Apologetics for the Masses #422: Refuting GotQuestions.org (Part 3)

Unsubscribe/Subscribe

http://www.biblechristiansociety.com/newsletter/unsubscribe - to unsubscribe from this newsletter

http://www.biblechristiansociety.com/newsletter - to subscribe to this newsletter

Topic

The Protestant website - GotQuestions.org - and John 6:51 (Part 8).

General Comments

Hey folks,

A couple of things:

1) For those of you in the Birmingham area, I will be giving a 4-part series on "How to Explain and Defend the Faith" at the Cathedral of St. Paul, beginning on Wednesday, June 8th, and continuing every other Wednesday after that, through July 20th. The talks will be in the parish life center from 11:00 - 11:45 AM each time. I would love to have as many of you there as can make it, so mark your calendars...

June 8: Call No Man Father: Common Sense Strategies for Evangelization and Apologetics

June 22: Opening the Cage Door: Questions Protestants Can't Answer

July 6: Whose Bible Is It? Verses Versus Verses

July 20: Sin, Salvation, and Scripture

2) Also, if you are into t-shirts with a message, check out this website...these guys produce some awesome t-shirts: Beautiful Catholic Tees For The Whole Family – Romantic Catholic

Introduction

Continuing with my analysis of the response from Sally at GotQuestions.org, to my repeated question about John 6:51. Specifically, in this issue, I will look at reasons #5-7 of her "Seven Convincing Reasons" for why John 6:51 "must be taken figuratively".

Challenge/Response/Strategy

Sally - GotQuestions.Org

"Seven Convincing Reasons" why John 6:51-59 passage "must be taken figuratively" (cont'd)

5) Figurative In Old Testament

The Jews were familiar with "eating and drinking" being used figuratively in the Old Testament to describe the appropriation of divine blessings to one's innermost being. It was God's way of providing spiritual nourishment for the soul. (See Jeremiah 15:16; Isaiah 55:1-3; and Ezekiel 2:8,3:1)

John's Response

Sally, this "Convincing Reason" actually works against your overall argument. First of all, the passages you reference regarding "eating and drinking being used figuratively in the Old Testament to describe the appropriation of divine blessings to one's innermost being," do not speak of eating flesh and drinking blood. The passages cited from Isaiah and Jeremiah are talking about, essentially, hearing the Word of God. Isaiah 55:3, "Incline your ear and come to me; hear, that your soul may live." Jeremiah 15:16, "Thy words were found and I ate them, and thy words became to me a joy and the delight of my heart." There is nothing in either of those passages as explicit and unambiguous as we find in John 6:51-58 about eating flesh (food indeed), and drinking blood (drink indeed). The passage from Ezekiel, though, is very explicit and unambiguous, but it is about God giving Ezekiel a scroll to eat that he may then go and preach the words written on the scroll to the Israelites. Again, nothing about eating flesh and drinking blood.
Secondly, and this is the main point I want to make here, and why I said you are actually arguing against yourself with this point, is that if the Jews were so familiar with "eating and drinking" being used figuratively to "describe the appropriation of divine blessings," and that is indeed what Jesus was saying, then why the heck did every single person who heard Him say these words take Him literally instead of figuratively?! If Jesus was simply using symbolic/figurative language to describe eating and drinking spiritual blessings for oneself, and the Jews were all "familiar" with such language being used in that way, then why did they get so upset? Why did His own disciples walk away? Did they all forget how "familiar" they were with such language? If that's what He was doing, then the reaction of the people hearing Him on that day makes no sense, whatsoever...none!

Finally, there are some passages in the O.T. that symbolically speak of eating people as eating bread, and one specifically about eating flesh, but in each of those passages, the symbolic language is used to convey something very bad. Psalm 14:4, "Have they no knowledge, all the evildoers who eat up my people as they eat bread and do not call upon the Lord?" Psalm 53:4, "Have those who work evil no understanding, who eat up my people as they eat bread, and do not call upon God?" Micah 3:1-3, "Is it not for you to know justice? You who hate the good and love the evil, who tear the skin from off my people and their flesh from off their bones; who eat the flesh of my people, and flay their skin from off them and break their bones in pieces, and chop them up like meat in a kettle, like flesh in a caldron." So, if Jesus was using the terms "eat My flesh" and "drink My blood" in a symbolic manner, then He would have been conveying something very bad, as opposed to some sort of "appropriation of divine blessings".

