- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
17 Jul 16
4 edits
Originally posted by checkbaiter
" Then what if you saw the Son of Man ascending to where He was before ?" (John 6:63)
This verse is referring to the resurrection of Christ.
It is more logical to interpret that it refers to some ascension of Christ into heaven.
He did not say " What if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to [ WHERE HE IS NOW.]".
As He speaks here He is alive and upon the earth. "Where He was before" is more likely speaking of Him being in Heaven. Had He said "ascending back to where He is NOW" that would more logically refer to resurrection perhaps back to stand upon the earth.
In the immediately previous verse Jesus is telling Nicodemus about things which are in heaven. And the reason He can speak authoritatively to Nicodemus is because Jesus has been there.
"If I told you of things on earth and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you of the things in heaven?
And no one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended out of heaven, the Son of Man, who is in heaven." (John 3:12,13)
The basis upon which Jesus can teach Nicodemus heavenly things that Nicodemus finds hard to believe, is because Jesus has been in heaven. He has not only been on the earth to speak of things on earth. He has also been in heaven and can teach about heavenly things.
This fact is clear from studying the context.
Because the translators have chosen to translate anabainō as “ascend,” people believe it refers to Christ’s ascension from earth as recorded in Acts 1:9, but Acts 1:9 does not use this word. Anabainō simply means “to go up.”
I did not insist that the ascension mentioned in John 3:13 has to be the ascension in Acts 1:9. So this is a argument direct to someone else.
I did not.
" And no one has ascended into heaven ..."
This is clearly speaking in the past tense. And if I do not know what Jesus is talking about because it is not recorded in the Gospels, that does not make it that it never occurred.
Thus, the Bible clearly reveals that our Lord is God as well as man, the true God and the true man, the perfect God and the perfect man. He is nothing less than God and nothing less than man, having complete divinity and complete humanity. He is God with the divine nature; He is also man with a human nature. The Gospel of John continually shows these two aspects of Him. He is God who knows everything and sees everything (1:47-48), who is omnipresent, and who descended out of heaven yet is still in heaven (3:13). He is a man who can get weary and thirsty (4:6-7). He can also weep (11:35). Both God and man are complete and perfect in Him. This is really mysterious. It is no wonder that His name is called “Wonderful” (Isa. 9:6).
From Concerning the Person of Christ by Witness Lee
http://www.ministrybooks.org/SearchMinBooksDsp.cfm?id=209CDFD5C6
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
17 Jul 16
2 edits
I may not know when previous to His death Jesus could have ascended to heaven.
This is completely unknown to me. However, that Jesus could ascend to heaven and return to earth BEFORE His ascension in Acts 1 is certain.
In John 20:17 on the morning of His resurrection would not allow Mary to cling to Him because He wanted to ascend to heaven first. The first to enjoy His resurrection must be the Father in heaven.
"Jesus said to her, Do not touch Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; But go to My brothers and say to them, I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God." (v.17)
Yet, in the evening of that same day Jesus came back to the earth and allowed the disciples to touch Him, embrace Him, hug Him, examine Him, and in any necessary way handle Him,
"When therefore it was evening on that day, the first day of the week, and while the doors were shut where the disciples were for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst and said to them, Peace be to you.
And when He had said this, He showed them His hands and His side. The disciples therefore rejoiced at seeing the Lord." (vs.19,20)
Other Gospels reveal that He told them to feel His flesh and bones. And Thomas was also invited to touch Him. This touching that Jesus directed must have been after He had ascended to the Father, for the Father's first enjoyment somehow. And He returned to the earth to be enjoyed by the disciples.
The point here is that this ascension is PRIOR to Acts 1:9. If Jesus could ascend to heaven and return in an evening then He could have done so before He spoke to Nicodemus in John 3:13 -
" And no one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended out of heaven, the Son of Man, who is in heaven."
The Recovery Version footnote does mention that some MSS omit the last phrase "the Son of Man who is in heaven".
Now, it should not surprise the Christian that there may be some or some ascensions of Jesus into heaven before Acts 1:9 and even before the day of His resurrection. The Gospel writer John tells us that the books detailing the astounding things that Jesus did would fill up the world. John only selected certain matters to record.
" Moreover indeed many other signs also Jesus did before His disciples, which are not written in this book.
But these have been written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name." (John 20:30,31)
Suffice it to say that not every wonderful thing Jesus did showing His disciples, was recorded in the Gospel of John. And again -
"And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which, if they were written one by one, I suppose that not even the world itself could contain the books written."
What we see of Jesus Christ in the four Gospels is the tip of an iceberg of marvelous things, that if written one by one, would make a gigantic library. So it is entirely possible that before His public ascension in Acts 1 Jesus could have ascended to heaven temporarily.
It simply means go up as in climbing a mountain or coming up out of the water as in a water baptism. The context shows that Jesus was speaking about being the bread from heaven and giving life via his resurrection.
Jesus repeatedly said, “...I will raise him [each believer] up at the
Let us keep chapter 3 and chapter 6 somewhat distinct. The conversation with Nicodemus about ascending and descending is in chapter 33. The conversation about the bread from heaven and His opponents seeing Him ascend to where He was before is in chapter 6.
The teaching you are proposing is to teach that the Deity of Christ is incomplete.
John is uncompromising from the beginning of his Gospel that Jesus is God in human form.
In fact seeing Christ IN HEAVEN is the proof the evangelist offers in John 12 when John writes that the prophet Isaiah SAW Christ's glory before Jesus was born.
For this reason they could not believe, because again Isaiah said,
"He has blinded their eyes and He hardened their heart, that they might not see with their eyes and understand with their heart and turn, and I will heal them."
These things said Isaiah because he saw His glory and spoke concerning Him." (John 12:39-41) [/b]
The words "His glory" confirms that Jesus Christ is the very God in heaven, Yahweh, Jehovah of hosts. His glory was seen by the prophet Isaiah in Isaiah 6:1-3.
" In the year that King Uzziah died I saw the Lord sitting on a high and lofty throne, and the train of His robe filled the temple. ...
Holy, holy, holy, Jehovah of hosts; the whole earth is filled with His glory...
Then I [Isaiah] said, Woe is me, for I am finished! For I am a man of unclean lips, And in the midst of a people of unclean lips I dwell;
Yet my eyes have seen the King, Jehovah of hosts." (See Isaiah 6:1-6)
John says then that the prophet of the Old Testament SAW the glory of God and of Christ. Jesus Christ is then God of glory whom Isaiah saw and whose glory was not appreciated by men in John 12 when God incarnate again revealed Himself in the Person of Jesus Christ.
- Joined
- 08 Dec 04
- Moves
- 100919
17 Jul 16
Originally posted by sonship[b]
" Then what if you saw the Son of Man ascending to where He was before ?" (John 6:63)
This verse is referring to the resurrection of Christ.
It is more logical to interpret that it refers to some ascension of Christ into heaven.
He did not say " What if you were to see the Son of Man ascending t ...[text shortened]... f Christ by Witness Lee
http://www.ministrybooks.org/SearchMinBooksDsp.cfm?id=209CDFD5C6[/b]
It is more logical to interpret that it refers to some ascension of Christ into heaven.
No it is not more logical. It is only logical if one fell hook, line and sinker to the trinity, but it is not what the bible teaches.
- Joined
- 08 Dec 04
- Moves
- 100919
17 Jul 16
Originally posted by sonshipAlmost every commentator seriously misunderstands this verse because they assume that “going up to the Father” refers to Jesus’ ascension into heaven. This problem is made worse by the fact that most English versions of the Bible translate the common Greek word anabainō, which means “to go up” or “to come up,” as “ascended.” This makes it seem like the verse is referring to Jesus’ ascension into heaven, which it does not.
I may not know when previous to His death Jesus could have ascended to heaven.
This is completely unknown to me. However, that Jesus could ascend to heaven and return to earth BEFORE His ascension in [b] Acts 1 is certain.
In John 20:17 on the morning of His resurrection would not allow Mary to cling to Him because He wanted to ascend to heav ...[text shortened]... y men in John 12 when God incarnate again revealed Himself in the Person of Jesus Christ.[/b]
Rudolf Bultman is a commentator who saw the problem about Mary touching Jesus, and wrote: “If the wording were pressed, it would follow that when he had gone to the Father he would subsequently present himself to his followers for fellowship and physical contact….” (The Gospel of John: A Commentary). Bultman is correct. If Jesus says the reason not to touch him is that he had not gone to the Father, then once he had “gone up” to the Father, people could touch him. Of course that is exactly what happened. Once Jesus had “gone up” to his Father, which, as we will see, he did when he went “up” to the Temple and then presented himself to the Father there, he allowed people to touch him.
