Jesus did not just fail to correct the crowd, He became even more emphatic. He wanted His listeners to take His words literally. And unless you want to say that Jesus deliberately mislead them, you have to accept that this is the correct understanding of what Jesus said.
Jesus did not always explain the parables to His Apostles.
But this is the only time that Jesus challenged His Apostles. Many of His disciples left because they understood our Lord's words literally. Jesus then challenges His Apostles over precisely this understanding of His words.
No. Go back to the beginning of the passage. Jesus is talking about believing in Him.
No, the controversy is over His demand that they must eat His Body and drink His Blood. And this is the point in which the disciples refused to believe in Him. To believe in Jesus is not just to accept that He is our Savior, but also to believe and accept all that He taught us, including the need to eat His Body and drink His Blood which He calls real food and real drink.
IF this was essential to faith, as you are saying that it is His literal flesh and blood, He did not convey this to:
Nicodemus
John's disciples
The woman at the well
The Samaritans
The royal official with the sick son
more unbelieving Jews.
All of these were prior to the Bread of Life Discourse.
IF as you say we have to literally eat/drink His flesh and blood for salvation then Jesus omitted this in His conversation with these other people
So He waited until the Bread of Life Discourse. Similarly he told Peter, James and John not to tell anyone about the Transfiguration until after He had been raised from the dead. God reveals His truths in His own time, not yours.
But what He did talk about was believing in Him.
To believe in Him is to believe in what He taught, i.e., that we must eat His Body and drink His Blood.
I always find it interesting that IF as you claim, we have to eat/drink the literal flesh and blood, why at the Passover meals did not Jesus prick His finger and allow the disciples to actually drink His literal blood?
At the Cross there is no record of anyone attempting to catch drops of His blood to drink later.
When they took Him down from the Cross....why did they not carve out pieces of His flesh....IF as you claim, we have to literally eat/drink His flesh? That would have been the time to do it....for it was the last time available.
Why not?
Nonsense! You are being absurd. At the Last Supper Jesus showed that the way that we are to eat His Body and Drink his Blood is through the bread and wind made into His Body and Blood. I should also point out that, although they do not share our belief in Transubstantiation, the Lutherans also believe in the Real Presence and that it is indeed the Body and Blood of our Lord that is consumed with the bread and wine. I guess sola Scriptura is not enough to settle this question even among the Protestants.
Recall in this passage it is the unbelieving Jews who are thinking as the Roman Catholic does....that He is referring to literal flesh/blood.
Rather it is the unbelieving Jews who refused to accept that we must eat His Body and drink His Blood as our Lord taught. If Jesus had simply said that it was just a metaphor they would have stayed. Why would Jesus purposely mislead them by His emphatic language and let them leave over a misunderstanding?
Jesus talked to a lot of people who walked away from Him. The rich young ruler is an example.
18A ruler questioned Him, saying, “Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” 19And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good except God alone. 20“You know the commandments, ‘DO NOT COMMIT ADULTERY, DO NOT MURDER, DO NOT STEAL, DO NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS, HONOR YOUR FATHER AND MOTHER.’” 21And he said, “All these things I have kept from my youth.” 22When Jesus heard this, He said to him, “One thing you still lack; sell all that you possess and distribute it to the poor, and you shall have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.” 23But when he had heard these things, he became very sad, for he was extremely rich. Luke 18:18-23
Did Jesus mislead the ruler?
Why didn't He follow after Him?
*****
But this is the only time that Jesus challenged His Apostles.
Nope. Get behind Me, Satan is a pretty stinging challenge and rebuke.
But that's not the only time.
*****
Seems like the disciples got taken to the spiritual woodshed a number of times!
*****
5The apostles said to the Lord, “Increase our faith!” 6And the Lord said, “If you had faith like a mustard seed, you would say to this mulberry tree, ‘Be uprooted and be planted in the sea’; and it would obey you. Luke 17:5-6
*****
14And they had forgotten to take bread, and did not have more than one loaf in the boat with them. 15And He was giving orders to them, saying, “Watch out! Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod.” 16They began to discuss with one another the fact that they had no bread.
17And Jesus, aware of this, said to them, “Why do you discuss the fact that you have no bread? Do you not yet see or understand? Do you have a hardened heart? 18“HAVING EYES, DO YOU NOT SEE? AND HAVING EARS, DO YOU NOT HEAR? And do you not remember,
19when I broke the five loaves for the five thousand, how many baskets full of broken pieces you picked up?” They said to Him, “Twelve.” 20“When I broke the seven for the four thousand, how many large baskets full of broken pieces did you pick up?” And they said to Him, “Seven.” 21And He was saying to them, “Do you not yet understand?” Mark 8:14-21
46An argument started among them as to which of them might be the greatest. 47But Jesus, knowing what they were thinking in their heart, took a child and stood him by His side, 48and said to them, “Whoever receives this child in My name receives Me, and whoever receives Me receives Him who sent Me; for the one who is least among all of you, this is the one who is great.”
49John answered and said, “Master, we saw someone casting out demons in Your name; and we tried to prevent him because he does not follow along with us.” 50But Jesus said to him, “Do not hinder him; for he who is not against you is for you.”
51When the days were approaching for His ascension, He was determined to go to Jerusalem; 52and He sent messengers on ahead of Him, and they went and entered a village of the Samaritans to make arrangements for Him. 53But they did not receive Him, because He was traveling toward Jerusalem. 54When His disciples James and John saw this, they said, “Lord, do You want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them?” 55But He turned and rebuked them, [and said, “You do not know what kind of spirit you are of; 56for the Son of Man did not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.”] And they went on to another village. Luke 9:46-56
*****
14Afterward He appeared to the eleven themselves as they were reclining at the table; and He reproached them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they had not believed those who had seen Him after He had risen. 15And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation.
16“He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned [notice what He did not say....nothing about eating/drinking flesh/blood....but about believing]. Mark 16:14-16
*****
17When he had left the crowd and entered the house, His disciples questioned Him about the parable. 18And He said to them, “Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him, Mark 7:17-18
At the Cross there is no record of anyone attempting to catch drops of His blood to drink later.
When they took Him down from the Cross....why did they not carve out pieces of His flesh....IF as you claim, we have to literally eat/drink His flesh? That would have been the time to do it....for it was the last time available.
Why not?
*****
Nonsense! You are being absurd. At the Last Supper Jesus showed that the way that we are to eat His Body and Drink his Blood is through the bread and wind made into His Body and Blood. I should also point out that, although they do not share our belief in Transubstantiation, the Lutherans also believe in the Real Presence and that it is indeed the Body and Blood of our Lord that is consumed with the bread and wine. I guess sola Scriptura is not enough to settle this question even among the Protestants.
Absurd? Hardly. Simply illustrating the wrongness of the RC position.
As I say....IF the disciples understood His words as Romans claim they would have wanted His real blood and flesh.
I mean we have Roman Catholics claiming to have relics from this saint or that saint because they believe they contain healing powers....some have even claimed pieces of the actual cross.
Why wouldn't they want His real flesh and blood.
Because they understood He was talking about believing in Him.
That is the message of the Gospel.
That is the message of the New Testament.
That is the message of Christianity.
So He waited until the Bread of Life Discourse. Similarly he told Peter, James and John not to tell anyone about the Transfiguration until after He had been raised from the dead. God reveals His truths in His own time, not yours.
The Mt of Transfiguration does not involve a discussion of eternal life.
All of those other examples did.
Early in His ministry Jesus made it clear about the necessity of having faith in Him for eternal life. It was His consistent message throughout His ministry.
IF one reads the NT in context this is crystal clear.