So, again, your Reason #5 actually works in favor of a literal interpretation of John 6:51-58, not a spiritual interpretation.

6) Jesus Confirmed

Jesus informed His disciples there were times when He spoke figuratively (John 16:25) and often used that type of language to describe Himself. The Gospel of John records seven figurative declarations Jesus made of Himself -- "the bread of life" (6:48), "the light of the world" (8:12), "the door" (10:9), "the good shepherd" (10:11), "the resurrection and the life" (11:25), "the way, the truth and the life" (14:6), and "the true vine" (15:1). He also referred to His body as the temple (2:19).

John's Response

Again, this "Convincing Reason" is more convincing when used to argue for a literal interpretation of John 6:51-58. Here's why: Jesus did indeed "[inform] His disciples there were times when He spoke figuratively," as He did in John 16:25. But, He did not so inform them in John 6. And, He did indeed often use "that type of language to describe Himself." And, when He used that language, never did they so badly misunderstand Him that they walked away from Him. Or, it was quite obvious that they knew He was talking figuratively. When Jesus said He was a door, did Peter say, "Lord, you're not made out of wood, so how can this be?" Or, when He said He was a vine, did James say, "But, Lord, you have no roots in the ground, how can this be?" Do we see anywhere else in the Gospels where the disciples walked away because it was a "hard saying" when they heard Jesus say He was a door, or the sheepgate, or a vine, or any other such figurative sayings? No! Why not? Because they knew He was speaking figuratively. Not so in John 6.

Furthermore, I would argue that a lot of what you call "figurative language" is not at all figurative. Jesus is indeed, literally, the good shepherd. He is indeed, literally, the Truth. He is indeed, literally, the light of the world - "And the city has no need of sun or moon to shine upon it, for the glory of God is its light..." (Rev 21:23). He is indeed, literally, the resurrection and the life. And, when He referred to His body as the temple (John 2:19), John explains to us what He meant...that He was speaking of His body. No similar explanation in John 6. And, in pretty much all the other places where His disciples did not understand Him, or misunderstood Him, either He went to them and explained what He was talking about, or they came to Him and asked Him to explain what He meant. We see that a dozen or so times just in the Gospel of Matthew - Matt 13:10,18; Matt 13:24-36; Matt 15:15; Matthew 17:10,19 and I could go on.

But, in John 6:51-58, did Jesus go to His disciples to explain that what He was saying was merely figurative? No. Did the disciples come to Him and ask Him to explain what He was talking about? No. Did the gospel writer say something along the lines of, "Jesus was referring to people believing in Him?" No. None of that happened in John 6:51-58. Why? Because they all knew He was speaking literally. They didn't understand how what He was saying could be true, but they all understood Him to be speaking literally.

7) Words Were Spiritual

Jesus ended this teaching by revealing "the words I have spoken to you are spirit" (6:63). As with each of the seven miracles in John's Gospel, Jesus uses the miracle to convey a spiritual truth. Here Jesus has just multiplied the loaves and fish and uses a human analogy to teach the necessity of spiritual nourishment. This is consistent with His teaching on how we are to worship God. "God is Spirit and His worshippers must worship in spirit and in truth" (John 4:24). As we worship Christ, He is present spiritually, not physically. In fact, Jesus can only be bodily present at one place at one time. His omnipresence refers only to His spirit. It is impossible for Christ to be bodily present in thousands of Catholic Churches around the world. When Jesus is received spiritually, one time in the heart, there is no need to receive him physically, over and over again in the stomach.”

Jesus was born to die. "The Son of Man came...to give his life as a ransom for many" (Mark 10:45). He was delivered up to be crucified according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God (Acts 2:23). This was to demonstrate His righteousness so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus (Rom. 3:26). Since God's laws were broken and His justice was provoked, it had to be satisfied by Christ before divine forgiveness could be applied to sinners. Dying as a substitute for sinners, the Lord Jesus paid the eternal debt for sin and satisfied the demands of justice while appeasing God's wrath so that He could extend mercy and grace to those who trust Him. God's perfect Son satisfied divine justice when "God made Him (Christ), who knew no sin, to be sin" for those who would trust Him (2 Corinthians 5:21).

Logic will tell you that the physical body of Jesus Christ does not become a piece of bread, nor does His blood become wine to be drank. His lifeblood was poured out for the redemption of those who would believe that He paid the price for sin, in full, and trust in Him and His finished sacrifice for their eternal life in the presence of God., as expressed in 1 Peter 1:18-21: “18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, [as] silver and gold, from your vain conversation [received] by tradition from your fathers; 19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: 20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you, 21 Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God.”

