Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: ADSUM
Many read the same passage and understand that it is not literal...

6:53–54 This is the fourth and last of Jesus’ strong prefaces in this discourse (cf. vv. 26, 32, 47). It should be obvious to any readers of this discourse by now that Jesus was speaking metaphorically and not literally. By referring to His flesh and blood He was figuratively referring to His whole person. This is a figure of speech called synecdoche in which one part stands for the whole. Jesus was illustrating belief, what it means to appropriate Him by faith (v. 40). He expressed the same truth negatively (v. 53) and then positively (v. 54a). He referred again to resurrection because it is the inauguration of immortal eternal life (cf. vv. 39, 40, 44).

Jesus was again stressing His identity as the revealer of God with the title “Son of Man.” Blood in the Old Testament represented violent death primarily. Thus Jesus was hinting that He would die violently. He connected the importance of belief in Him with His atoning death. The idea of eating blood was repulsive to the Jews (cf. Lev. 3:17; 17:10–14). Jesus’ hearers should have understood that He was speaking metaphorically, but this reference offended many of them (vv. 60–61).

Many interpreters of these verses have seen allusions to the Lord’s Supper in what Jesus said. Sacramentalists among them find support here for their belief that participation in the eucharist is essential for salvation. However, Jesus had not yet said anything about the Christian communion service. Moreover He was clearly speaking of belief metaphorically, not the communion elements. Most important, the New Testament presents the Lord’s Supper as a commemoration of Jesus’ death, not a vehicle for obtaining eternal life. Nevertheless these verses help us appreciate the symbolism of the eucharist.

Constable, T. (2003). Tom Constable’s Expository Notes on the Bible (Jn 6:53).


1,191 posted on 01/27/2015 6:07:41 PM PST by aMorePerfectUnion ( "I didn't leave the Central Oligarchy Party. It left me." - Ronaldus Maximus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1188 | View Replies ]


To: aMorePerfectUnion

You may believe whatever you like, but you still choose to ignore the clear words of Jesus. This is just a personal opinion that the Words of Jesus were not meant literally.

Then why did Jesus repeat it and not explain that it was not literal?

Why did Jesus say “Do this in Memory of Me” at the Last Supper as Catholics celebrate the Eucharist at Mass?

Why did Luther believe in the “Real Presence”?

I am sure that Satan would accept this alternate explanation so that one does not receive the gift and grace of Christ’s Body and Blood. Satan certainly does not want us to gain salvation.


1,209 posted on 01/27/2015 6:52:52 PM PST by ADSUM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1191 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson