John 6 For Roman Catholics

And greetings, welcome to The Dividing Line, a special Dividing Line today, even though there's lots of things going on. We'd normally be talking about a number of different subjects. We're putting all of those things aside today because we're going to do a special program where we are going to walk through the sixth chapter of the Gospel of John.

Well, why would we do that? Well, we've spent a lot of time on John chapter six in the past. There's a lot of reasons to spend time with the longest chapter in the Gospel of John. But specifically, our intention in this program is to walk through this text with an eye to communicating to our Roman Catholic friends.

Many of us have Roman Catholic family members, neighbors, co-workers, whatever it might be. And I didn't take the time to grab, could have just grabbed a handful of books to give you citations and quotations.

All you'd have to do is tune into EWTN today, watch some EWTN programming on television, and you'd probably multiple times encounter speakers saying that John chapter six in the Bible is one of the clearest demonstrations of the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation, of the concept of the mass as a perpetuatory sacrifice, but specifically the element of that, of the concept of transubstantiation.

That is the idea that when the priest consecrates the host, the wine, when those words of consecration are said, used to be in Latin only, now it's in vernaculars and so on and so forth, but when the priest by his sacramental authority brings about this miracle of transubstantiation, then Christ is made present upon the altar, body, soul, blood, and divinity.

And so, this is why Roman Catholics genuflect when they enter into the church, why there is the reservation of the host in a pyx, a ciborium, a monstrance, tabernacle, all sorts of different terms used for the various ways this can be done.

But the idea being that Christ is physically present with his people in the mass and that this is a perpetuatory sacrifice. Now, it is a perpetuatory sacrifice that does not perfect. And if we were to spend most of our time today talking about my primary objection to the Roman Catholic concept of transubstantiation and the mass as a Eucharistic sacrifice, that's what I would focus upon.

I would look at what the Bible actually teaches about the effect of the death of Christ and compare and contrast that with what Roman Catholicism teaches in regards to the mass. But leaving that aside, because there's just only so much time and so many things you can get to in one program, we want this to be understandable.

We want this to fit into some time frame that would be somewhat meaningful. It could take a while. We've been having some conversations with some folks about this on Twitter, and I don't know. I don't think 140 characters is really quite enough to do justice to all of the streams of thought and revelation and teaching and history that go into this particular subject.

But especially when I encounter Roman Catholic individuals who truly believe that this is one instance where we've got the Bible on our side, you non-Roman Catholics, you are clearly ignoring what the Bible is actually teaching here.

Well, when I encounter folks that really believe that, I want to have the opportunity to sit down and say, let's walk through this text together. Let's see what it's really talking about. Because unfortunately, the majority of citations by Roman Catholics come from the end of the chapter.

And the reality is this chapter is a single whole. There is a theme. Now, of course, chapter and verse divisions are a much later innovation. Chapters came along in the medieval period. The chapter and verse divisions we have today, not till the middle of the 16th century.

But still, in this instance, the chapter divisions that were added in later, fairly accurate at this point. Because chapter 6, even though it's rather long, does have a continuous theme to it. And unfortunately, if you jump to the end of the chapter, there's a grave danger of what's called eisegesis, reading into the text, something that would not have suggested itself to the original author or to the original audience to which these words were addressed.

And so we want to walk through this text and ask the question, what is being taught here? And in fact, when someone such as myself looks at John chapter 6 and look at Jesus saying, when he says, eating my flesh and drinking my blood, this has nothing to do with any kind of concept of transubstantiation, which is dependent upon the use of Aristotelian categories of philosophy that would have been completely unknown to the apostles and the original audience of John chapter 6.

When I say that, am I just simply trying to avoid the clear teaching of John chapter 6? Or is there a very clear teaching of John chapter 6? Let's look through the text. We will be displaying the text or at least attempting to display the text for you as we work through John chapter 6.

Now, because it is so long, if you will allow me to, let's just simply agree that at the beginning of the chapter, a tremendous miracle takes place in the feeding of the 5 ,000. And you have here Jesus demonstrating his lordship over the physical creation.

You have here the provision that the Son of God makes for those who are listening to his word. And yet we're going to discover that only a small percentage, a small number of those who are attending to the words of the Son of God are actually believers.

