saying of Jesus, but a piece of apostolic teaching. But in the Pauline Epistles the word is used to denote, not something that must not be divulged to the uninitiated, but something that could not be known by men except by divine revelation but that, though once hidden, has now been revealed in Christ and is to be proclaimed so that all who have ears may hear it;... In view of the above there is no need to appeal to the influence of the mystery cults to explain the presence of mustArion here. The idea that God's thoughts and ways are not men's, but that they are his secret, which is not obvious to human wisdom but which he may reveal to those whom he chooses, was familiar to everyone who listened attentively in the synagogue. There was an Aramaic word at hand to express it--the word used in Daniel--and it is probable that that word raz is behind mustArion here. Moreover, the idea is expressed elsewhere in the teaching of Jesus--most obviously in Mt.11:25=Lk.10:21.... What then is the mustArion here? It is the secret that the kingdom of God has come in the person and words and works of Jesus. That is a secret because God has chosen to reveal himself indirectly and in a veiled way. The incarnate Word is not obvious. Only faith could recognize the Son of God in the lowly figure of Jesus of Nazareth. The secret of the kingdom of God is the secret of the person of Jesus. ekeinois...tois exw. Contrasted with the disciples to whom God has given the secret are 'those that are without'. This expression has been held to support the theory of the influence of ideas connected with the mystery cults; but, although hoi exw is used in classical Greek quite often, no instance of its use to denote 'the uninitiated' has been produced; for that purpose serveral words are regularly used (amuAtos, atelestos, abakcheutos, bebAlos). It is possible that the phrase may mean quite literally 'those outside (the house in which the disciples are at the moment)'; for 'the house' occurs often in Mk (2:1; 3:20; 7:17; 9:28,33; 10:10) and is the scene of private conversation between Jesus and his disciples. Or it may mean 'those outside the number of the disciples'. The fact that hoi exw only occurs here in the gospels but occurs four times in Paul (and cf. also hoi exwthen in I Tim. 3:7) is hardly evidence enough to warrant the conclusion that there must be Pauline influence here. en parabolais ta panta ginetai. This is usually taken as a statement that Jesus uses parables in teaching 'those that are without'; and, if we take vs.11f. closely with their context that must be the meaning. But if the saying is treated as independent, parabolA here can be understood in the sense of 'riddle' (cf., e.g., Pss.49:4; 78:2; Prov.1:6; Ezek.17:2, in all of which masal (LXX: parabolA) is clearly synonymous with hidah = 'riddle', 'dark saying'). We may then translate with Jeremias, 'all things are obscure' (ginetai being equivalent to estin, and en parabolais to an adjective); and the saying ceases to refer particularly to Jesus' parables. The fact that this interpretation gives us a clear contrasting parallelism between the two parts of v.11 suggests that this probably was the original meaning of the saying. Jeremias' conclusion that the saying was concerned 'with His preaching in general' is supported by lalw in Mt.13:13. But there is noting in Mk or Lk. to limit the reference to preaching. A wider reference--to Jesus' ministry as a whole--fits the parallelism of the two halves of v.11 better; for the secret of the kingdom of God in the first half is the secret of Jesus' person, works and words, not just of his words. The fact that seeing is mentioned in the quotation in v.12, as well as hearing, is possibly also some support for the wider reference. NTC-MARKhendriksen151,2 - "He said to them, To you has been given the mystery of the kingdom of God, but for the outsiders everything comes in parables...." This word "mystery" is very interesting. Outside of Christendom, in the realm of paganism, it referred to a secret teaching, rite, or ceremony having something to do with religion but hidden from the masses, and known (or practiced) only by a goup of initiates. In the LXX (Greek) translation of Daniel 2, where the word occurs no less than eight times (as a singular in verses 18, 19, 17,30, and 47b: as a plural in verses 28, 29, and 47a), it refers to a "secret" that must be revealed, a riddle that must be interpreted. In the book of Revelation, where it occurs four times (1:20; 10:7; 17:5,7), it is perhaps best explained as being "the symbolical meaning" of that which required explanation. The word occurs twenty-one times in Paul's epistles (Rom. 11:25; 16:25; I Cor. 2:1,7: 4:1: 13:2; 14:2; 15:51; Eph. 1:9; 3:3,4,9: 5:32; 6:19, Col. 1:26,27; 2:2; 4:3; II Thess. 2:7; I Tim. 3:9,16). There it can be defined as a person or a truth that would have remained unknown had not God revealed him or it, a revealed or open secret. Thus, had it not been disclosed we would not have known that in every age a remnant of Jews (as well as of Gentiles) will be saved, until at last through faith in Jesus Christ "all Israel" will thus have been gathered; and that this process will continue until Christ's return, when the full number of Gentiles destined to be saved will also have been brought in (Rom. 11:25). Again, had it not been revealed we would not have known that "we shall not all sleep," etc. (I Cor. 15:51). A very similar "mystery" or revealed secret in Christ himself in all his glorious riches, actually dwelling through his Spirit in the hearts and lives of both Gentiles and Jews, united in one body, the church (Eph. 3:4-6; Col. 1:26,27). And how, apart from divine disclosure, would we have been able to discover that one day the spirit of lawlessness will become incarnate in "the man of lawlessness"? (II Thess. 2:7). This same general definition of "mystery," namely that it is a divinely disclosed secret, a person or thing which apart from revelation could not have been discovered, fits very well into the context of the present passage of Mark's Gospel (4:11) and its parallels (Matt. 13:11; Luke 8:10), the only Gospel instances of its use. Here the mystery is the powerful manifestation of the reign ("kingdom," "kingship") of God in human hearts and lives; which reign, in connection with Christ's coming, was attended by mighty works in both the physical and the spiritual realms. Jesus declares that this mystery--that it was indeed God who was doing all these things, not Satan--had been "given," that is, "graciously disclosed" to those who were with him at this time; in fact, to all who had accepted him by genuine faith. To outsiders (literally: "to those outside") "everything comes in parables"; that is, to them Christ's teaching had to be presented in parabolic form. From what follows it is clear that when Jesus here speaks about "outsiders" he is thinking especially of hardened Pharisees and their followers, men with impenitent hearts (cf. Matt. 13:13,15), for he continues: MARKj&d - Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom. A "mystery" is not something obscure, but something plain to those initiated, but a secret to those without. The Greeks had what they called the "Eleusinian mysteries," unknown to all without, but fully explained to all who were initiated. The Saviour says no more than that there are matters that my disciples shall know that those without can never understand. When one makes Jesus the Master and himself a pupil (disciple), of course he has the vantage ground and will be admitted to spiritual knowledge that he could never obtain had he not entered the school of Christ. The English alphabet is a mystery to the savage, but is no mystery to even little children who have learned it. To them that are without...parables. The method of instruction by parables was peculiarly adapted to their state. It was interesting, and would excite attention, and many of the similes would be long remembered, and their true meaning would insensibly break forth upon their minds. It would lead them to some correct views before they were aware. At the same time the truths thus delivered were covered by a thin veil, and were not immediately apprehended; thus, while instant rejection might be the result of presenting the naked truth, attention to the truth was secured by the interesting covering under which it was couched. He spake only in parables to these Jewish cavillers, in order to take from them the means of knowing truths which they would merely abuse. He would not cast pearls before swine. Mark 4:12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; so that they may indeed see but not perceive--RSV; so that (as Scripture says) they may look and look, but see nothing--NEB; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; and may indeed hear but not understand--RSV; they may hear and hear, but understand nothing--NEB; lest at any time they should be converted,; lest haply they should turn again--ASV; if perhaps they may turn--ABUV; lest they should turn again--RSV; otherwise they might turn to God--NEB; and their sins should be forgiven them.; and it should be forgiven them--ASV; and be forgiven--ABUV; They may /surely look\ and yet not see, And /surely hear\ and yet not understand, Let once they should return, and it be forgiven them. that seeing they may see and not perceive, and hearing they may hearand not understand, lest they may turn, and the sins may be forgiven them.' TRNTyeagerV225 - hina blepontes blepwsin kai mA idwsin, kai akouontes akouwsin kai mA suniwsin, mApote epistrephwsin kai aphethA autois. hina (final conjunction introducing a purpose clause). blepontes (pres.act.part.nom.pl.masc.of blepw, adverbial, concessive). blepwsin (3d.per.pl.pres.act.subj.of blepw, purpose). kai (adversative conjunction). mA (negative conjunction with the subjunctive). idwsin (3d.per.pl.aor.act.subj.of horaw, purpose). kai (adjunctive conjunction joining clauses). akouontes (pres.act.part.nom.pl.masc.of akouw, adverbial, concessive). akouwsin (3d.per.pl.pres.act.subj.of akouw, purpose). kai (adversative conjunction). mA (negative conjunction with the subjunctive). suniwsin (3d.per.pl.pres.act.subj.of suniAmi, purpose). mApote (prohibitory conjunctive particle introducing a negative final clause). epistrephwsin (3d.per.pl.1st.aor.act.subj.of epistrephw, purpose). kai (adjunctive conjunction joining clauses). aphethA (3d.per.sing.1st.aor.pass.subj.of