John 6:44
Just some observations.
Jesus says, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up the last day" (6:44)
The context: Jesus feeding the five thousand.
The speaker: Jesus
The audience: "The Jews." They had just been miraculously feed by Christ and now they were asking for a sign.
Check out the next verse when Jesus says, "It is written in the Prophets: 'They will all be taught by God.' Everyone who listens to the Father and learns from him comes to me" (6:45).
This is how I understand the passage. Jesus tells the Jews that they have rejected Him because they were not drawn to Him by the Father. Although the Jewish people were very proud of their supposed relationship with the Father, the truth was that they never had a relationship with the Father to begin with. This is what Jesus indicates with his statement in v. 44. If the Jewish people had listened to the Father and had learned from Him, they would have come to Jesus. They would have accepted Him. Thus, their rejection of Christ was an indication of a prior rejection of the Father.
Now back to v. 35.
"35Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty. 36But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe."
Jesus tells the Jews that He offers eternal nourishment. Those who come to Him will be satisfied for eternality. However, in spite of this wonderful offer, the Jews continue to reject Him. They have seen Jesus and yet still they don't believe.
That is why Jesus makes this statement in v. 37.
"37All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. 38For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. 39And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. 40For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day."
Obviously the Father had not given these individuals, who had reject Him, to Jesus. Since they had rejected the Father (v. 45), the Father had denied them the priviledge of coming to Jesus for eternal nourishment. However, this was not the case with everyone (v. 38-40). Jesus had come to this earth for a purpose--to do His Father's will. The Father had given some individuals to Jesus to save. These individuals were responsive to the Father's teaching (v. 45). And in light of this, they would come to Jesus for eternal satisfication.
I hope this will help. I know that it won't satisfy everybody.
Jesus says, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up the last day" (6:44)
The context: Jesus feeding the five thousand.
The speaker: Jesus
The audience: "The Jews." They had just been miraculously feed by Christ and now they were asking for a sign.
Check out the next verse when Jesus says, "It is written in the Prophets: 'They will all be taught by God.' Everyone who listens to the Father and learns from him comes to me" (6:45).
This is how I understand the passage. Jesus tells the Jews that they have rejected Him because they were not drawn to Him by the Father. Although the Jewish people were very proud of their supposed relationship with the Father, the truth was that they never had a relationship with the Father to begin with. This is what Jesus indicates with his statement in v. 44. If the Jewish people had listened to the Father and had learned from Him, they would have come to Jesus. They would have accepted Him. Thus, their rejection of Christ was an indication of a prior rejection of the Father.
Now back to v. 35.
"35Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty. 36But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe."
Jesus tells the Jews that He offers eternal nourishment. Those who come to Him will be satisfied for eternality. However, in spite of this wonderful offer, the Jews continue to reject Him. They have seen Jesus and yet still they don't believe.
That is why Jesus makes this statement in v. 37.
"37All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. 38For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. 39And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. 40For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day."
Obviously the Father had not given these individuals, who had reject Him, to Jesus. Since they had rejected the Father (v. 45), the Father had denied them the priviledge of coming to Jesus for eternal nourishment. However, this was not the case with everyone (v. 38-40). Jesus had come to this earth for a purpose--to do His Father's will. The Father had given some individuals to Jesus to save. These individuals were responsive to the Father's teaching (v. 45). And in light of this, they would come to Jesus for eternal satisfication.
I hope this will help. I know that it won't satisfy everybody.
posted by Daniel | 4:11 PM
9 Comments:
Daniel said: Jesus tells the Jews that they have rejected Him because they were not drawn to Him by the Father.
Yes Jesus speaks this to the Jews, but He clearly is not referring to the Jews only is He? Are you saying that ‘no one’ refers to the Jews only, or is He saying ‘no one’ as in nobody, ever? I would say that clearly ‘no one’ are words of incapacity and are placed in a universal context.
Daniel said: Although the Jewish people were very proud of their supposed relationship with the Father, the truth was that they never had a relationship with the Father to begin with. This is what Jesus indicates with his statement in v. 44.
Again, if Jesus was talking to these certain Jews only, why did he say ‘no one’? Does that not entail more than just those certain Jews? Of course it does, otherwise He would have said ‘you cannot come to Me etc’.
Daniel said: If the Jewish people had listened to the Father and had learned from Him, they would have come to Jesus.
No doubt this is true. But the ability to hear (or the lack of ability to do so) is a common theme in John’s gospel. Note the same theme in John 8:43, 47:
Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you cannot hear My word… He who is of God hears the words of God; for this reason you do not hear them, because you are not of God.