And so I'd actually like to pick up in verse 14, when after this great miracle, the teaching and the miracle that takes place, we read, therefore, when the people saw the sign which he had performed, they said, this is truly the prophet who is to come into the world.

And so there is a recognition on the part of the audience that Jesus is the prophet, the one coming into the world. Now, there's a lot of discussion we don't have time to get into today concerning what that would mean to them specifically.

There were all sorts of different messianic expectations at the time of Christ, some distinguished between the Messiah and the prophet and the forerunner. And there's all sorts of things we get into there that's not overly relevant to our purpose here.

But there is a positive reaction. There is a positive reaction seeing the sign which he performed, the sign being the feeding of the 5 ,000. So that concept of performing signs, very important in the gospel of John.

So notice in verse 15, so Jesus, knowing, or as the New American Standard says here, on the screen, by the way, we have on this side over here, we have the Greek text. Over here is the New American Standard Bible, if you're wondering which translation is there.

And there are times when I will not be looking at the NASB, I'll be translating the Greek. So there will be some differences, but I want to have it there because obviously, John chapter 6 was not written in English.

The English language did not exist when John chapter 6 was written. And so it's important to look at the original languages of the Bible when we're seeking, especially in the later verses, to get into some fairly in-depth exegesis, asking of the text what it actually meant in its original context, what's communicating to us today.

And so Jesus perceiving or knowing that they were about to or intending to come and to literally, it means to grasp him and to make him king. So to make him king by force, he withdrew again to the mountain by himself.

And so Jesus is not seeking to be made a king, he is not seeking to be put into a position of kingship or rulership through the actions of the people. His is a kingdom that has a very different character in nature than that which they have in mind.

But certainly, we can understand how people today, if someone has the ability to engage in the creation of food miraculously, here's someone who could be a great king. And so Jesus demonstrates that he has a knowledge, a knowledge of what's going on in the hearts and minds of these individuals.

And so he withdraws. He will not allow himself to be taken in by their particular plans. Now, when evening came, verse 16, his disciples went down to the sea and after getting into a boat, they started to cross the sea to Capernaum.

It had already become dark and Jesus had not yet come to them. So I would imagine that the disciples are somewhat at a loss here. Can you imagine their situation? Many of them do not yet fully understand Jesus' messianic purpose, his mission, the nature of his kingship.

And certainly, they must have been pretty excited because they probably heard some of the whispering about making him king. And if Jesus becomes king, then what about the rest of us? It means we're going to have a pretty good position here.

And right when the excitement seems to be the strongest, Jesus disappears. There must have been a certain level of disappointment and confusion on the part of the disciples at Jesus' reaction. This is probably for most of the disciples something they're really looking forward to.

I mean, we've been trudging these dusty roads all this time and well, now it's finally starting to pay off and people are starting to get excited and Jesus disappears. Right when maybe we've got 5 ,000 men, that's a good start.

And right then, Jesus withdraws to the mountain by himself alone. And so there's probably a little confusion and then some disappointment on their part as they see the crowds dissipating and dispersing.

So they don't really know what's going on. So as disciples went down to the sea, after getting into a boat, they started to cross the sea to Capernaum. It had already become dark and Jesus had not yet come to them.

The sea began to be stirred up because of a strong wind, because a strong wind was blowing. And there's lots of discussion about what happens on the Sea of Galilee and the weather phenomena that results in these types of storms and things like that.

Then when they had rowed about four or five stadia, three or four miles, they saw Jesus walking on the sea and drawing near to the boat and they were frightened. They were filled with fear. And that certainly is understandable.

Naturalists try to explain this that, well, actually they had drawn very close to the shore. And so Jesus was just walking along by the shore, but they didn't realize that. Or he was walking in the shallows and et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

But they wouldn't have been frightened by that. These were accomplished fishermen. They knew where they were and they knew what was going on here. And this is the second time in a 24-hour period they have seen a tremendous miracle where Jesus demonstrates his sovereignty over the created order, both in the creation of food from a small amount, now in walking upon the water.

And so Jesus says to them, Ego ai me, I am. A phrase that we don't have time to get into today, but especially in the Gospel of John, though it appears elsewhere, especially in the Gospel of John, there is a very significant utilization of this phrase that literally goes back to the divine name in the Old Testament.

And you can see that in John 8, 24, 8, 58, 13, 19, 18, 5 through 6, places like that in the Gospel of John. It is, I do not be afraid. So they were willing to receive him into the boat and immediately the boat was at the land to which they were going.

Now, when it says, and immediately the boat was there, is this another miracle? And it would probably seem to be because they had only gone a certain distance. And it could be, we don't want to read too much into it, it could just be that they had very smooth and quick sailing, the wind was behind them, but it actually seems to be more likely that what you have here is another miracle in the transportation of the boat to the land to which they were going.

And so John does not invest a whole lot of time in that particular story. He doesn't go into issues regarding Peter or any of these other things, but he does give us this information. And it is important, I think, to keep in mind that at the end of the chapter, instead of having 5 ,000 excited people, and that's just the men, there would have been many more than that, including women and children, having these large amounts of excited people, you have 12 confused disciples, one of whom is the devil.

And they have stood there watching, not only Jesus withdrawing in this early part of the chapter so they can't make him king, but now his teaching in the Synagogue Capernaum is going to be so difficult, so hard that the disciples, these other disciples, not 12, but these other disciples walk away.

And Jesus not only does not stop them, but as we're going to see, he keeps repeating the one thing that offends them. And I want you to be very careful that you don't assume that you what that one thing is.

A lot of people assume they know what it is, but we'll see what the text actually states when we get to it. And so, there is a lot here about the disciples and what they would have been experiencing and how it was important for Jesus to communicate to them.

We're not looking for numbers. We're not looking for large crowds. We're not trying to fill up former basketball arenas. There is something completely outside the realm of popularity and numbers that will determine the character and nature of my followers.

And that's what he's going to get into. And that's what he's going to teach in the Synagogue Capernaum, even though, as I've said many times, it seems in John chapter 6, Jesus founded the church shrinkage movement.

Not the church growth movement, but the church shrinkage movement, because he goes from 5 ,000 excited followers to 12 confused disciples. But that was his choice. He did this purposefully. It's very clear that it doesn't get to the end of chapter.

It's like, oh man, I guess I didn't think that through very well. No, this was exactly what he intended to accomplish, and he did it in the way that he intended to do so. So, verse 22, the next day the crowd stood on the other side of the sea.

The crowd that stood on the other side of the sea saw that there was no other small boat there except one, and that Jesus had not entered with his disciples into the boat, but that his disciples had gone away alone.

There came other small boats from Tiberias near to the place where they ate the bread after the Lord had given thanks. So, when the crowd saw that Jesus was not there nor his disciples, they themselves got into small boats and came to Capernaum.

And I think it's interesting to note, notice this last phrase here, seeking Jesus. So, especially in our day, where we live in a secular society, where it's hard to get a secular person to even try to show interest in spiritual things.

The danger for us is we see someone who shows an interest in spiritual things and we're just all over them. They just must be a true convert or whatever. We get to learn a lot from how Jesus responds to these individuals because they've rowed across a lake seeking him.

They are seeking Jesus. And the temptation for us is to think, wow, as long as somebody's doing that, this must be a demonstration of true and abiding faith and so on and so forth. It's not going to be the case.

These same disciples are going to walk away at the end of the chapter. They were seeking Jesus, but Jesus knows what they're really seeking. It says they're seeking Jesus, but once Jesus starts telling the truth about who he is and what is necessary to be a follower of his, all of a sudden they're no longer seeking Jesus.

So, we can learn a lot from that description that's given there. When they found him on the other side of the sea, they said to him, Rabbi, when did you get here? So, they're interested in how he got here.

Had he walked all the way? Nobody could walk all that distance. How could this be? Jesus is not interested in fulfilling their inquisitory. You are seeking me not because you saw the sign or signs, but because you ate of the bread and were filled.

So, Jesus goes to the reason why they are seeking after Jesus in understanding the signs. Obviously, throughout the Gospel of John, there's a lot of play on such words as hearing but not hearing, seeing but not seeing.

The blind man in John chapter 9, for example, hearing in John chapter 8. There's a lot of discussion of how there could be so many people who follow Jesus around and yet did not just understand but accept the message that was given to them.

So, Jesus goes directly to the issue and he says, I say to you, you are seeking me not because you saw signs but because you ate the bread and were filled. Do not work and that term work, it's nothing esoteric about it or spiritual about it in some strange way.