aphiAmi, purpose). autois (dat.pl.masc.of autos, personal advantage). Translation: "...in order that although seeing, they may see, but not perceive, and although hearing, they may hear but not understand, lest they turn around and it be forgiven for them." COMMENT: The hina purpose clause runs throughout the verse, which quotes Isa.6:9-10. Cf. Jn.12:40; Acts 28:26,27. Jesus had spoken to the outsiders, who now were not with Him, but He used the parabolic approach in order that although they see (concessive participle in blepontes), the saw only in the blepw sense, but did not perceive in a deeper, more intellectual and spiritual sense. This deeper insight is gained by horaw (#144). This verse points up beautifully the difference between blepw (#499) and horaw (#144), and also the difference between akouw (#148) and suniAmi (#1039). The gospel of Jesus Christ is superficially intelligible to the unsaved. They "see" and "hear" but they do not "perceive" and "identify with" it. To do so is to accept Christ and this gift of salvation is for the elect only. This deliberate parabolic approach in the teaching methods of Jesus is to achieve the purpose intended as expressed in "mApote...k.t.l." - "Lest they turn around in repentance and their previous sin of rejection of Christ be forgiven for them." Cf. Mt.13:14,15. Israel's heart had been hardened when they rejected the messages of the prophets. The treatment they are receiving now is in just retribution for their hardness of heart. God is under no obligation to take measures to enlighten minds and hearts that do not wish the light. Cf. comment on Mt. 13:14,15. R1413 - When the construction with hina is continued in a further clause by mA, the negative alone is repeated (cf. Jn.6:50). M142f. - The radical view which interprets the whole phrase -- hina and mApote alike -- as strictly final, so that parables are told to prevent any who are not predestined for salvation from hearing, is too incongruous with any part of the NT period to be plausible. It is far more reasonable to take both hina and mApote as instances of the Semitic blurring of purpose and result, so that Matthew's change of hina to hoti is essentially true to the sense, while his illogical retention of the mApote is true to the semitic idiom (cf. II Cor.4:4). M187 - T.W.Manson tried to soften the apparent harshnessof this verse by assuming that it was a mistranslation of the Targumic form of Isa.6:9f. in which the original should have been translated not as hina but as hoi (this is improbable-- TGr48). TGr49 - Hina means "in order that" and mApote means "lest." The prophet (Isaiah) saw the darkening of the national mind as part of God's inscrutable providence and it looks as if Mark, and indeed Jesus, did so too. Jesus took pains according to the synoptic gospels, to hide his true identity from most of the Jews throughout his ministry (hina is final--BD369[2]). T102 - The hina of v.12 (and Lk.8:10) is transformed into a causal hoti in the Matthew parallel, but this would not prove identity of meaning. BD471(3) - This verse means "although they look with perceptive eyes, yet they will not perceive," and the latter part of this verse means "in case they repent." [Ed. The initial particle of vs.12 is used as a quotation formula, meaning "that it may be fulfilled" (cf. the similar construction in Mt.18:16). In this usage, hina portrays the notion of purpose. Teaching by means of parables was intended to fulfill the sentence of judicial blindness pronounced on those who will not see.] MARKitGNTwuest85,6 - "That." The Greek word is hina, and is used very often to introduce a purpose clause. The fuller translation is "in order that." Robertson gives us help on this difficult passage. He says, "What is certain is that the use of parables on this occasion was a penalty for judicial blindness on those who will not see...The parables are thus a condemnation on the wilfully blind and hostile, while a guide and blessing to the enlightened." This is on the same principle as God hardening Pharaoh's heart by forcing him to an issue which he did not want to meet (Rom.9:14-18). Light resisted, blinds. Here, the Pharisees, were attempting to show that our Lord was in league with Satan. They did not want the truth. Thus, rejecting the truth, they in a sense blinded themselves. The parables are so adjusted that they blind the one who wickedly rejects the truth, and enlighten the one who desires it. "They should be converted." The verb means "to turn one's self about, to turn to, to return to, to cause to return, to bring back." It refers to a reversal of one's position concerning anything previously held. Robertson translates "Lest haply they should turn again." "Their sins should be forgiven them." The words "their sins," are not in the best texts. The verb is third person singular, not plural. The translation is "it should be forgiven them." robertson commenting on these words says: "It is the purpose of condemnation for wilful blindness and rejection such as suits the Pharisees after their blasphemous accusation against Jesus... Jesus is pronouncing their doom in the language of Isaiah. It sounds like the dirge of the damned." The singualr number of the verb "it should be