A passage in which many struggle

[The Biblicist]

Strawman argument number 1.

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.

 

[psalms109:31]

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.

 

[Robert Snow]

Knowing Greek does not make a person correct. Greek scholars disagree among themselves all the time, so knowing Greek proves nothing.

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.

 

[agedman]

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.

Robert, why isn't the same standard applied to the non-cal?

Could your statement not be just as correct if it read, "The only thing worse than a non-cal is a non-cal who uses their limited Greek knowledge to attempt to discredit God's word."?

BTW, The KJV and the NASB are basically identical in translation of the passages of the OP that are argued on this thread, as I show below:

KJV:

29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
​

NASB:

29 Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.”
​

KJV:

38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
​

NASB:

38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 39 This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. 40 For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.”
​

I am not certain what concern you are attempting to relay in your post.

Perhaps it is that you prefer the KJV.

 

[Van]

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.

 

[MB]

It is no secret that on the BB many discussions deteriorate into a view that involves either "free will / choice" or total inability.

There is a section of Scriptures in which Christ states EXACTLY who will and will not be saved as well as the security of those that believe.

There are other Scriptures that bear witness, but those of John 6 are so plainly stated that it remains inarguable.

John 6:

28 Therefore they said to Him, “What shall we do, so that we may work the works of God?” 29 Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.”30 So they said to Him, “What then do You do for a sign, so that we may see, and believe You? What work do You perform? 31 Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, ‘He gave them bread out of heaven to eat.’” 32 Jesus then said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread out of heaven, but it is My Father who gives you the true bread out of heaven. 33 For the bread of God is [i]that which comes down out of heaven, and gives life to the world.” 34 Then they said to Him, “Lord, always give us this bread.” 35Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst. 36 But I said to you that you have seen Me, and yet do not believe. 37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out. 38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me.39 This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. 40 For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.”
41 Therefore the Jews were grumbling about Him, because He said, “I am the bread that came down out of heaven.” 42 They were saying, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does He now say, ‘I have come down out of heaven’?” 43 Jesus answered and said to them, “Do not grumble among yourselves. 44 No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.45 It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught of God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me. 46 Not that anyone has seen the Father, except the One who is from God; He has seen the Father. 47 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.” 52 Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” 53 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. 54 He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55 For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. 56 He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also will live because of Me. 58 This is the bread which came down out of heaven; not as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever.”
​

Does ANY not read that belief is the work of God?

Does anyone miss that some will see (even read, hear...) the Word (Christ) and NOT believe?

Does anyone not see that Christ was contrasting those who do not believe with those that DO believe is decreed NOT by human effort but by the very WILL of God ("This is the will of Him who sent me...").

Does anyone not take it as factual "...that everyone (NOT ANYONE) that beholds the Son and believes in Him WILL have eternal life...?"

I cannot find even the slightest hint of human capacity to accept, reject or any other current indicators of "free will / choice" exist in this passage from John. In fact, I see this passage as a TOTAL refutation of such thinking.

Frankly, I am rather weary of those who want to bolster some kind of human made up view in order to water down the decrees of God.

"NO MAN comes to me unless the Father who sent Me draws him" does NOT include humankind ability in any manner.

God draws; Jesus saves.

Because whom God draws WILL believe.

There is no freedom of choice / will as some on the BB have continually argued for in plain refutation of the very Word of God.

It is no wonder that the end of such a human involvement view is that salvation must be held on to under human effort and cannot ultimately be assured.

Certainly, there are those of the BB who would make much of the adoption of some principle such as OSAS.

But, upon what is that hope based when they put human involvement into the salvation from the beginning.

ONLY those given to Christ by God WILL come in belief.

NONE others are invited.

You may not like that message, but if you deny it, you set yourself against the very words of Christ.

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

 

[agedman]

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.

John records Christ's words as, "This is the work of the father,..."

Van records Christ's words as, "This is the work the father requires,..."


Please folks note - the word "requires" does not occur in the original language but is obliged by Van's view.

He makes all the much that those who disagree with him are wrong, that they have to twist Scripture and all the rest of the typical non-cal rhetoric against Calvinistic thinking.