It means to put out effort. It's the standard word for working. Do not work for the food which perishes. Now, it's important that we start focusing in here now because we're starting to talk about food and Jesus is going to describe himself as food, as bread.

So, one of the fundamental truths of exegesis is, and this is true whether you're reading secular or religious literature, when an author begins to introduce a concept, then you take seriously the definitions that they offer and then you apply them later on.

You don't jump into any author's discussion three or four pages in and ignore where they have laid out their categories beforehand and then come up with your own categories and think you're actually accurately representing the person that you're reading.

Well, the same thing is true here. He's raised the issue of eating of the loaves and being filled. So, here's a discussion of food. It's coming into the discussion. Well, what kind of food? Well, we are not to work for the food which perishes.

So, the food that he had miraculously provided the day before, it perished. The people that ate that food did not live forever. They didn't glow the next day. If they had gone out and run a foot race, they wouldn't have necessarily beaten somebody else just because they happened to have some of the special loaves and fishes.

It was food which perishes. And he says, do not work for the food which perishes. And he's referring to that food because as he says, you ate of the loaves and were filled. But instead, work for the food which endures to eternal life which the son of man will give to you for on him the father, God, has set his seal.

And so, immediately, there is a distinction being drawn between physical things which perish and spiritual things which only find their origin, their source, where? Well, which the son of man will give to you.

So, there is a future tense idea here that the son of man in some way is going to give food which endures to eternal life. It does not perish. It endures to eternal life. And here he calls himself the son of man.

And he says that the father, even God, has set his seal upon the son of man. He has demonstrated that the son of man is who he claims to be. And that, of course, will even be made all the more clear in the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

So, therefore, they said to him, what shall we do in order that we might work the works of God? Jesus had raised the issue of working. Do not work for this. Instead, work for that. And so, they asked the question, what should we do that we might work the works of God?

And Jesus' response is rather straightforward. Jesus answered and said to them, this is the. Now, notice they used the plural. They said ta erga, the works of God. Jesus' response is to use a singular, ta ergon.

This is the work of God that you believe upon the one whom he sent. You believe upon the sent one. And so, Jesus does not give them a long list of things that they are to do. He does not give them a long list of penances or anything else.

He says, the work of God is that you believe upon him whom he has sent. This is the work of God. This is what all men are called to do is to believe in the one that God has sent. Well, it's easy for us who are accustomed to reading the scriptures to sort of pass by the amazing weight of what that would have meant, because Jesus is talking about himself.

He's identifying himself as the son of man. He's saying he's sent by God the Father. And you and I who are accustomed to reading scriptures, like, yeah, you know, we know who Jesus is. We've read the book of Revelation and we know how it all ends.

But what about in the day in which these words were spoken? These would have been amazing claims that were being made. And so, it's not overly difficult to understand why they then ask the question. So, they said to him, what, therefore, what do you do as a sign in order that we may see and that we may believe you?

What do you work? Or as the New American Standard says, what work do you perform? And so, they ask for a sign. If you're going to make such an amazing claim that the work of God is to believe in you, then what sign do you give?

What evidence do you give that you're the one in whom faith should be placed as the very work of God? And then they demonstrate that they had not stayed completely asleep during synagogue school. They say, our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, just as it is written, he gave them bread out of heaven to eat.

And so, they hearken back rightly to the fact that God had provided miraculous sustenance to the children of Israel in the wilderness in the manna. And so, if that's the case, that certainly was a sign from God of his favor upon the people of Israel.

It certainly was a sign that Moses was his chosen leader of the people of Israel. And so, if Jesus can provide special food, well, God had done that in the past. And is that the sign he's offering? And Jesus corrects their understanding in verse 32.

Jesus then said to them, truly, truly, I say to you, it was not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but my father who is giving you the true bread out of heaven. And so, he doesn't allow them to switch the context back to something that happened in the past.

And he corrects their idea, it wasn't Moses. It was God. And what God is doing now is on a different level than anything that has been done in the past. It is my father. And remember, John 6, this is gonna be a really deep observation here.

If you're sort of tuning out a little bit, this will undoubtedly refocus you. But John 6 comes after John 5. I went to seminary to learn that. Yeah. And what was in John 5? Well, Jesus made that amazing claim in John 5.

He talked about, I am working and my father is working. And he was doing that in the context of the Sabbath day. And so, the Jews understood that what he was claiming was divine prerogative. And the rest of John 5 is a description on Jesus' part of how he can truly be divine.

And yet, he has been sent by the father and how he is distinct from the father. And yet, everyone has to honor the son, even as they honor the father. And they have different roles in bringing about the redemption and so on and so forth.

It's deep Trinitarian revelation in John 5. And so, when Jesus says, my father, here in John 6, that needs to continue to have that same strong divine emphasis and the union of father and son that it did in chapter 5.

But now, it is my father who gives you the true bread out of heaven. And what is that true bread? Well, for the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven and gives life to the world. Think about, this is the bread of God.

The bread of God. Well, there's a fascinating description. You wouldn't call the manna the bread of God. It was just sustenance. It was provided by God. But this is the bread of God. And it comes down from heaven.

And I suppose you could say, in a sense, the manna did. But obviously, there's much more to it in the sense of coming down out of heaven. This is Jesus' claim as to where he has come from. This is one of the very reasons why so many liberals, whether Catholics or Protestants, reject the Gospel of John as actually reflecting Jesus' words or having any meaningful historical basis.

I just want you to understand, I reject all of that. I see absolutely no reason whatsoever to question the validity of the Gospel of John, simply because you're a naturalist. The Gospel of John wasn't written for naturalists.

And they'll never have any real understanding of what is being found in this particular Gospel. But the bread of God is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world. So, is this a temporary, perishable life?

Or is Jesus talking on a much broader spectrum than this? Well, I think as we continue on, we will see. And so, when he says this, verse 34, then they said to him, Lord, always give us this bread. I mean, wow.

The bread that comes down of heaven, it gives eternal life. This sounds great. Always give us this bread. And notice what it says. They say, Kuri, Lord. So, here you have people. This is very important now.

Here you have people. They've rowed across a lake. We can't get people to show up for church on time on Sundays or even regularly from week to week. They've rowed across a lake, and they're not arguing with Jesus, and they even call him Lord.

That's, man, in most churches, we're signing them up and putting them in positions of leadership, right then and there, right? But we're going to miss something very important if we don't see what's truly going on here.

Because they say, always give us this bread. They don't see the connection. They don't see what's going on. They don't see Jesus' identification of himself. And so, now it becomes very patent in verse 35.

Jesus said to them, and then again and again, it's Ego Aimi, I am the bread of life. I am the bread of life. So, everything that comes with this, this means he has come down out of heaven. He has been sent by the Father.

This isn't just some mere prophet. He is the prophet who is to come, but not just that. I say that especially for my Muslim friends who pick and choose which parts of these words they'll accept. I am the bread of life.

This is Jesus' claim that it's so easy for us to not see the tremendous weight of these words. Jesus says, I am the bread of life. No other prophet had ever said anything even remotely like this, nor could they have.

They never pointed themselves. But Jesus says things that absolutely demand our decision as to whether we're going to believe what he's saying. I am the bread of life. And when he makes that, he's identified himself as the bread of life or the living bread.

There's different ways in the genitive in the original language can be taken. The living bread or the bread of life. Then, my friends, this is key right here, especially to my Roman Catholic friends. Here we're talking about bread.

Later on, we're going to talk about eating his flesh and drinking his blood. And clearly, he being the bread of life is the whole reason why we would do this, right? Well, please note something. When he introduces this idea, when he introduces the idea of himself being the bread of life, makes it clear for everyone to understand.

He immediately says these words, the one coming to me will never hunger and the one believing in me will never thirst. So, here you have hungering and thirsting. And how is this hungering and thirsting in relationship to the bread of life satiated?

How is it avoided? How is it that you will never hunger? How is it you will never thirst? By eating physical bread? Drinking physical wine? No. What are the terms that are used? The one coming to me will not hunger.

The one believing in me will never thirst. Coming and believing. We're going to see those two terms put in parallel over the next number of verses. And the teaching that is presented to us will be very much about the very sovereign kingship of God in the matter of salvation.

But in the first place, we're hungering, thirsting, bread. They're all brought together. Jesus defines that the actions being involved are spiritual actions. Coming, believing, nothing about chewing, drinking, swallowing.

