John 6: Eucharist?
Friday, October 16th, 2009
Dr. Everett Berry (Ph.D. Theology, Southern Seminary) is a frequent guest on “Live from Criswell”. His presence allows me to address more significant theological issues. He is a theologian, after all!
Here’s a follow-up e-mail he received after mentioning John 6’s comments about “eating my flesh” and such, followed by his reply to the email.
Dr. Berry, I heard you on Dr. Creamer’s radio show. I have a question for you. Why should we take John 6 verses 50-69 as symbolic? Why not take Him literally as Catholics do?
Thank you, Gene
And here is Dr. Berry’s reply:
Gene,Thanks for the question. Briefly, when we deal with John 6, verses 50-69 are a part of the larger discourse that Jesus is having with the crowds, the Jews and his disciples. He begins by saying that the people are following him because they have eaten “literal” food. But they should rather seek the food which is eternal (6:27). He then interprets the eating of that food in several ways; as believing in the Father who sent him (6:29), as coming to him and believing (6:35), and as beholding and believing in the him (6:40). This being said then, when Jesus claims that the one who eats his flesh and drinks his blood will be raised on the last day (6:54), the point is that the one who has eternal life is the one who believes he is the bread from heaven who gives his flesh for his people. Furthermore, Jesus tells the disciples that the flesh profits nothing but his words are of the Spirit and so they give life (6:63). Those who eat them have eternal life but still there are those who do not (6:64). Also, just as a practical question, how does it make sense to interpret this passage as referring to the Eucharist when this ordinance has not been established yet. This would seem to be anachronistic.
Just food for thought. No pun intended.
Blessings,
Everett Berry
And my comment? I think the pun was intended.
There is more on this interchange here.
Sphere: Related Content