After the sun came up, Jesus Christ, as the acceptable firstfruits, went up from the tomb area to the Temple on Mt. Moriah and showed himself publicly to God and was acceptable in God’s sight to represent the rest of the harvest—all the believers who will be raised from the dead. The High Priest showing the firstfruits in the Temple was something all the Apostles and disciples understood from their Jewish upbringing, and knew was supposed to happen that very day. So if they believed Mary’s testimony that Jesus had been raised from the dead, they would also understand he had to go up to the Temple and show himself to God there. Therefore, when Mary appeared to them and told them Jesus was alive, she bolstered her statement by telling them that he had to “go up to the Father,” that is, appear in the Temple. We know she told them Jesus had to go up to the Father (in the Temple) because when Mary got to the disciples, she not only told them she had seen Jesus alive, but she also told them what he had said to her (John 20:18).
As both the High Priest and the Offering, Jesus had to remain Leviticaly clean until after he offered himself, and he would not be Leviticaly clean if Mary touched him (Lev. 22:1-8). Mary was unclean by virtue of the fact that she had been in the tomb that morning and seen that the body of Jesus was gone.
However, after Jesus had fulfilled his role as High Priest and firstfruits offering by showing himself in the Temple, he could let people touch him—and he did. As we saw in Matthew 28:9, the first people he allowed to touch him were the women who came to the tomb to anoint his body with spices. However, the Bible makes it clear that he came to them after the sun had come up (Mark 16:2). So Jesus had time to go to the Temple between the time he saw Mary Magdalene and told her not to touch him and the time he saw the other women and allowed them to grab his feet. We should remember that when Jesus saw Mary he was in the process of starting up to the Temple (“I am going up to my Father;” John 20:17). So by the time he allowed the women to take hold of his feet later that morning, he would have been finished with his brief priestly duties. Also, he could invite the disciples to “handle” him later that day when they were behind locked doors (Luke 24:39).
Sorry for the copy and paste, but I am pressed for time this morning...back later tonight..
http://www.revisedenglishversion.com/John/chapter20/17
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
17 Jul 16
9 edits
Originally posted by checkbaiterYou're relying on a man whose view of any recorded ascension or resurrection of Christ whatsoever as a distortion to the real meaning of Christian faith.
[b]Almost every commentator seriously misunderstands this verse because they assume that “going up to the Father” refers to Jesus’ ascension into heaven. This problem is made worse by the fact that most English versions of the Bible translate the common Greek word anabainō, which means “to go up” or “to come up,” as “ascended.” This makes it seem like the verse is referring to Jesus’ ascension into heaven, which it does not.
Wiki - On Rudolph Bultmann -
Bultmann is known for his belief that the historical analysis of the New Testament is both futile and unnecessary, given that the earliest Christian literature showed little interest in specific locations.[1] Bultmann argued that all that matters is the "thatness", not the "whatness" of Jesus, i.e. only that Jesus existed, preached and died by crucifixion matters, not what happened throughout his life.[1][2][2]
Bultmann's approach relied on his concept of demythology, and interpreted the mythological elements in the New Testament existentially. Bultmann contended that only faith in the kerygma, or proclamation, of the New Testament was necessary for Christian faith, not any particular facts regarding the historical Jesus.[3]
No particular fact about the historical Jesus is even important to this modernist theologically far left wing Rudolph Bultmann. I would not put much trust in someone like this who considers any facts recorded about Jesus' life as not important.
Norman Geisler speaks in Christian Apologetics in the chapter - "Some Objections Against the Objectivity of Miraculous History - Theological Objections: Miracles Are Suprahistorical "
He [Paul Tillich] claimed that it is "a disastrous distortion of the meaning of faith to identify it with the belief in the historical validity of the Biblical stories." He [Tillich] believed with Soren Kierkegaard that whether all the events surrounding Jesus of Nazareth really occurred is irrelevant to faith. The important thing about a "myth" or "miracle" is not whether it happened in history but whether or not it evokes an appropriate religious response. With this Rudolph Bultmann and Shubert Ogden would also concur, along with much of contemporary theological thought.
Even those like Karl Jaspers - who oppose Bultmann's more radical demythologization view - accept, nevertheless, the distinction between the spiritual and empirical dimensions of a miracle.