John's Response

My first comment in regard to this, the 7th of your "Convincing Reasons," is to say that I am astounded that you put limits on what God can and cannot do - "It is impossible for Christ to be bodily present in thousands of Catholic Churches around the world." Really?! You know, I thought I read somewhere that "All things are possible with God." The Word of God says all things are possible with God, the Word of Sally says, "No, not all things are possible with God." Who should I believe on that...God, or Sally?

"Logic will tell you that the physical body of Jesus Christ does not become a piece of bread, nor does His blood become wine to be drank." First of all, you have that backwards. No, Jesus' body and blood do not become bread and wine. The bread and wine become His body and blood. Now, regarding your "logic" - logic will tell you that a man cannot walk on water. And logic will tell you that the dead do not come back to life. And logic will tell you that 5 loaves of bread and a couple of fish is maybe one or two loaves shy of being able to feed 5000+ people. And logic will tell you that the blind do not see, the deaf do not hear, the mute do not speak, the lame do not walk, and that lepers are not healed while out for a jog. All I can say to you is shame on you for trying to limit the infinite God because of your finite ability to reason. Oh ye of little faith!

But, my point here is this: The word "spirit" is not the same thing as the word "figurative". In your reasons #4, 5, and 6, you state that Jesus is speaking "figuratively". Now, here in #7, you state that His words are "spiritual". So, in Sally's world, figurative = spiritual. Is it the Father, Son, and Holy Figurative? God, Scripture tells us, is spirit (John 4:24). Does that mean God is figurative? Apparently it does in your interpretative scheme. Catholics, however, reject that notion. For us, the spirit is as real as it gets.

Furthermore, your interpretation of John 6:63 has Jesus contradicting Himself. "My flesh is food indeed and My blood is drink indeed," in John 6:55 vs. your interpretation of John 6:63, "My flesh is figurative food indeed and My blood is figurative drink indeed." Not to mention the aforementioned problem you have with John 6:51 where we are told that the bread that Jesus wants us to eat is the flesh that He will give for the life of the world - you say the flesh that He gave for the life of the world is indeed His real flesh, but then you turn around and say that the bread He wants us to eat is His figurative flesh. The problem is that it can't be both! Either the bread He wants us to eat is His real flesh that He gave for the life of the world, or the bread that He wants us to eat is His figurative flesh that He gave for the life of the world. One or the other, Sally...it can't be both. So which is it?

And yet another problem. Verse 60. “Many of His disciples, when they heard [Jesus say they must eat His body and drink His blood] said, ‘This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?’” If Jesus is speaking symbolically, then why is this a hard saying? You might say that, at first, the disciples misunderstood. But, that counters your "Convincing Reason" #5 that the Jews were familiar with "eating and drinking" being used in a figurative sense. But then you say Jesus cleared it up for them, and for us, in verse 63 when He says, “It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.” But, if Jesus was explaining in verse 63 that His words were symbolic, then why did many of His disciples reject Him and leave Him in verse 66? (An interesting side note here here, Sally, is that the disciples leave Jesus in chapter 6, verse 66...666. Hmmm.)

Anyway, if this was a “symbolic” teaching, why would the disciples walk away? Why would they consider it such a “hard teaching” that they would walk away?! The only response you can make is that the disciples misunderstood not only Jesus' use of the supposed "figurative" language of eating and drinking (which they were supposedly "familiar" with), but that they also did not understand Jesus' "spiritual/figurative" explanation of what He was saying in verse 63. Even after Jesus' supposedly spiritual/figurative explanation in verse 63, the disciples - people who were closest to Him, people who had been with Him throughout His ministry, people who had "believed" in Him (John 2:11) - they still thought He was speaking literally and many of them walked away from Him. Why is that, Sally?

