In another essay in this series, I wrote, “Any rational argument against [And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people (πάντας, a form of πᾶς) to myself¹] must explain: 1) how Jesus was wrong and 2) when He changed his mind.” I want to consider some arguments against it to see how that observation holds up.

A blog post titled “What Did Jesus Mean When He Said That he will ‘Draw All Men [and Women] to Myself’?” on the Christian Publishing House Blog stated:

The Greek expressions rendered “all” in John 12:32 is an inflected form of the word pas. In Koine Greek “all” does not always mean “all.” Many times in the biblical Greek “all” is used in a hyperbolic sense and does not necessarily always mean “all.”

If I assume that Jesus knew this esoteric rule of Koine Greek, I can shoehorn this argument into item #2 of my understanding of a rational argument: Jesus changed his mind even before He spoke. He wasn’t wrong (item #1) because He never said that He will draw all to Himself. I misunderstand Him taking Him at his word.

I’m not convinced that this is an esoteric rule of Koine Greek. The author² cites no Greek grammar but lets it stand on his own authority. I’m not sure how I would apply such a rule if it existed. Much of what Jesus or Paul said or wrote seemed hyperbolic to me when I began to study the Bible. I suspect that forms of πᾶς (pas) much like all in English mean “every, all, the whole, always, complete, entire, utter,” unless explicitly limited in the text. “It is the context that will make clear the author’s intention.”³

According to the Greek Concordance on biblehub.com there are 90 occurrences of πάντας (the Greek word translated all people in John 12:32) in the New Testament. I’ll look at all of them eventually. I’ve surveyed the first nine in Matthew [see Table below].

All nine occur in narrative passages and are clearly limited in scope. The first occurrence follows (Matthew 2:1-4 ESV):

Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the east came to Jerusalem, saying, “Where is he who has been born king of the Jews? For we saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him.” When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all (πᾶσα, another form of πᾶς) Jerusalem with him; and assembling all (πάντας, a form of πᾶς) the chief priests and scribes of the people, he inquired of them where the Christ was to be born.

Here πάντας was clearly limited to all the chief priests and scribes of the people. It is completely fair to further limit this to all the chief priests and scribes of the people in Jerusalem, since wise men from the east came to Jerusalem. I’d be willing to limit it further to all the chief priests and scribes of the people living in Jerusalem at this time.

Though I’m not searching occurrences of πᾶσα (another form of πᾶς) deliberately, this one came up in context: all Jerusalem was troubled with Herod. I see no problem limiting this occurrence of a form of πᾶς to all Jerusalem who heard with Herod was troubled.

Another example follows (Matthew 2:16 ESV):

Then Herod, when he saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, became furious, and he sent and killed all (πάντας, a form of πᾶς) the male children in Bethlehem and in all⁴ (πᾶσι[ν], another form of πᾶς) that region who were two years old or under, according to the time that he had ascertained from the wise men.

Here πάντας was limited to the male children in Bethlehem and in πᾶσι(ν) that region who were two years old or under. Since this order was carried out by men it wouldn’t surprise me if the results were less than perfect. We are told explicitly that they missed their intended target completely (Matthew 2:13-15a ESV):

Now when [the wise men] had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, “Rise, take the child and his mother, and flee to Egypt, and remain there until I tell you, for Herod is about to search for the child, to destroy him.” And he rose and took the child and his mother by night and departed to Egypt and remained there until the death of Herod.

One more example follows (Matthew 21:12 ESV):

And Jesus⁵ entered the temple⁶ and drove out all (πάντας, a form of πᾶς) who sold and bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons.

Here πάντας was limited by who sold and bought in the temple. It was further limited by the stated location of the temple: And when [Jesus] entered Jerusalem, the whole (πᾶσα, another form of πᾶς) city was stirred up, saying, “Who is this?”⁷ Here, too, πᾶσα was limited by the…city of Jerusalem.