Jesus spoke of an inability to hear (“cannot hear”) in John 8:43 just as He spoke of an inability to come in John 6:44. It isn’t ‘no one comes to Me’ it is ‘no one CAN come to Me’. How can you justify the wording of inability here if these Jews somehow had the ability, but just refused to exercise it?
Daniel said: Thus, their rejection of Christ was an indication of a prior rejection of the Father.
Yes this is partly true, as they did reject the Father. But interestingly enough, Jesus did not say this. Jesus never even hints at the fact that they had the opportunity to come, had the opportunity to be apart of ‘all the Father gives’. He says the exact opposite again and again. Jesus said that ‘all the Father gives will come’, ‘no one can come unless I draw’, and in verse 65 He says that no one can come unless it has been granted him by the Father. Again, the verbiage of inability clearly refutes your argument. ‘no one can’ is not a statement of ‘no one who doesn’t first choose’.
Daniel said: Since they had rejected the Father (v. 45), the Father had denied them the priviledge of coming to Jesus for eternal nourishment.
Can you please point out if verse 45 where this affirmation is stated by Jesus? Because I would say the text clearly says that those who hear and learn from the Father do what? Come. What do those who are given by the Father to the Son do? Come. John 6:45 parallels hearing and learning with drawing. There is a strong, irrefutable line of thought that flows from 6:37 through 6:45, and you have to break it up and insert a foreign idea to interpret ‘learned of the Father’ as an indicator of why these Jews could not come. Jesus says no one can come unless the Father draws, and in the next sentence He describes those who come by saying they have heard and learned from the Father. We cannot read the text backwards can we?
I've said this a hundred times but it still seems to go unanswered. Why in the world would we believe that Jesus really meant 'everyone can come to Me', when in fact He uses the words 'no man can come to Me'? I am still trying to figure out how one can justify that.
SDG
Nathan said: "I've said this a hundred times but it still seems to go unanswered. Why in the world would we believe that Jesus really meant 'everyone can come to Me', when in fact He uses the words 'no man can come to Me'? I am still trying to figure out how one can justify that."
No one is suggesting that Jesus said, "ALL CAN COME." Christ was doing something very specific here. As Magnum rightly pointed out, Jesus’ point was not to explain who “can come” in the general salvific way. Jesus was merely communicating to religious Jews how He and the Father are one. In other words, He was announcing his Divinity. Jesus pointed-out NOT how individuals are justified (grace through faith) rather Jesus announced (WATCH THIS!) who He was AND how genuine belief in the Father meant belief in the Son as well. And so for these particular Jews (or ANY PERSON, principally for today), the test for faith meant belief in the Father AND in the Son. The Jews in this section could NOT have known the Father because they rejected the Son. Jesus was punking arrogant and religious Jews! Now this context obviously speaks to the Jews whom Jesus was speaking with, but would equally apply to anyone who might pull a similar kind of stunt. (THINK OLD TESTAMENT AND JEWISH) Had OT/NT Jews known the Father they would have known the Son too once they were confronted by Him. The Father would have dragged them to the Son.
Nathan, compare these two verses and rethink what Christ may have been doing all along.
Joh 6:44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him
John 14:6 Jesus *said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.
Magnum is Solid!
Thank you, Jesus for loving ALL of humanity.
One major theme throughout the gospels is emphasized continuity between Jesus and the Old Testament. Jesus is the OT Messiah. By giving this emphasis, the gospel writers were declaring that Christianity is the true Judaism. Judaism, in its current state, has rejected the plan of the Father. Jesus was the fulfilment of the OT.
Check out John 5:19-23.
"So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise. For the Father loves the Son and shows him all that he himself is doing. And greater works than these will he show him, so that you may marvel. For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will. The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him."
Compare that with John 7:14-19.
"About the middle of the feast Jesus went up into the temple and began teaching. The Jews therefore marveled, saying, "How is it that this man has learning,when he has never studied?" So Jesus answered them, "My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me. If anyone's will is to do God's will, he will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own authority. The one who speaks on his own authority seeks his own glory, but the one who seeks the glory of him who sent him is true, and in him there is no falsehood. Has not Moses given you the law? Yet none of you keeps the law. Why do you seek to kill me?"
Anonymous said: As Magnum rightly pointed out, Jesus’ point was not to explain who “can come” in the general salvific way. Jesus was merely communicating to religious Jews how He and the Father are one. In other words, He was announcing his Divinity.
So then, the words ‘no one can come’ do not express as you say ‘ who “can come” in the general salvific way'? How does the wording of 'no one can come' mean anything but explaining that 'no one can come unless'? Why say 'non one can come' if thats not what you really meant? In addition, your interpretation would mean that being raised up ‘on the last day’ does not refer to salvation correct? What does this refer to then? Please clarify. And please explain from the text why I should take 'no one can come' as not meaning what it says.