forgiven them," ostensibly refers to a single sin, in this context, the wilful rejection of the truth. Translation: "...in order that seeing they may be seeing and may not perceive, and hearing, they may be hearing and may not understand, lest haply they turn again and it should be forgiven them." TCGTC-MARKcranfield155,6 - This verse is dependent on the second member of the antithesis in vs.11, and a comma (as in the Bible Society) is required at the end of v.11 rather than a colon (as in R.V.). Isa.6:9f is quoted, in full or in part, not only here and in the Mt. and Lk. parallels but also in Jn.12:40 and Acts 28:26f. Mk agrees with the Targum of Isa. against both M.T. and LXX in having (i) the third instead of second person plural in Isa.6:9; (ii) the verb 'forgive' in place of the verb 'heal' in Isa.6:10; and (iii) the passive 'it should be forgiven' (R.V. has passive in Isa.6:10, but the M.T. does not). This agreement tells strongly in favour of the authenticity of the saying. Mt.13:14f. reproduces the LXX text. The main difference between Mk.4:12 and Mt.13:13 is that Mk's hina is replaced by hoti. Thus in Mt. the people's spiritual blindness is the reason for Jesus' speaking en parabolais. Lk. retains the hina of Mk, but greatly abbreviates the quotation. The stumbling-block here is of course the hina. Various ways of removing it have been suggested. But, though it is true that in the NT hina is sometimes equivalent to hoste (e.g. Jn.9:2), that in Rev.22:14 it probably has the force of hoti, and that the Aramaic de can serve both as a final conjunction and as a relative pronoun, it is probably wise to resist the temptation to soften the final clause into a consecutive or a causal or a relative. For even if we were to get rid of the final clause, we should still be up aginst the dedotai in vs.11, which implies a corresponding ou dedotai (in Mt.13:11 it is explicit). Moreover, the hina here is not a solitary erratic boulder; on the contrary, it reflects the teleological thinking which is characteristic of the whole of the Bible, including the Synoptic Gospels. If then the hina is given its proper final force, its significance is that the fact that the secret of the kingdom of Gid, in accordance with OT prophecy, remains hidden from many is something that is within the purpose of God. In the last clause mApote may be explained in several ways. (i) As meaning 'lest' and introducing a further negative purpose clause dependent on the subjunctives after hina. The problem then is the same as that involved in the preceding hina (though possibly it might seem to be raised in a rather harsher form). 'Lest' is certainly the meaning of the Hebrew pen in Isa.6:10. (ii) As meaning 'unless', since the Aramaic dilema, which may be presumed to underlie it, can have this meaning. So Jeremias, who thinks that the dilema in the Targum of Isa.6:10 is meant in this sense. (iii) As meaning 'perhaps', a sense that both dilema and mApote can have (mApote has this sense as early as Aristotle, ... ; in the NT cf. II Tim.2:25). In this case we should punctuate with a dash or a full stop after suniwsin. As the reminiscence of Isa.6:9f is anyway free, this twist to the original meaning is not impossible. If (iii) or even (ii) is accepted, there is a hint here of a gracious purpose of God beyond the purpose indicated by the hina-clause. What then is the significance of 4:11f as a whole; first, as an independent saying not specially connected with the parables, and secondly, as set by Mark in its present context? (i) God's kingly intervention in the person, works and words of Jesus is a secret (mustArion) in the sense that it can only be recognized by a God-given faith (dedotai). This secret of the kingdom of God is the secret of Jesus' Messiahship and the secret of his divine Sonship. God's self- revelation is indirect and veiled. (While the eye of faith sees through the veil and grasps the secret, for the unbeliever, so long as he remains an unbeliever, the veil is unpenetrated, and everything is still simply en parabolais). No outwardly compelling evidence of divine glory illumines the ministry of Jesus. It is a necessary part of the gracious self-abasement of the Incarnation that the Son of God should submit to conditions under which his claim to authority cannot but appear altogether problematic and paradoxical. In the last hours of his life his incognito deepens until in the helplessness, nakedness and agony of the Cross, abandoned by God and man, he becomes the absolute antithesis of everything that the world understands by divinity and by kingship. But this veiledness is not simply designed to prevent men from recognizing the truth. God's self-revelation is truly revelation; it is precisely veiled revelation. Throughout the ministry we can see these two motives (revealing and veiling) at work. One the one hand, Jesus gathers the crowds about him and teaches them, sends out the Twelve to preach, and reveals the power and compassion of God by his miracles. God's self-revelation is not to be accomplished in a corner. On the other hand, Jesus teaches the crowds indirectly by means of parables, seeks to conceal his miracles, and forbids the demoniacs to declare his identity. The two