But here is clear evidence that indicates just which side takes the Scriptures as literal.

No other comparison needs to be made beyond this single point.

I trust that all who read will actually look at the Scriptures (especially any that parallel the Greek with the English) and see for them self which view is actually adding, twisting, scheming, ... the literal interpretation.

 

[agedman]

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

MB,

I am not certain that you have read through this thread and not just taken the OP and jumped into it many pages later.

That some reject that proof is their right and privilege, but for you to blanket discredit the OP without any substance is merely reactionary.

Perhaps you will set your eyes upon the original language and bring clarification to the topic that has somehow been missed by others who have looked into it.

However, IF you are going to support a view that God "requires" some work of man, then you are obliged to demonstrate how the original language of "This is the work of God," should be translated, "This is the work God requires of humankind."

If you can't find that in the original language - then the OP stands as accurate.

 

[Van]

Pitchback

John records Christ's words as, "This is the work of the father,..."

Van records Christ's words as, "This is the work the father requires,..."

Please folks note - the word "requires" does not occur in the original language but is obliged by Van's view.

He makes all the much that those who disagree with him are wrong, that they have to twist Scripture and all the rest of the typical non-cal rhetoric against Calvinistic thinking.

But here is clear evidence that indicates just which side takes the Scriptures as literal.

No other comparison needs to be made beyond this single point.

I trust that all who read will actually look at the Scriptures (especially any that parallel the Greek with the English) and see for them self which view is actually adding, twisting, scheming, ... the literal interpretation.

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.

 

[agedman]

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.

The use of "for" and "require" are not found in proper translations that are true to the original.

Those are added words which modify the meaning to what some would desire - for it fits the scheme of the held view of the translator.

But, as you see, the pure rendering doesn't support such desire.

"This is the work of God,..." can not be rendered in any other manner unless great reliance upon some human generated view is placed as superior to the literalness of God's word.

All such views when not taking as literal these five words ultimately must deny, add or manipulate what Christ presented as "This is the work of God."

 

[percho]

The use of "for" and "require" are not found in proper translations that are true to the original.

Those are added words which modify the meaning to what some would desire - for it fits the scheme of the held view of the translator.

But, as you see, the pure rendering doesn't support such desire.

"This is the work of God,..." can not be rendered in any other manner unless great reliance upon some human generated view is placed as superior to the literalness of God's word.

All such views when not taking as literal these five words ultimately must deny, add or manipulate what Christ presented as "This is the work of God."

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 Biblicist]

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.

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.

 

[psalms109:31]

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.

 

[Van]

The use of "for" and "require" are not found in proper translations that are true to the original.

Those are added words which modify the meaning to what some would desire - for it fits the scheme of the held view of the translator.

But, as you see, the pure rendering doesn't support such desire.

"This is the work of God,..." can not be rendered in any other manner unless great reliance upon some human generated view is placed as superior to the literalness of God's word.

All such views when not taking as literal these five words ultimately must deny, add or manipulate what Christ presented as "This is the work of God."

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.

 

[Van]

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.

 

[agedman]

Lets summarize a little.

Not a problem - however the folks need to know this is a summery of YOUR view and not what is perhaps aligned appropriately with Scripture.

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.

This is your opinion and not what the original language states.

BTW, the NET on the web (HERE) has little pop up window giving the exact translation - guess what - it is, "This is the work of God," NOT some requirement of God demands of humankind to achieve and perform or in any manner self generated out of human volition.

The translation would indicate that the requirement of "belief" is the difference between those who relied upon the work(s) of the law for righteousness and those who are actually righteous.

That in the context such belief is not self generated but God imparted to specific folk. That is why some heard and believed and some having both eyes and ears did not believe.

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

agreed

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

But look how you reversed the order of the Scriptures to achieve compliance with your view!

The Scripture statement is NOT a flow from human then God then Christ.

Look at the exact words of Christ:

36 "But I said to you that you have seen Me, and yet do not believe. 37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out. 38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 39 This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. 40 For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.”
​

Do you not clearly see that the flow is God to Christ to humankind?


Van, as you said, "No amount of strawman arguments will alter this obvious truth."

 

[The Biblicist]

Lets summarize a little.

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!