    And think about this. These same disciples who walked away from Jesus because of this teaching on eating His Body and drinking His Blood...what had these same disciples witnessed the day before? They had just witnessed the miracle of the loaves and the fishes. Jesus had just fed thousands of people with a few loaves of bread and a couple of fish (although, logic tells us that you can't feed thousands of people with 5 loaves of bread and a couple of fish, so the "miracle" of the fish and the loaves must be figurative, right?). And what else did those same disciples witness the day before? Verse 19, “When they had rowed about three or four miles, they saw Jesus walking on the sea and drawing near to the boat.” They had just seen Jesus Christ walking on water! Walking on water! And you think they are going to walk away from Him because He just told them that they have to symbolically eat His body and blood? I don’t think so! And, let’s think about what else they had seen. They had seen Jesus turn water to wine. They had seen Jesus cure the sick and heal lepers, the blind, and the lame. They had seen Jesus cast out demons. They had even cast out demons and healed the sick by the power Jesus had given them! And they walked away from Him because He told them they had to “symbolically” eat His body and “symbolically” drink His blood. I don’t think so!
   And, again, if you say that they misunderstood Him... and that they even misunderstood His “symbolic” explanation in verse 63, then why didn’t He explain it to them until they understood, as He had on pretty much every other occasion of misunderstanding? How could the greatest teacher who ever lived let His disciples walk away from Him over a misunderstanding? Maybe He wasn't such a great teacher after all, huh? And, why, if not a single person took Him to mean what He said as being symbolic; not a single one of the Jewish leaders and authorities; not a single one of His disciples; not a single one of the Apostles - people who had been with Him day in and day out since the beginning of His ministry and who knew Him better than anyone save His own mother; if all of the people who were so close to Jesus took Him literally; then why does anyone today, 2000 years after the fact, believe that His words were symbolic? Could it be because it is such a hard teaching? Because it is so difficult to understand how we could possibly be able to eat His body and drink His blood? Aren’t people today rejecting the real meaning of Jesus’ words, just as the Jews and many of His disciples rejected the real meaning of Jesus’ words 2000 years ago...because it is a hard teaching? Because it does require a tremendous amount of faith. A tremendous amount of trust in God’s word.
   And let me point out one other thing here. Look at verses 30 and 31 in John 6. The Jews are asking for a sign and they refer to the miracle of the manna from Heaven which God gave the Israelites for food in the desert. And Jesus’ response to them in verse 32 and following makes it very clear that He is talking about something greater than...something greater than...the miracle of the manna in the desert. And in verse 62, Jesus says to his disbelieving disciples, “Do you take offense at this? Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending where He was before?” Here Jesus is telling us that whatever it is He is talking about is greater than even the miracle of His ascension into Heaven!
   Do you see what I’m saying here? Taking Scripture in context we see that Jesus frames His discussion about eating His flesh and drinking His blood with the miracle of the manna from Heaven on the one hand and the miracle of His ascension into Heaven on the other hand. And, He is clearly pointing to the fact that whatever it is He means by eating His body and drinking His blood... whatever He means by that...it is something that is more miraculous than manna from Heaven and His ascension into Heaven! I ask you, is eating a piece of bread and drinking some grape juice more miraculous than manna from Heaven? Is eating a piece of bread and drinking some grape juice more miraculous than Jesus ascending into Heaven in a cloud of glory? I don’t think so! But, is the bread and wine of the Eucharist being changed into the actual Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ...is that a greater miracle than the manna in the desert? Is the bread and wine of the Eucharist being changed into the actual Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ...is that a greater miracle than the ascension of Jesus into Heaven? I would have to say it is.
   In other words, an interpretation of this passage from John 6; and the passages from the Last Supper; and the passages from 1 Corinthians 10 and 11; an interpretation which renders these passages as Jesus speaking symbolically... an interpretation which puts the words “is symbolic of” or "figuratively" in Jesus’ mouth, when those words are nowhere to be found in these passages...just doesn’t make any sense. Everyone took Jesus literally because He was speaking literally...period!

Sorry, Sally, but your "Seven Convincing Reasons," when examined using logic, common sense, and, most importantly, the full context of Scripture, are just not all that convincing after all. I invite you to put away your preconceived biases regarding the Catholic Church, and truly think about and pray about these responses I've made to your "Seven Convincing Reasons". They are scripturally consistent and logically consistent. Know the truth, Sally, and the truth shall make you free.

Closing Comments

I'll let you know if I get any response from Sally. If I do, I may extend this out another issue or two. If not, on to new pastures for the next issue. I hope you have a great week!

Donations

The Bible Christian Society is a non-profit organization that relies solely on your support to bring the truths of the Catholic Faith to tens of thousands of people throughout the U.S. and all around the world each year. If you would like to help us do what we do, you can donate online at:

http://www.biblechristiansociety.com/donations

or send a check to:

Bible Christian Society

PO Box 424

Pleasant Grove, AL 35127.

Anything you can do is greatly appreciated!