The distinction has already been made in regards to that which perishes over against that which does not. But here, the first place in any fair analysis of any written document, if you're going to follow the argument from beginning to end, right here, Jesus establishes the parameters of what he's talking about and that involves coming and believing.

This must be kept in mind. This must be kept in mind. Just as important is the next verse, verse 36. But I said to you that you have seen me and you are not believing. You're not believing. Now, again, think about what's going on here.

These men have walked into the synagogue. They rode across the lake. They want to hear Jesus' teaching. They call him Lord. They want to know what works they can do. They want the bread that comes down out of heaven.

And Jesus looks at them and says, you're unbelievers. You're not believing. You've seen me. You're not believing. Because what they were seeking after was the filling up of their belly. They're seeking physical food.

They did not understand that what Jesus provides is for that person who is spiritually hungry, spiritually thirsty, and he identifies them as unbelievers. You are not believing. That must have been a kick in the gut.

It's pretty abrupt, don't you think? But it's vitally important to realize that this statement must be kept in mind in regards to what Jesus is going to say after this. And it also explains why it is that they're going to walk away.

Yep, the very same men who rode across the lake, the very same men who then went to the synagogue at Capernaum, the very same men that called him Lord and what must we do, they walk away. And there's a reason for it.

There's a reason for it. And it's not because they're offended at ideas of cannibalism. There's another reason. And it's a reason, unfortunately, that's normally skipped over when people look at this text.

Because as soon as Jesus says, you have seen me and yet you do not believe, he says, all that the Father gives me will come to me. And the one coming to me, I will never cast out. I will never cast out.

Now, again, it's easy for us to skip over the reality of the fact that Jesus is saying some amazingly exalted things about himself. He is the focus of all of these things. He is the focus of the coming, the focus of the faith.

All that the Father gives me will come to me. Now, there can really be no question. There are two actions here. There is the giving of the Father, and then there is the coming to Jesus. What's the relationship between the two?

Man's religions, even religions that claim to be Christianity, man's religions, which are focused upon man's accomplishment, man's works, the idea that God makes salvation a general possibility, a general offering, and then sits back to see if anyone will take him up on his offer.

Man's religions will always hear these texts and emphasize the power of man over the power of God. But in the original language and logically in any reading of the text, the relationship of the two actions is very clear.

It is the giving by the Father that results in the coming of any individual to Jesus Christ. If anyone is coming to Christ, it is because they were given by the Father to the Son. The Father has the sovereign power, capacity, right, ability to give people to the Son.

And when he does so, the inevitable result, it says all, all that the Father gives me will come to me. Now, I just stop. I want to ask all of us, whether Roman Catholic or non, do we believe that? If you believe that Jesus tries to save but fails, then you don't believe this.

If you believe that the Father is trying to save everyone equally, but it's all up to man, so with some he succeeds and some he fails, all because of man's choice, then you don't believe this. All that the Father gives me will come to me.

That's Jesus' teaching. And yeah, it banishes every type of work salvation. It banishes every kind of salvific sacramentalism because it's all of the Father and the ability of the Son. And when we bring in the rest of Scripture, the applicatory work of the Holy Spirit, all the Father gives you will come to me.

And the one coming, and it's present tense, it's not the one who point action, briefly tips the hat toward God. No, it's the one coming. The one coming to me, I will, New American Standard says, certainly not cast out.

I translate as never cast out. It's a strong negative, and it's the strongest negative. It's not a possibility. I will never cast out the one coming to me. We like that part. We really love hearing that the one coming to Christ will always find him to be a perfect Savior, and he'll never cast him out.

And how many times have the saints of God down through the ages rejoiced in that promise? Because we know our own hearts. We know when we failed him. We know that the sin that we can fall into, and yet we have the promise.

The one coming to me, never cast him out. But that's the second half of a sentence. And when we ignore the first half of a sentence because we don't like what it teaches, and only the second half of the sentence because we do like what it teaches, we can't say that we're really being honest with the text at that point.

And so, the one coming to me does so, why? Because he's been given by the Father to the Son. So, my continuous present tense coming to the Son is because of something that the Father has done. This is the vast chasm that separates man-centered religion from God-centered religion.