Yes Jesus was expressing His divinity, but He clearly takes this opportunity to explain God’s sovereignty, and to explain why it is these so called religious leaders rejected God in the flesh. Can you please point to an indicator in the text where we can affirm that when Jesus says ‘no on can come’ He really means to communicate His divinity only? Why should we take the phrase ‘raised up on the last day’ as something not referring to justification?
Like I have shown before, verse 40 supplies us with the meaning behind the conversation. He announces *how* one has eternal life in verse 40. The Jews grumbled in verse 41, clearly not happy with verse 40 and Jesus identifying Himself as the Son, and so in verse 44 Jesus explains why they do not see –because it has not been granted to them. Again, please point to the indicator in the text that will lead us to believe that Jesus was in fact only announcing His deity, which if so, we can denounce His plain rendering of verse 44. Where does the context change from verse 40 to 44? If Jesus HAD wanted to express sovereignty and the inability of man to come on his own, He couldn’t have said it any clearer.
Also, is this statement not clarified with verse 65? –‘This is why I have told you that no one can come to Me unless it is granted by the Father’? Clearly, when Jesus says ‘no one can come to Me’, He is explaining why the Jews had rejected Him –THIS is why I have told you’. What is the ‘THIS’? It is ‘there are some of you who do not believe’ –verse 64. Jesus clearly reiterates verse 37 and 44 with verse 65. They did not believe, why did they not believe? Jesus answers that in verse 65 beginning with ‘this is why I said these past things’.
Also, is this section not further clarified with what Jesus says in John 8? “Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word. He who is of God hears God’s words; therefore you do not hear because you are not of God.” He didn’t say they were not willing, He said they were not able.
Anonymous said: Jesus pointed-out NOT how individuals are justified (grace through faith) rather Jesus announced (WATCH THIS!) who He was AND how genuine belief in the Father meant belief in the Son as well.
Is verse 40 talking about justification? Yes or no? If yes, when does the context change into a focus on divinity only in verse 44? It is very clear that the ‘raise up at the last day’ in verse 40 has the same meaning in verse 44. He describes how to have eternal life (by going through Him), and then He explains why they did not have eternal life (because they were not drawn).
Anonymous said: Had OT/NT Jews known the Father they would have known the Son too once they were confronted by Him. The Father would have dragged them to the Son.
Agreed. But Jesus clearly says that the reason they did not know the Father was because they had not been given by the Father (v36-37), they had not been drawn (verse 44), and they have not been granted to them (verse 65). Yes Jesus was pointing to His divinity. Yes He was saying that He and the Father are one, and if they had known the Father they would know Him. But He clearly identifies that the only way for them to know the Father through the Son is if they are given, drawn, and granted so by the Father. The inability of man and the sovereign control of God is undeniable if words have any real meaning at all.
Anonymous said: Nathan, compare these two verses and rethink what Christ may have been doing all along.
Joh 6:44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him
John 14:6 Jesus *said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.
I see no real correlation here –any such is forced. One says that no one can come unless the Father draws, the second says no one can come unless they come to the Son. They both announce the divinity of Jesus (44-come to ME, 14:6-through ME), but the first says they can’t come unless they are given, and the second says they cannot come to the Father unless they come to the Son. They both give conditions for coming, but these two conditions are clearly not one in the same. We can’t take the meaning of 14:6 and forced it into verse 44 –and in the process ignored the contextual context of verses 37 and 65. 14:6 means exactly what you and Magnum are saying about verse 44, but they are clearly not one in the same.
Anonymous said: Thank you, Jesus for loving ALL of humanity.
Of course Jesus has some sort of love for all of mankind, but are you saying His love for these Jews was in the same measure as His love for His disciples was? That is, He 'tried' to save these Jews in the same measure as He 'tried' to save His disciples?
Daniel quoted: For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will.
‘Raises the dead’ can be perfectly symbolized with raising Lazarus ‘from the dead’ (reference John 1:12-13). And yes, the Son gives life to whom He will –not whomever deems the Son, his Creator, worthy of attention.
I understand the arguments here, but I must see from the text why Jesus was only pointing to His divinity. Otherwise it is just a philosophical belief not rooted in the actual wording. Please point to the wording and show me where Jesus clarifies that He is not talking about who can come, and how one is to be raised on the last day.
