Featured A passage in which many struggle

Your interpretation is rediculous but it is your only escape from the obvious true iinterpretation and so you throw out all common sense and cling to it. So, let's begin with the abc's and work ourselves to the correct interpretation.

1. John 6:35 demands that "cometh to me" in regard to Christ as the "bread of life" metaphorically equals satisfying ones hunger "shall never hunger."

35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.

So the question is how does bread satisfy ones hunger EXCEPT BY EATING IT. Literal Eating it is the implication of the context to satsify literal hunger and sustain literal life:

31 Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.
32 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.
33 For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.
34 Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread.

LITERAL APPLICATION:

1. The Father literally gave literal bread which had to be literally eaten. Eating it is what satisfied hunger and sustained physical life.

2. Giving bread by the Father preceded eating or partaking of that bread or else there could be no bread to eat.

3. The act of Eating satisfied hunger and sustained life.

METAPHORICAL APPLICATION

1. The Father gives this metaphorical bread - which is Christ
2. Coming to Christ satisfies spirtual hunger and sustains spiritual life
3. Metaphorical eating of Christ equals coming to Christ

No one can logically or scriptural repudiate the parallel between the literal with the metaphorical application spelled out thus far. COMING TO CHRIST equals PARTAKING OF CHRIST OR EATING HIM because only EATING/PARTAKING satisfies hunger and sustains life. If one does not EAT of Christ there is no satisfaction of hunger and no spiritual life:


48 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.
52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?
53 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.

Note that Christ provides an exact parallel between the literal manna given by God and the metaphorical manna given by God.

1. Given
2. Eating satisfies hunger and sustains eternal life

COMING equals SATIFYING OF HUNGER and SUSTAINING LIFE which occurs BY EATING (partaking of). Eating and drinking (PARTAKING) is contextually defined as believing in him:

47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.
48 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.
52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?
53 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.

1. He states the literal first in verse 48 - beleving is what obtains eternal life
2. He states the metaphorical in verses 49-54 - eating and drinking is what obtains eternal life.
3. Hence, metaphorical "eating" and "drinking" EQUALS believing on him


31 Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.
32 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.
33 For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.
34 Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread.
35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.

1. he states the literal first in verse 31-32 where eating satisfied their hunger and sustained physical life.
2. he sates the metaphorical in verses 33-35 where metaphorial eating is implied from the literal in verses 31-32 which satisfies hunger and obtain eternal life.
3. In verse 35 - coming to him is eating him which satisfies hunger and obtains eternal life and eating him is equal to beleiving in him or partaking of him by faith (v. 48).

The only possible way you can deny the above evidence is simply to refuse to accept the evidence. The only possible alternative you have to accepting the evidence is an attempt to create confusion and hope the readers can't see the obvious.

 

Jesus word is Spirit and life that came down from heaven.

If you never hear His word you have nothing to eat so listening and learning from Him is how we eat Christ. So through that we find the rest for our souls. That is why our faith comes from the words of Christ and the word concerning Him. If we turn away from Christ we turn away from life. Jesus is our life.

James 1:18
He chose to give us birth through the word of truth, that we might be a kind of firstfruits of all he created.

It is ridiculous to believe we are regenerated before we eat. We live because we eat.

The first thing we are lead to do is eat and then to say we have life. If you don't eat you have no life.

To repent turn to God through Jesus Christ. Jesus came to save sinners and I am the worst is the Gospel message.

 

I don't speak Greek, but I do read and speak English. Therefore I will stay with the Bible in English, the KJV. The only thing worse than a Calvinist is a Calvinist who uses their limited Greek knowledge to attempt to discredit God's Word.

 

Folks, note how hard the Calvinists work to change the subject. John 6:29 clearly teaches the lost must believe in Christ, that is the work God requires. This is evident not only from the context, John 6:28-30, but also from the grammar, an objective genitive according to Dr. Daniel B. Wallace, author of Beyond the Basics Greek Grammar.

Next, John 6:37 refers to being given to Christ, as being placed in Christ, and therefore will not be cast out. The Calvinism fiction is that being given to Christ means being changed by "irresistible grace" so that a person is compelled to "willingly" come by faith to Christ. Note one single verse supports this complete invention of men. Not one.