[Christian Apologetics, Norman L. Geisler, Baker Book House, pg. 299] [my bolding]
You can nourish your faith with the de-mythologizing views of someone like Rudolph Bultmann. But I won't be taking his exegesis as helpful to really understand any of the details John wrote concerning Christ's historical life in the Gospel.
He would regard any ascension or resurrection for that matter as myth and "a disastrous distortion of the meaning of faith."
- Joined
- 08 Dec 04
- Moves
- 100919
17 Jul 16
Originally posted by sonshipEat the fish and spit out the bones....
You're relying on a man whose view of any recorded ascension or resurrection of Christ whatsoever as a distortion to the real meaning of Christian faith.
Wiki - On Rudolph Bultmann -
[quote] Bultmann is known for his belief that the historical analysis of the New Testament is both futile and unnecessary, given that the earliest Christian literature ...[text shortened]... n or resurrection for that matter as myth and "a disastrous distortion of the meaning of faith."
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
18 Jul 16
1 edit
John chapter 6 does not only includes Christ's resurrection but verses 32 through 71 include everything from His incarnation, dying, resurrecting, ascension, and coming to those believers on earth as [b]"life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45) [/b].
Verses 32 - 51a - Incarnation
Verses 51b - 55 - Slain
Verses 56 - 59 - Resurrected in order to indwell
Verses 60 - 62 - Ascended to heaven
Verses 63 - 65 - Becoming the [Divine] Life-giving Spirit
Verses 66 - 71 - Embodied and Realized in the Word of Life
Let's briefly work our way backwards to His Incarnation from His Availability to man as the living word of God. Remember, I am stepping backwards through the progression.
Peter confesses that they can go to no other teacher because Jesus has the words of eternal life.
"Simon Peter answered Him, Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. And we have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God." (v.68,69)
To open the heart and receive the words of Jesus is to receive Jesus Who is eternal life. He has wonderfully embodied His divine life imparting Being within His words.
This takes us back to the previous step -
"It is the Spirit that gives life, the flesh profits nothing; the words which I have spoken to you are spirit and are life." (v.63)
His words are of a nature that imparts Himself as the Holy Spirit into us. We have to open up out entire being to receive Him through receiving His word which are spirit a divine life.
It is not the physical flesh and blood which He told them they must eat, causing many to turn away at the hardness of the saying. But His words convey the Holy Spirit of life. We "eat" Him through taking in His words.
But before this we step back to His ascension.
" ... Does this stumble you? What if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before?" (vs. 61b,62)
Checkbaiter has protested that Jesus meant here to come back from the dead. The authority he appealed to Rudolph Bultmann takes no miracle or sign in the New Testament seriously. In short he is a teacher filled with unbelief and teaches unbelief in the plain words of the Gospels.
"Where He was before" I believe is from where He has said He came down so many times in the chapter - heaven.
1.) "out of heaven" - (v. 31)
2.) "out of heaven" (v. 32)
3.) " I have come down from heaven" (v.38)
4.) " came down out of heaven" (the Jews murmur) (v.41)
5.) " bread which comes down out of heaven " (v.50)
6.) " I am the living bread which came down out of heaven" (v.51)
7.) "bread which came down out of heaven" (v.58)
Seven times already Christ (or the Jews) have referred to Him as the bread that came down out of heaven. In verse 62 where He speaks of "where He was before" , I submit that the most logical interpretation is in heaven from where He came down, from where He came out.
we will continue the step backwards below.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
18 Jul 16
7 edits
Now we step back one more to see He Resurrected to accomplish this.
Before Jesus ascended to heaven to where He was before He had to be resurrected.
And He teaches that He resurrected for that purpose that He could indwell man.
"He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me and I in him.
As the living Father has sent Me and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also shall live because of Me.
This is the bread which came down out of heaven, not as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread shall live forever ." (vs. 56-58)
How does this passage suggest resurrection ? If the blood and flesh are separated that of course indicates that death has occurred. But once this "food" is eaten it is still "the living bread". In fact the one who eats this bread will live by Jesus.
So the verse implies strongly that He will DIE - to separate the flesh and the blood apart from each other, and He will be ALIVE in resurrection so that He who eats Him will live by Him, ie. by His living self.