motives, both of which are necessary to the divine purpose, are constantly in tension--a fact which explains some apparent inconsistencies (e.g. between the command egeire eis to meson in 3:3 and the frequent injunctions to silence). By this veiled revelation men are placed in a situation of crisis, a separation between faith and unbelief is brought about, and the blindness and sinfulness of men are shown up for what they are. That this judgement (cf. Jn.9:39) is part of the divine purpose is indicated by the hina in v.12; but it is not the whole purpose of God. his ultimate purpose is salvation, and the latter part of v.12 (mApote epistrepswsin kai aphethA autois) is perhpas to be interpreted, as was suggested above, as hinting at this. God's self-revelation is veiled, in order that men may be left sufficient room in which to make a personal decision. A real turning to God or repentance (epistrephein) is made possible by the inward divine enabling of the Holy Spirit (dedotai), but would be rendered impossible by the external compulsion of a manifestation of the unveiled divine majesty. The revelation is veiled for the sake of man's freedom to believe. (ii) Mark by introducing this saying at this point has connected it particularly with the parabolic teaching. The original reference of the saying may well have been much wider, as we have suggested above; but at any rate it is clear that the teaching in parables comes within its scope. While in the case of those who already in some measure believe directness in teaching is appropriate, those who do not yet believe must be taught in an indirect way. (On this see further on v.33.). NTC-MARKhendriksen152,3,4,5 - That they may see and see but not perceive; And hear and hear but not understand; Lest they should turn again and be forgiven. In this way Mark summarizes the substance of Christ's quotation from Isa.6:9, 10. Luke 8:10 is even shorter. A fuller statement is found in Matt. 13:13-15. Jesus, then, is saying, "For the outsiders everything comes in parables, that they may see and see but not perceive...lest they should turn again and be forgiven." But how can that be? Isn't this shocking? Can it be true that the kind and merciful Savior, the very One who was constantly extending tender invitations, would take great pains to prevent people from perceiving and understanding the truth? That he would actually go out of his way to keep men from turning to God and being forgiven? There have been various attempts to solve this problem. Among them are the following: 1. We misinterpret the little word "that" when we take it to mean "in order that" or "so that." Or else, Mark himself misinterpreted the Aramaic word which Jesus probably used. Answer. Mark represents Jesus as saying not only "that" but also "lest." This combination that...lest shows that the little word "that" can best be taken to indicate purpose. 2. The saying is an unauthentic and intolerable version of a genuine saying of Jesus. It is sometimes added that in view of such passages as Matt. 11:28-30; Rev. 3:20 Jesus could never have spoken the words ascribed to him in Mk.4:11,12. Answer. For the theory that this saying is unauthentic and intolerable there is no proof. Also, is it fair to refer to Matt. 11:28-30, but to forget about verse 25; or, to Rev. 3:20, and to ignore verse 16? Besides, does not Mark's summary truly reflect Isa. 6:9,10? 3. If Christ's words were those reported by Mark, they must have been spoken in jest. Jesus evidently wanted his words to be taken in a sense which was the exact opposite of their literal meaning. This is clear from the fact that Matthew diametrically changes the meaning of the statement, for he makes Jesus say because (instead of that) seeing they do not see...." Answer. If it be granted that when the Master uttered the words, "To you has been given the mystery of God" he was speaking in earnest, stating what he knew to be a fact, and not making a joke, the rest of the closely knit saying must also be considered a fact. And as to the alleged conflict between Matthew, on the one hand, and Mark and Luke, on the other, why cannot both be right? The true explanation, as this author sees it, is as follows: Both because and that (whether "in order that" - my preference-, or "so that") are correct. It was because by their own choice these impenitent Pharisees and their followers had refused to see and hear, that, as a punishment for this refusal, they are now addressed in parables, "that they may see and see but not perceive, and hear and hear but not understand, lest they should turn again and be forgiven." They must "endure the blame of their own blindness and hardness" (Calvin on this passage). God had given these people a wonderful opportunity. It is his sovereign will to remove what man is unwilling to improve, to darken the heart that refuses to hearken. He hardens those that have hardened themselves. If God even surrenders to the lusts of their hearts the unenlightened heathen when they hold back the truth in unrighteousness (Rom. 1:18,16), will he not punish more severely the impenitents before whom the Light of the world is constantly confirming the truthfulness of his message? And if he blesses those who accept