Prerequisite for Freedom;
Interpretation; John 6:51-59
When Jesus starts making His
claim to exclusivity in front of the crowds in John chapter 6 they become more
and more uncomfortable. They begin to react. “How could He say that? How could
He say He is the only way? How could He claim to be the Messiah? We know His
parents!” The problem with the crowd was that they have an agenda, and it is
not God’s plan. They want to assert their authority and do ti their way over
against the authority of God. Jesus wants to make this very clear, so each time
they react He makes the statement sound a little more abrasive. He wants to
bring everything out in the open and remove the veneer of religiosity and make
is clear to one and all that they are rejecting Him as the Messiah. He makes
statements like “No one can come to Me unless the
Father draws him.” He is emphasising divine authority over their authority. Hen
then says, “He who believes has eternal life.” Once again the issue is faith,
not works. He says, “I am the bread of life,” then, “I am the living bread; the
bread I shall give is my flesh.” See how He is pushing it now? He says the
bread is His flesh and then the flesh is His life, and then He says He gives His
life as a substitute for the sins of the world. Jesus could not be more clear. He makes it so clear that they understand what
He is saying. They react more and more, and the text says that they grumble and
complain and argue among themselves. They are not interested in what God says, they are interested in their own agenda. To religion
they say yes but to God they say no. To a political solution they say yes but
to God they say no.
So now from verse 51 Jesus is
really going to turn up the heat. He is going to make sure they understand what
the dynamics are. What he says, if it is taken literally, which is how they react
to it, is so abrasive and offensive to the Jewish mentality that they just
react to it.
The doctrine of interpretation
1)
Interpretation is
the science and art of analysing a text in order to understand the meaning the
author intended to convey to the reader. It is not what it means to me, it is
what the author intended.
2)
Interpretation of
the Bible is based on what is called the historical-grammatical principle of
interpretation. This emphasises the study of the original languages in terms of
linguistics and grammar, in terms of historical context, the literary context
(whether it is poetry or whatever), and emphasises the plain or normal sense of
the text. Allegorical interpretation reigned through the Middle
Ages until literal historical-grammatical interpretation was restored with the
Reformation.
3)
The Bible was
originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Koine Greek, and to correctly understand
what the Bible says we must understand it in the original language.
4)
When we talk
about the historical-grammatical principle, the grammar relates in the sense of
grammar or syntax which is the arrangement of words and their relationship to
one another. Grammar or syntax studies the relationships between words and
clauses to display the author’s emphases and to bring out the various nuances
and shades of meaning.
5)
The historical
context is vital, for the Bible was written over a period of 2000 years in
places as diverse as
6)
The literary
context must not be ignored. What kind of literature is this? Is it a personal
letter, history? Does the author’s style include the use of imagery and
metaphor, and how does he use them? Remember, every text has a context and a
text without a context is a pretext.
7)
This is the key
principle of hermeneutics: When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense,
makes no other sense, therefore take every word at its ordinary, usual, literal
meaning unless the facts of the immediate context studied in the light of
related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truth indicates clearly otherwise.
Scripture must always be interpreted in a plain, normal sense. Once the ground of
meaning shifts from the author to the reader, then the text can mean anything,
and once something can mean anything then it means nothing.
8)
The literal interpretation
of Scripture does not exclude the use of imagery or figures of speech, but
these are clearly indicated by the context and general rules of grammar and
literature.
9)
Some types of
figures of speech that are common are similes (like or as) and metaphors.
10)
The apostle John
particularly informs us of numerous metaphors which our Lord used to teach thing
about His person. So when Jesus said, “I am the bread of life,” He did not mean
that He is physical bread or the source of physical nourishment, or that He was
to be physically, literally eaten. He is simply making an analogy that he is
the source of life and eternal life.
11)
The physical act
of eating bread and of drinking wine is used as a metaphor throughout the Scripture.
Eating manna in the Old Testament was a physical act but it had spiritual
significance, according to 1 Corinthians chapter 10. The picture of eating is, I accept that as true. Eating shows that a person takes
something and accepts it and makes it his own. Proverbs 9:5, wisdom says, NASB
“Come, eat of my food And drink of the wine I have
mixed.” It is a metaphor: Come, make me (wisdom) part of your life. That is the
thrust of the meaning of eating and drinking. Cf. Jeremiah 15:6. Furthermore,
the Rabbis used eating and drinking as metaphors for accepting and believing something.
John 6:51 NASB “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.” The words “came down”
in the Greek is an aorist active participle of the word katabaino [karabainw].
The word means to come down but the significance here is that it is in the
aorist tense—past time, and it refers to an event. The participle means that
the action precedes the action of the main verb, and that this is referring to
an event in history. When did Jesus come down? Approximately 32 years before
this. It was a one time event, it was not a continuous
event. Then Jesus says, “if anyone.” He uses a 3rd
class condition, which means maybe you will or maybe you won’t, it is a matter
of volition; “if anyone eats,” and here we have an aorist active subjunctive of
esthio [e)sqiw] which means to eat. But it is in the aorist tense—one
time action in past time, an event. Then follows a present tense: “he will
live,” continuous action.
John 6:53 NASB “So
Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat [aorist tense]
the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves’.”
He is pushing their buttons to the maximum. He is talking metaphorically. The
Jews should be thinking in terms of Scripture but they have rejected Scripture.
They are operating in human viewpoint legalism and religion and are rejecting
the Old Testament. The Old Testament says in Leviticus 17:11 NASB “For
the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you on the altar
to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood by reason of the life
that makes atonement.” In the Mosaic Law they were forbidden to eat meat that
had the blood in it. They had all these rituals to drain all the blood out of
meat. Jesus is using these metaphors to talk about spiritual truth, and He is
veiling it. But then He will come out and state it clearly to those who are
responsive, to those who are positive; to those who are negative He is not
going to make it any more clear.
John
So we close with the
question: What does it take to be a Christian? The key word is believe. When the apostle Paul was asked by the Philippian jailer, What must I do
to be saved? he didn’t say believe and go to church,
believe and participate in rituals, believe and be good. He said: “Believe in
the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved.”