He must be resurrected in order to abide in man as his new life. Then the believer's experience of living by Christ is the same as Christ's experience of living by His Father.
"As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me shall also live because of Me." (v.57)
Can you see how this indicates His resurrection and living again after being slain ?
We assimilate and "eat" the resurrected Son of God that He may LIVE in us.
Then we must step back again to see Him slain in His death.
"And the bread which I shall give is My flesh, which I will give for the life of the world." (v.51)
This should refer to Jesus giving Himself up to the uttermost on His cross. He gave His body and blood "for the life of the world". That is that those in the world may believe in Him and receive divine and eternal life through Him.
"The Jews then contended with one another, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? "
Of course anyone who gives you his flesh to eat is DYING that you may "EAT" him.
In saying He will give His flesh to eat and His blood to drink Jesus is indicating that He will DIE. He will be SLAIN that we may have Him as divine life.
By taking Him in He conveys God's life to us.
"Jesus therefore said to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves."
Jesus considers men without Him as dead. To be without Jesus within is to be spiritually dead. God looks upon you as dead in sins and trespasses. Without Christ received God says you have no life. For the real life is the Uncreated Eternal Person - the Triune God.
What will occur to Jesus (resurrection) will occur to those who eat Jesus too.
"He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up in the last day. For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink." (vs.54,55)
The step before this as we step backwards from His words which give life is His incarnation. This is in all the discussion from verses 32 - 51 where He teaches He is that reality of the type of the bread that came down out of heaven.
Looking forward again the process of john 6 is:
Verses 32 - 51a - Incarnation
Verses 51b - 55 - Slain
Verses 56 - 59 - Resurrected in order to indwell
Verses 60 - 62 - Ascended to heaven
Verses 63 - 65 - Becoming the [Divine] Life-giving Spirit
Verses 66 - 71 - Embodied and Realized in the Word of Life
- Joined
- 08 Dec 04
- Moves
- 100919
18 Jul 16
Originally posted by sonshipSo be it, I'm done here...🙂
Now we step back one more to see He [b]Resurrected to accomplish this.
Before Jesus ascended to heaven to where He was before He had to be resurrected.
And He teaches that He resurrected for that purpose that He could indwell man.
"He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me and I in him.
As the living Father has sent Me ...[text shortened]... ne] Life-giving Spirit
Verses 66 - 71 - Embodied and Realized in the Word of Life
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
18 Jul 16
5 edits
Here is the connection between John 6 and Matthew 24.
1.) Jesus exhorts that men take Him in and LIVE because of Him as He lived by the Father.
" As the living Father sent Me and I live because of the Father, so he also who eats Me, he shall live because of Me." (John 6:57)
2.) In the end times Jesus gains a critical mass of overcoming Christians living moment by moment by Him, whom He will reward by rapturing them before the great tribulation.
This is not all Christians unfortunately. This is a remnant of overcoming normal ones.
" At that time two men will be in the field, one is taken and one is left.
Two women will be grinding at the mill; one is taken and one is left.
Watch therefore, for you do not know on what day your Lord comes." (Matt. 24:40-42)
Christ will make a testimony of His pleasure with those Christians who are watching and ready by eating Jesus and living by Jesus AS He lived moment by moment by the Father.
One is taken and one is left is often assumed to mean the Christian is taken and an unbeliever is left. I submit that this is not a reliable understanding. It is simply TWO - men and TWO women.
And the difference causing WHO is taken and WHO is left is because of WATCHING. Therefore the WARNING to conclude the teaching is about WATCHING For the Lord to come.
"Watch therefore, for you do not know on what day your Lord comes."
For certain the one taken is expecting the Lord Jesus and lives accordingly.
For certain the one left is not watching for the Lord to come.
Obviously those who deny that Jesus is Lord are left. But also the possibility exists that those who believe Jesus is Lord yet do not watch so as to live by Him also will be left.
They will be dealt with latter not lost eternally.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
18 Jul 16
2 edits
In other words - OSAS is not OSGR.
Once Saved Always Saved does not mean Once Saved Guaranteed Rapture.
If the snatching away from the surface of the earth before the great tribulation was automatic upon being a Christian, then the Lord Jesus would not exhort the Christian to watch. What need would there be for her or him to watch. Rapture would be automatic and garuanteed. Right ?