SDG
Well after reading the brief statements here, I'll just add.....uh "what Nathan said":)
Seriously, the fact is that Jesus is clearly pointing out why these men who had come for some more fish sticks were not actually coming to Christ as the Bread of Life. His whole response to them is clearly pointing out why they are not His. True it is because they are unwilling. That is a fact in evidence. However, Jesus goes way beyond the simple reason that they are unwilling. He points out "why" they are unwilling. They are unwilling BECAUSE they have not been given to the Son by the Father. They are not a love gift from the Father to the Son. Anonymous tends to think it is a grand thing that God promiscuously throws His love around equally. However, that is not the point here and to run outside the text for the answers does not really respond to the argument that Jesus is giving in John 6. Each of the passages quoted above by anonymous and Daniel do not accurately speak to John 6. There is a specific conversation and a specific people involved and Jesus is making his point to these people and of course they cannot understand His words because they are not His sheep.
Nathan,
I thought that you had a really good observation. You write, "John 6:45 parallels hearing and learning with drawing." However, I draw (no pun intended) different conclusions from this observation.
I think that it makes better sense to understand verse 45 as interpreting what Jesus means in verse 44. The "drawing of the Father" is synomynous with "listening and learning from the Father."
v. 65 just underlines this point. The Jews did not know and did not want to know the Father. Thus, this is why they did not come to Christ. "No one can come unless the Father draws him." Because of their rejection of Him, the Father had not granted them the priviledge to come to Christ.
Tim,
I don't understand why you say that those passages don't pertain to the subject. In both the chapter before and after John 6, the author shows how the Jews had rejected the Father. Of course, this is important for the interpretation of John 6.
Tim,
Good thoughts on the ‘broader’ context. Jesus says He is the bread of life, that is the statement of His divinity. But the Jews didn’t like that, so He explains why they didn’t like that. Yes they were unwilling, yes they rejected Him. But we all reject Him unless He grants us repentance. A review of John 10 would also shed a little understanding of this passage. But I agree that we can stay completely in John 6 and obtain the true meaning of the text.
Daniel,
You said: I think that it makes better sense to understand verse 45 as interpreting what Jesus means in verse 44. The "drawing of the Father" is synomynous with "listening and learning from the Father."
The line of thought in this passage is very clear:
6:37 Action: Given by Father Result: All come to Christ
6:39 Action: Given by Father Result: None lost, all raised up
6:44 Action: Drawn by the Father Result: Come to Christ, raised up
6:45 Action: Hear from and Taught by Father: Result: Come to Christ
It is a true statement that hearing and learning from the Father is synonymous with being drawn –that is, all who are drawn will hear and learn. Just like when John 3:16 says that ‘whoseover believeth’ –that is a true statement! Whoever believes will have life. However, Jesus makes it clear that the only way to believe is to be given, drawn, and taught by the Father –it’s a all or nothing deal. Your interpretation contradicts verse 44 instead of clarifying it, and it also provides trouble with verse 37. For if human will, that is, our decision to hear and learn in any war precedes the giving and drawing, why was this left out in 37, 39, and 44? It says that all who are given will come, not all who make the decision to come. IT says that no one can come unless they are drawn, it doesn’t say that no one can come unless they decide to hear and learn. And it says no one can come unless it is granted, not no one can come unless they first make the decision. Again, to get your interpretation we must read the text backwards and ‘spiritualize’ the meaning of ‘all that the Father gives’ and ‘no one can come to Me’.
You said: Because of their rejection of Him, the Father had not granted them the priviledge to come to Christ.
Yes they rejected Him. Yes they were not given. But the above interpretation is not what the text says. It says that all who are given will come, and that no man can come unless they are drawn and thus raised. Where in the text does Jesus say that because of their rejection they would not be given or drawn? He doesnt say that at all. We cannot take the 'the ones who hear and learn will come' and interpret this as WHY they didnt come. That is not what the text says.
As far as other passages go, I could easily bring up Acts 13:48, 2 Thess 2:13, 1 Corinthians 1:24, John 10 etc that help firm up my position. For none of these passages make sense if man has the ability to choose to ‘elect himself’ –which is an oxymoron. But if we stay in John 6 and properly exegete it, there is no need to go anywhere else. For unless we contradict verse 37 and 44 there is no position left but sovereign grace.
SDG
Nathan,
I don't believe that man has the ability to elect himself, to regenerate himself or anything of the like. That's nothing but a strawman.
Sorry for the strawman Daniel, it wasnt intended. It's hard to precisely know what everyone believes on the subject. Everyone usually knows the Calvinists stance line by line, but those outside of that 'system', that is, those who believe in free will, tend to all have varying beliefs on any number of passages. Just look at how many views on John 6 and Romans 9 have been expressed here. So any straw man is not meant intentionally, and feel free to correct any misrepresentation I make of you and I will not let it happen again.
SDG
Post a Comment
<< Home