the mysterious, will he not curse those who reject the obvious? It is evident, therefore, that Matt. 13:13 is in harmony with Mark 4:12; in fact, the "because" of the former helps to explain the "that" or "in order that" of the latter. When, of their own accord and after repeated threats and promises, people reject the Lord and spurn his messages, then he hardens them, in order that those who were not willing to repent will not be able to repent and be forgiven. See Also N.T.C. on Matt. 13:10-15; and on John 12:37-41. TNICoNT-MARKlane156-159 - These verses are widely held to represent Mark's distinctive understanding of the purpose of parables, but to be inauthentic as an expression of the intention of Jesus. support for this approach has been found in the presence of unusual language, in the apparent interruption of the sequence of verses 10 and 13 by verses 11-12, and in the incredibility of the thought that Jesus could have used parables to veil the truth. To answer these objections requires the formulation of sound principles of interpretation as well as the clarification of the meaning of the text itself. It is not possible to base on vocabulary a judgment concerning authenticity. The vocabulary of any given logion may be influenced by the audience and the situation to which it is addressed. The term "mystery" or "secret" in verse 11 illustrates this fact. The term belongs to the vocabulary of revelation. It occurs both in Daniel and in Tannaitic rabbinic literature with the meaning "secret things." In Daniel it carries the meaning of an eschatological secret, a veiled proclamation of future events appointed by God. The concept of revelation is sharply in view, and it appropriate to the Marcan context. This provides strong reason for not allowing that this word reflects later ideas. Mk. 4:11-12 is properly understood only in the context of the contemporaneous situation set forth in Ch. 3, where unbelief and opposition to Jesus is blatant. In Ch. 3:6 Jesus' opponents conspire to secure his destruction, while in Ch. 3:22 they declare that his power is demonic. It is against this background that in Ch. 4:11-12 Jesus makes a sharp distinction between the disciples (to whom God entrusts the mystery of the Kingdom) and the unbelieving multitude (from whom the truth is concealed). Basic to this distinction is the fact that the revelation of God itself has its history of acceptance and rejection whenever it enters the human scene. The term "parable" in verse 11 expresses an aspect of revelation and of human understanding when confronted by revelation. This is the point stressed in the explanation of the parable of the sower in Ch. 4:14- 20. To all who have no lasting adherence to the word of revelation, Jesus' whole mission partakes of the character of "a parable"; it is an enigma. Seen in this perspective, the term "parable" in verse 11 expresses an intensely theological idea; the word describes the fate of revelation faced with the understanding of the man whose heart is hardened. The fundamental secret, which is common to all of the parables, concerns the one who spoke them. It is the secret that in Jesus the Kingdom of God has begun to penetrate the experience of men. Accordingly in Ch. 4:11 Jesus was not thinking of the Kingdom of God in any abstract sense, whether as a future or a present reality, but of the Kingdom as it is embodied in his own person. A greater appreciation of the historical situation of belief and unbelief in which Jesus spoke the parables will indicate the appropriateness of this logion to the context in which it is found. Ch. 4:11-12 distinguishes two classes of people con- fronted with a single event, the significance of which is entirely different to each class. The one event which both experience is described as "all things" (Ch. 4:11,34), i.e. the whole mission of Jesus. The disciples are enabled by God to see in this mission "the secret of the Kingdom of God," while those whose eyes are blinded and whose ears are dulled see nothing but a disturbing enigma. The parables are, accordingly, an aspect of the mission of Jesus. Unbelief makes every phase of that mission a riddle, something wholly alien to the perspective of man. The distinctly Palestinian flavor of the logion contained in verses 11-12 has been demonstrated by T.W. Manson and J. Jeremias. Of particular interest is the agreement of the citation of Isaiah 6:9f. with the Targum against both the MT and the LXX.[32} This citation has proven offensive to many interpreters. Various proposals have been made for altering either the text itself or the usual translation of the passage to circumvent the understanding that Jesus spoke in parables to guard the mystery of the Kingdom. It is not necessary to adopt these expedients. What must be seen is that the introductory term in verse 12 is intended to serve as a citation formula, meaning "that it might be fulfilled";[34] what follows is essentially a quotation of Scripture which bears on the fulfilment of God's sovereign purpose. In verse 11 Jesus called attention to the contemporary situation of belief and unbelief, of revelation and veiledness; in verse 12 he cites the text from Isaiah, not to explain why he speaks in parables, but as a commentary on the contemporary situation in which the purpose of God was coming to fulfilment. In both verses the sovereignty of the divine disclosure and determination is clearly in view.