Look again:
" Watch therefore, for you d not know on what day your Lord comes." (Matt. 24:42)
Do you think that a Christian brother lying in a bed of fornication is going to be miraculously raptured ? It is a sad fact of life that some who have believed into Jesus Christ have a living that has not changed from their worldly sinful ways.
Is such a brother in a state of "watching" for his Lord to come? No he is not. The concern for the Righteous and holy Lord coming to him suddenly is absent. He is gambling on living like an unbeliever.
Please do not divorce this concept from John 6 where Jesus said that if we EAT Him, take Him in, assimilate His words we will live by Him.
"As the living Father sent Me and i live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also shall live because of Me." (John 6:57)
He will be able to resist the temptation of commiting fornication because he is nourished up and fed up on the living word of Jesus Christ. He lives by what he eats. And he is watching by keeping his heart turned toward the Lord Jesus in his heart.
Here is where the popular "The Late Great Planet Earth" was misleading. And I have not followed any Left Behiind movie or book. I don't need to.
One is taken and one is left must refer to one who is a Christian who is watching and one who is either a Christian or an unbeliever who is not watching.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
19 Jul 16
2 edits
The Lord's coming is dependent upon a remnant who take the way of purification from the degradation of Christianity. He needs a remnant of those living by Him. This living is itself a watching of which He warns in Matthew 24::40-42.
Don't think that Jesus will come again if He does not secure some living in this realm of watching.
" At that time two men will be in the field, one is taken and one is left. Two women will be grinding at the mill; one is taken and one is left.
Watch therefore, for youy do not know on what day your Lord comes." matt. 24:40-42)
I believe that anyone able to read this post still has an opportunity to be among those whom Christ will secure as a remnant - watching and ready - walking in the Holy Spirit. These live with Jesus continuously and only await for Him to go from His spiritual presence to His physical presence coming upon them suddenly for rapture.
Rapture is a strategic move in the spiritual warfare. Christian men and women, boys and girls who live walking with the indwelling Christ are those who will turn the age from the church age to the age of the kingdom.
They are the most important people on the planet. And what they are involved in is a great and high calling - very crucial in human history. We live to prepare for the "householder" Jesus to come.
"But know this that if the householder had known in which watch the thief was coming, he would have watched and would not have allowed his house to be broken into.
For this reason you also be rady, because at an hour when you do not expect it, the Son of Man is coming." (Matt. 24:43,44)
The human mind may wonder - "Well is He coming back of His own accord or are we bringing Him back?"
It depends upon where we stand with Him and how we live. To some it will be as a thief coming to steal something precious. To others it will be a longing for Him to come and snatch us physically. He only seeks to snatch away those whom He has inwardly already snatched away via their living through Him on earth.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
19 Jul 16
1 edit
The Lord Jesus says He is coming like a thief. A thief comes to steal the precious things. Do you feel precious to Jesus Christ ?
There is a preciousness related to eternal redemption so that once one receives the Lord he will never perish forever. But there is a preciousness related to the daily living by Him as He also lived by the Father. For this we need to "eat" Him - assimilate Him and remain in His realm.
" He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me and I in him.
As the living Father has sent Me and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also shall live because of Me." (John 6:56,57)
When Jesus speaks of eating His flesh and drinking His blood we should take this as God speaking to us about His incarnation as a man. We must fully realize and enjoy that God has become a man. He becomes not just our companion. He must become our food and drink.
This is God Almighty telling us that He has clothed Himself in humanity in order that we may live by Him. He has not just become incarnate to shed redemptive blood, though that is crucial. He has come to thoroughly be our food and drink.
In this chapter Jesus stresses that it is His WORDS that are spirit and life. He says the flesh profits nothing. But through His words taken, eaten, assimilated and lived on and by moment by moment, day by day we eat Jesus Christ. We need get started eating some of His word every day. Then Spirit and life will be dispensed into our soul.
" Many therefore of is disciples when they heard this, said, This word is hard, who can hear it?" (v.60)
"It is the Spirit that gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words which I have spoken to you are spirit and are life." (v.63)
If Jesus meant to physically eat His body His body for these last 2,000 years would have to be the size of the moon perhaps for all the people to eat. It is His words that impart God as Spirit and life.
Peter acknowledges the Jesus has the words of eternal life.
" Jesus therefore said to the twelve, Do you also want to go away?
Simon Peter answered Him, Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life." (vs.67,68)