[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]KingKai25 wrote:
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
If you look at the context of the eat my flesh and drink my blood, if he was being symbolic or whatever, then he’d be saying, “insult me.”
That’s not what Jesus was doing here. He was being very literal. All the early Church fathers are in accord with each other. Even your beloved Calvin agreed, so does Luther. [/quote]
The passage is even further punctuated by the inclusion of the objections of the other disciples. It could have read just as easily without their negative comments, but they were included, for a reason. What other reason could it possibly be?
I don’t remember any part of Genesis where Adam says, “A snake? Talking? You’re joking right? No, hold on, for real? A talking serpent. Oooooookaaaaaaaay. Well, wth, hand over that fruit, woman.”[/quote]
Two things. First of all, neither you nor Brother Chris are actually paying enough attention to the full context of John’s gospel. As evidenced by both his letters and his gospel, John loves paradox, and he loves to present Jesus as a paradoxical figure. Consequently, John commonly arranges his material in ways that are specifically intended to highlight Jesus’ “in-your-face,” unapologetic teaching style. In John’s gospel, Jesus frequently says inflammatory, confusing things without giving ANY clear explanations of what he means; even when he does provide explanations, they are often equally as confusing as the original statement being clarified. Moreover, when unbelievers respond to Jesus, they frequently mischaracterize his SPIRITUAL statements that employ PHYSICAL metaphors as statements about physical realities (or what you call, “literal” statements). Look at Nicodemus’ response to Jesus’ assertion that we need to be born again to see the kingdom of God (3:3-4). And the kind of response the disciples provide - “wow Jesus, this saying is hard” - is the kind of response people have to Jesus’ statements all the time in the gospel.
John 4 provides an excellent example of what I’m talking about. Jesus speaks with the Samaritan woman and speaks to her about his ability to provide “living water” (4:10). As is common in John, she responds by assuming that Jesus is talking about physical water, as you can see from her response - “sir, you have nothing to draw with and the well is deep. Where can you get this living water? Are you greater than our father, Jacob, who gave us the well and drank from it himself…?” (John 4:11-12). How does Jesus respond? Does he explain that he isn’t talking about physical water? NOOOOOOO. He keeps the metaphor going - " everyone who drinks THIS water (water from the well) will be thirsty again, but whoever drinks the water I give them will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give them will become in them a spring of water welling up to eternal life." What physical water is Jesus talking about? NONE - it is a spiritual reality to which he refers. Thus you have an excellent analogue to John 6 - in both instances, Jesus makes a spiritual point through physical metaphors, and in both, his hearers mistakenly assume that Jesus is talking about physical realities rather than spiritual ones.
Secondly, and building off of the previous point, if one of John’s rhetorical goals in his gospel is to show how Jesus was frequently misunderstood and paradoxical, it absolutely makes sense in context that John would record the disciples’ statements. In context, the question presented in Jesus’ discussion with the Jews in John 6:35-71 is, “who are those whom God has given Jesus” (see especially John 6:36-37, 44, and 64-65)? THAT is the focus of the discussion. Jesus has no problem saying to the Jews, who are questioning his claims about himself, that “no one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them” (6:44). But then, even Jesus’ disciples start to question his claims, and many of them leave (6:66). In the end, Jesus even asks the Twelve, “you do not want to leave too, do you?” (6:67). The twelve, spoken for by Peter, recognize Jesus’ authority (6:68). The point is that it absolutely makes sense for “some of the disciples” (6:60 - note that “the disciples” refers to a larger group than the Twelve) to question what Jesus says, BECAUSE SOME OF THE DISCIPLES ARE NOT TRUE DISCIPLES. They take offense at Jesus just like the other Jews who don’t believe in him. [/quote]
Or, what if you guys are those disciples? [/quote]
Kingkai’s explanation of what Jesus is doing here is very thorough, so I’ll just add a few words:
Christ’s speech to the Jews is often very in your face, because of their unbelief, and this passage is especially so. Note the progress-
Joh 6:41 The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, I am the bread which came down from heaven.
Jesus notes their attitude in vs 43, then continues-
Joh 6:48-51 I am that bread of life. (49) Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. (50) This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die. (51) I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.
He adds here the MUST have this bread in order to have eteral life.
Now the Jews reaction is more vehement-
Joh 6:52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?
What follows is Christ stomping them so to speak-
Joh 6:53-58 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. (54) Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. (55) For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. (56) He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. (57) As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. (58) This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.
Notice how He keeps mentioning His Father, and that He, as the bread, comes down from heaven. This is what the Jews hate Him for. He speech is a form of JUDGEMENT upon them. Compare this verse:
Mar 4:12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.
Note just above this in Mar 4:10 He is giving this explanation to “the twelve”.
Similarly, in Jn 6, when he gets His true disciples alone, He explains:
Joh 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
It couldn’t be clearer what is going on here. This chapter does not support transubstantiation.