[35] The citation of Isa. 6:9f. does not mean that "those outside" are denied the possibility of belief. It indicates that they are excluded from the opportunity of being further instructed in the secret of the Kingdom so long as unbelief continues. That the Kingdom has come in an initial phase in the presence of Jesus can be discerned only through faith, which is to say by the grace of God. Jesus' presence, therefore, means disclosure and veiling; it releases both grace and judgment. [Footnote 32] - This agreement extends to the use of the third instead of the second person plural in Isa. 6:9; the choice of the verb "forgive" instead of "heal" in Isa. 6:10; and the use of the passive "it should be forgiven" rather than the active voice in Isa. 6:10. [Footnote 34] - "In order to understand the hina-clause of Mk. 4:12 which follows it is imperative that the words coming after hina should be regarded as a free quotation from Isa. 6:9f., and as if in inverted commas. Hence the hina is not expressing the purpose of Jesus but that of God; in fact it almost amounts to an abbreviation of hina plArwthA, and is therefore to be translated "in order that.'" A parallel example of this construction occurs in Mt. 18:16. [Footnote 35] - Within the historical situation both the objective and subjective aspects of revelation must be considered. On the objective side, there is that which cannot be wholly grasped because of the nature of the content of the revelation; it is "a secret," or veiled. On the subjective side, men of faith display a genuine comprehension and appropriation of the truth, but not on such a scale as to exclude the need for further exposition, illumination and application. Those who hear the word of revelation in unbelief may have a general knowledge of the teaching; they lack a genuinely saving understanding of the truth, however, and the person of Jesus remains to them enigmatic. MARKbarclay87-91 - This has always been one of the most difficult passages to understand in all the gospels. The Authorized Version speaks of the mystery of the Kingdom of God. Now this word mystery has in Greek a technical meaning; it does not mean something which is complicated and mysterious in our sense of the term. It means something which is quite unintelligible to the person who has not been initiated into its meaning, but which is perfectly clear and plain to the person who has been so initiated. In New Testament times, in the pagan world one of the great features of popular religion was what were called the Mystery Religions. These religions promised communion and union with and even identity with some god, whereby all the fears and the terrors of life and of death could be taken away. Now nearly all these Mystery Religions were based on the story of some god who had suffered and died and risen again; they were nearly all in the nature of passion plays. One of the most famous of them was called the Mystery of Isis. Osiris was a wise and good king. Seth, his wicked brother, hated him and along with seventy-two conspirators persuaded him to come to a banquet. there he persuaded him to enter into a cunningly made coffin which exactly fitted him. When he was inside it the lid was snapped down and the coffin was cast into the Nile. Isis, his faithful wife, after a long and weary search, found the coffin and brought it home in mourning. When she was absent the wicked Seth came again, stole away the body, cut it into fourteen pieces and scattered them throughout all Egypt. Once again Isis set out on her sad and weary search. In the end she discovered all the pieces and by her magical powers put them together and restored Osiris to life again; and from that time he became the immortal king of the living and the dead. Now what happened was this. The candidate underwent a long preparation of purification and of fasting and of asceticism and of instruction as to the inner meaning of the story. Then the dramatic story with its grief and its sorrow and its resurrection and its triumphal ending was played out as a passion play. Music and incense and lighting and a splendid liturgy were all used to enhance the emotional atmosphere. As the play was played out the worshipper felt himself one with the god both in his sufferings and in his triumph. He passed through death to immortallity by union with the god. Now the point is that to an uninitiated person the whole thing would have been meaningless; but to the initiated the thing was full of meaning which he had been taught to see. That is the technical meanong of this Greek word musterion. When the New Testament talks of the mystery of the Kingdom, it does not mean that the Kingdom is remote and abstruse and recondite and hard to understand; but is does mean that it is quite unintelligible to the man who has not given his heart to Jesus, and that only the man who has taken Jesus as Master and Lord can understand what the Kingdom of God means. But the real difficulty of the passage lies in the section that follows. If we take it at its face