However, many verses teach God sets people apart in Christ, puts them in Christ, baptizes them into Christ and on and on. Therefore to be given to Christ for salvation means to be set apart in Christ. It is an absolute lock. Thus Calvinism, while trying to rewrite the verse, charges non-Cals with trying to alter the text. LOL

Agedman has made one mistaken argument after another in this thread, trying to pour Calvinism into the text, but Calvinism cannot be found in any text.

In post #164 he attempts to justify the malfeasance of Calvinism by claiming non-Calvinists are guilty of the same thing. This is a falsehood of Satan, Christ says we are to compare ourselves to Christ, not to another man's servants, i.e. others who believe they are serving Christ.

Next we get the argument "work of God" could only mean work God does, again. Twaddle. Work of God could mean work God does or work God requires. Calvinism must deny this obvious truth.

Lets compare the two ways of understanding John 6:35: Jesus said to them, I am the bread of [eternal] life, he who comes to Me [he who is altered by irresistible grace such that they are compelled to willingly come by faith to Me OR he who is given to Me]will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst. The only thing that "demands" the ridiculous eisegsis of irresistible grace is Calvinism, not the context. The context is presenting two things, (1) you must believe, and (2) God must give you to Christ. If both occur, then (1) Christ will not cast you out of being given and therefore placed in Christ, and (2) Christ will raise you up on the last day.

 

It seems the other way around. You must be struggling with it because, according to what you claim about it is dead wrong. You're trying to claim this is what the whole of scripture says about us being saved. Actually the Bible also says that all will be drawn to Christ. Jn 12:32. Then here you come with your twisted understanding trying to make it a particular choice of God of who gets to be saved and who is sent in to destruction. The truth is it is you who has set your self against the words of Christ.
MB

 

Pitchback

I am perfectly happy with the NASB translation, this is the work of God, which means this is the work for God, the work God requires.

It is Calvinism which ignores the grammar, and the context, and makes the mistaken claim work of God means word God does.

 

I agree with you.

Paul was going down the road ignorant in unbelief. God through his Son Jesus went to work and called Paul from unbelief into belief.

The Work of God.

 

The above evidence has been ridiculed, made fun of, but no one yet has attempted to deal with it on a contextual basis to provide contextual data that my assertions and interpretations are incorrect.

So, I will just ignore the ridicule and assume the evidence cannot be overturned until SUBSTANCE is provided to demonstrate that.

 

I like showing the positive way to but we also need to know the negative


The work of Jesus does not always go like Paul. I think through Stephen God was already working on Saul who we know as Paul. What Jesus said really did the job what was already working on Paul. Why are you persecuting me. When someone shows who you are like Stephen did the first action is anger and unbelief.

The work that Jesus did on the young rich ruler did not work the young rich ruler did not follow Jesus as Jesus called him to do. Why, because the young rich ruler did not listen and learn from Jesus to see his sin through the work of Jesus the young rich ruler covetousness.

What do you have that is more important than turning to God through Jesus Christ and live. God would rather you to repent and live.

 

Again, if you cannot address my view, why post. I have no interest addressing your strawman arguments. work of God is accurate but ambiguous. work God does or work God requires are clear but opposites. Because of the context, work God requires is the correct understanding of the text.

You can claim an objective genitive cannot be translated as an objective genitive till the cows come home. Dr. Daniel Wallace sees it differently.

 

Lets summarize a little.

The context of John 6:28-30 drives the decision as to whether the "work of God" is a subjective genitive (work God does)or an objective genitive (work God requires) to the conclusion it is work God requires, thus answering the question, what must we do.

John 6:31-35 present Christ as the bread of [eternal] life, and compares Him to the manna from God providing temporal life.

John 6:36-40 present the work God requires, believe in Him and then what God does, gives the person to Christ.

No amount of strawman arguments will alter this obvious truth.

 

You were doing fine until you made this last rediculous conclusion? It is easy, very easy to show it is rediculous. Verse 36 declares unbelief not belief, therefore, the only work of man in verse 36 is. unbelief. That is the work of the unregeneated nature (Rom. 8:7).

However, I dare you to find any work of man in verses 37-39 and verse 37-39 precede verse 40 as cause precedes consequences. It is the work of God and only the work of God that is the subject of verses 37-39 in response to the work of man in verse 36.

Note the closing statement in verse 39 to the work of God which is the same closing statement to verse 40. The cause of this closing statement when and where it is first introduced in verse 39 is not the work of man but the work of God. So simple, so clear!