So, do these nine examples of πάντας, along with two examples of πᾶσα and one of πᾶσι(ν), persuade me that Jesus intended to limit πάντας in some way when He said, And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people (πάντας, a form of πᾶς) to myself⁸? No. Matthew was careful to alert his reader by the words which immediately followed it that πάντας was limited. Jesus, by comparison, seems far too cavalier if He intended any such limitation.

There is a book ad preceding the blog post I quoted:

Jesus told the leaders of his day that he “will draw all men [and women] to myself.” You too can experience the joy of drawing “all men” [and women] to the “good news” by Reaching Hearts with the Art of Persuasion.⁹

I never expected with a few clicks of a mouse in under two minutes to find one document that effectively explained one reason I thought Jesus spoke in the exaggerated language of a salesman was the inherent logic of my Christianity. I had a philosophical bent to my mind at a very young age.

I’ve considered the four occurrences of πάντας in Mark’s Gospel [see Table below], but first it seems necessary to address something else. For me the grammatical arguments are most compelling: What did Jesus say? The author of this blog post seems to be arguing something else. He paraphrased D. A. Carson: Jesus “means ‘all people without distinction, Jews and Gentiles alike’, not all individuals without exception, since the surrounding context has just established judgment as a major theme (v. 31)…”

If Jesus draws me to Himself, does that preclude Him from judging the sin condemned in my flesh? No, of course not. I return to what I called the long name¹⁰ of God (Exodus 34:6, 7 ESV):

The Lord passed before [Moses] and proclaimed, “The Lord, the Lord, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation.”

Since I mentioned this alternative argument, I should probably address it directly. One of the things I like to do is to put alternatives into the text to see how they feel:

I’m not subtle enough to hear much difference between these two statements, but I’m not thick. I understand what the author of the blog post wanted Jesus to say:

And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw from all peoples to myself, from Jews and Gentiles alike without distinction. I will not draw all individuals without exception.

If I take this to the judgment seat of Christ, what is my account if He asks why I believed it? I read a blog post from a Christian bookseller paraphrasing the president of the Evangelical Theological Society? “But what did I say, Dan,” is all He has to say to bring me to my senses. He said, And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all…to myself.

Three of the four occurrences of πάντας in Mark’s Gospel are more like the occurrence in John 12:32 than any in Matthew’s Gospel, and they are clearly limited. One example follows (Mark 2:1-5a, 11, 12 ESV):

And when [Jesus] returned¹¹ to Capernaum¹² after some days,¹³ it was reported that he was at home.¹⁴ And¹⁵ many were gathered together, so that there was no more room, not even at the door. And he was preaching the word to them. And they came, bringing to him a paralytic carried by four men. And when they could not get near¹⁶ him because of the crowd, they removed the roof above him, and when they had made an opening, they let down¹⁷ the bed¹⁸ on which¹⁹ the paralytic lay. And²⁰ when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic…“I say to you, rise,²¹ pick up your bed,²² and go home.” And he rose and immediately²³ picked up his bed²⁴ and went out before²⁵ them all (πάντων, another form of πᾶς), so that they were all (πάντας, a form of πᾶς) amazed and glorified God, saying, “We never saw anything like this!”

Here πάντας was not limited by the words immediately following it. Instead, it was flanked by two infinitives in the present tense: ἐξίστασθαι (a form of ἐξίστημι) and δοξάζειν (a form of δοξάζω), translated: they were all amazed and glorified God in the ESV. Likewise, πάντων was not limited by the words immediately preceding it: (he) went out before them all. (It seems to me that them was added by the translators.) Both are limited by their context, a house in Capernaum at a specific time: And when he returned to Capernaum after some days, it was reported that he was at home. And many were gathered together, so that there was no more room, not even at the door.

So, should I assume that πάντας in John 12:32 was limited to all who heard Jesus at that particular moment in Jerusalem? That doesn’t feel right, and I’ve never heard anyone argue that point. My feelings and potentially poor scholarship aside, I want to look more closely at Jesus’ words (John 12:31-33 ESV):

Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out. And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.” He said this to show by what kind of death he was going to die [Table].

Here is the mind of Christ. I do like to put this in a little more perspicuous form.