value it sounds as if Jesus taught in parables deliberately to cloak His meaning, purposely to hide it from all ordinary men and women. Whatever else the passage originally meant it cannot mean that; and whatever else Jesus said He did not say that; for, if one thing is crystal clear, it is that Jesus used parables not to cloak His meaning and to hide His truth but to compel men to recognize the truth and to enable them to see it. How then did this passage come to be in the form in which it is? It is a quotation from Isaiah 6:9,10. From the beginning it worried people. It was worrying people more than two hundred years before Jesus made use of it. The Hebrew of it literally runs (the following two translations are by W.O.E. Oesterley): And He said, Go, and say to this people, "Go on hearkening, but understand not; go on looking, but perceive not." Make fat the heart of this people, and its ears make heavy, and its eyes besmear; lest it see with its eyes, and with its ears hear, and its heart understand, so that it should be healed again. That seems on the face of it that God is telling Isaiah that he is to pursue a course deliberately designed to make the people fail to understand. In the third century B.C. the Hebrew scriptures were translated into Greek, and the Greek version, the Septuagint, as it is called, became one of the most influential books in the world, for it carried the Old Testament everywhere Greek was spoken. The Septuagint translators were worried at this strange passage and they translated it differently: And He said, Go and say to this people, "Ye shall hear indeed, but ye shall not understand; and seeing, ye shall see, and not perceive." For the heart of this people has become gross, and with their ears they hear heavily, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. The Greek version does not say that God intended that the people should be so dull that they would not understand; it says that they had made themselves so dull that they could not understand - which is a very different thing. The explanation is that no man can translate or set down in print a tone of voice. when Isaiah spoke he spoke half in irony and half in despair and altogether in love. He was thinking, "God sent me to bring His truth to this people; and for all the good I am doing I might as well have been sent to shut their minds to it. I might as well be speaking to a brick wall. You would think that God had shut their minds to it." So Jesus spoke His parables; He meant them to flash into men's minds and to illuminate the truth of God. But in so many eyes He saw a dull incomprehension. He saw so many people blinded by prejudice, deafened by wishful thinking, too lazy to think. He turned to His disciples and He said to them: "Do you remember what Isaiah once said? He said that when he came with God's message to God's people Israel in his day they were so dully un-understanding that you would have thought that God had shut instead of opening their minds; I feel like that to-day." When Jesus said this, He did not say it in anger, or irritation, or bitterness, or exasperation. He said it with the wistful longing of frustrated love, the poignant sorrow of a man who had a tremendous gift to give which people were to blind to take. If we read this, not hearing a tone of bitter exasperation, but a tone of regretful love, it will sound quite different. It will tell us not of a God who deliberately blinded men and hid His truth, but of men who were so dully uncomprehending that it seemed no use even for God to try to penetrate the iron curtain of their lazy incomprehension. God save us from hearing God's truth like that! MARK j&d - 12. That seeing they may see, and not perceive. Did he speak in parables because he did not wish them to know and to enjoy? Everything shows the reverse. But he was aware, that, in consequence of the inveteracy of their prejudice, they could not, in the first instance, see "the secret of the kingdom" without being repelled in spirit, and confirmed in their dissent and dislike. He wished, therefore, that they should not "see." But, at the same time, he graciously wished that they should "look," and keep "looking," so that they might, if possible, get such a glimpse of the inner glory as might fascinate their interest and attention, and by and by disarm their prejudices, so that they might with safety be permitted to "see". - Morison. Though they see the truth intellectually, they shall not appreciate it spiritually; they see it as the horse sees the same prospect with his rider, without appreciation. - Abbott. But their position was according to their own choice. Christ forbade none; and the disciples in this case were not merely the twelve chosen by him, but all who would come. Moral inability always is the fruit of moral unwillingness. Those who cannot see, were in the first place unwilling to see. Lest ... they should be converted. His meaning is not, "These things are done in parables, lest they should be converted," but, "Their eyes they closed, etc., lest at any time they should be converted." That is, men willfully close their hearts to the truth, lest they should be led to repentance and reformation. They will not, therefore they cannot.