That Jesus will draw πάντας to Himself is either the judgment of this world or something so intimately associated with the judgment of this world that it is one of the next things that came to his mind. Now I admit, my religious mind has had many other ideas about the judgment of this world. Most, if not all, of them can be summed up with some negation of Jesus’ saying I…will draw all…to myself: I will not draw all to Myself; I will draw not all to Myself; I will draw some to Myself but not all.

I will draw all to Myself, is such a shock to my religious mind that if it followed directly after, Now is the judgment of this world, this might have been a speculative essay about how and when a negative particle was removed from the Greek of John 12:32. It is entirely possible, perhaps even likely, that Jesus will say, Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels,²⁶ to my religious mind.

I will draw all to Myself, does not follow Now is the judgment of this world. [N]ow will the ruler of this world be cast out, falls between them. So again, that Jesus will draw πάντας to Himself is either the means by which the ruler of this world [will] be cast out or something so intimately associated with the means by which the ruler of this world [will] be cast out that it is the very next thought that came to his mind. And again, I admit, my religious mind has had many other ideas about how the ruler of this world [will] be cast out.

Though my religious mind never recognized any connection between now will the ruler of this world be cast out and I...will draw all…to myself, once I hear it from the mind of Christ it is difficult to conceive of any better way to cast out the ruler of this world than to plunder all of his possessions, rather than some or a few of them. And that little taste of freedom from the domination of my religious mind serves as a bridge back to Now is the judgment of this world.

Suddenly, that Jesus will draw πάντας to Himself, that He will cause all to be born again (ἄνωθεν; NET: from above) by his own indwelling Holy Spirit sounds like the most scathing judgment of this world I could ever imagine. And this thought battles mightily against my religious mind’s tendency to demand that infinite mercy and infinite judgment be two entirely different things.

The irony here is that the carnal or fleshly mind hears the judgment in Jesus’ saying, You must be born again,²⁷ and rejects it as hate speech. So, the carnal/fleshly mind rejects the mercy in Jesus’ judgment while my religious mind rejects the judgment in Jesus’ mercy, his promise to draw all to Himself.

In the Introduction to this blog I speculated that “the religious mind may be nothing more than a subspecies of the carnal mind (KJV) or the outlook of the flesh (NET).” Here they seem opposed to one another. What binds them together, however, and betrays their common origin is their design by the ruler of this world to keep us from abiding in Christ and to keep his words from abiding in us. Both are evidence of the ruler of this world’s domination over our hearts and minds.

It is perfectly just that Jesus say, Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels,²⁸ to my religious mind. Only the mind of Christ endures. Paul wrote (1 Corinthians 2:6-16 ESV):

Yet among the mature we do impart wisdom, although it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to pass away. But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. But, as it is written,

“What no eye has seen, nor ear heard,

nor the heart of man imagined,

what God has prepared for those who love him”—²⁹

these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. For who knows a person’s thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God [Table]. Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual [Table].

The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual person judges all things,³⁰ but is himself to be judged by no one. “For who has understood the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ.

To the extent that Christianity is a product of the religious mind, it is idolatry serving neither Christ nor those who would abide in Him.

According to a note (26) in the NET Matthew quoted from Hosea 11:1. The table below compares the relevant portions of the Greek of Matthew 2:15b to Hosea 11:1b in the Septuagint.

It appears that Matthew made his own translation from Hebrew rather than quoting the Septuagint directly.

According to a note (12) in the NET Paul quoted from Isaiah 40:13. The table below compares the Greek of 1 Corinthians 2:16a to Isaiah 40:13 in the Septuagint.

The tables mentioned above follow.

Tables comparing Hosea 11:1; Exodus 34:6; 34:7 and Isaiah 40:13 in the Tanakh, KJV and NET, and comparing Hosea 11:1; Exodus 34:6; 34:7 and Isaiah 40:13 in the BLB and Elpenor versions of the Septuagint with the English translations from Hebrew and Greek, and tables comparing the Greek of Matthew 2:16; 21:12; Mark 2:1, 2; 2:4, 5; 2:11, 12 and 1 Corinthians 2:15 in the NET and KJV follow.