Sharing the Bread of Life; John 6:51-58
Summary
TLDRThe video script delves into the fourth part of the 'Bread of Life' discourse, exploring the spiritual significance of Jesus' words beyond the physical act of feeding the 5000. It discusses the cultural and symbolic context of bread in Hebrew tradition and the early church's struggle with accusations of cannibalism and incest. The script emphasizes the importance of internalizing Jesus' teachings as part of the believer's eternal life, highlighting the transformative power of the Eucharist as a living experience of Christ's presence within the faithful.
Takeaways
- đ The discourse on the Bread of Life is a multi-part sermon that explores the deeper spiritual significance of Jesus' feeding of the 5000 beyond its physical aspects.
- đ In the second part, the sermon delves into the cultural symbolism of bread within Hebrew traditions during the first centuries.
- đ The third part encourages a multifaceted perspective on Jesus' teachings, urging the congregation to consider various interpretations and references.
- đ° The 'money shot' of the discourse is the challenging statement by Jesus about consuming his flesh and blood, which was culturally grotesque and misunderstood by both contemporary and early Christian societies.
- đ« The early church faced accusations of incest, infanticide, and cannibalism, stemming from misunderstandings of their practices and teachings.
- đ„ The 'kiss of peace' and the use of 'brother' and 'sister' in the early church were misconstrued as evidence of incest.
- đ· The accusation of cannibalism arose from the Eucharistic practice of consuming the body and blood of Christ, which was misunderstood by outsiders.
- đ¶ The claim of infanticide was a misinterpretation of the story of Jesus' birth, his sacrificial death, and the consumption of bread and wine in the Eucharist.
- đ The Holy Spirit is presented as God's gift, a living presence that guides and transforms believers into the embodiment of Christ's teachings.
- đ± The metaphor of 'eating' in the script suggests a deeper, more active engagement with the teachings of Jesus, akin to tearing apart and internalizing the message.
- đ The Eucharist or Communion is not merely a memorial but a living experience of Christ's presence, calling for a deeper understanding and internalization of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection.
Q & A
What is the main focus of the 'Bread of Life' discourse in the script?
-The main focus is on the deeper spiritual and symbolic meanings of Jesus' teachings about the bread and wine, particularly the metaphor of consuming his flesh and blood, and its implications for the early Christian community.
How does the script describe the early Christian community's understanding of the bread and wine?
-The script suggests that the early Christians understood the bread and wine as symbolic representations of Jesus' body and blood, partaking in a spiritual experience that internalizes the teachings and presence of Christ.
What cultural misunderstandings did the early Christian community face regarding their practices?
-The early Christians were accused of being incestuous, engaging in infanticide, and practicing cannibalism due to misunderstandings of their rituals and teachings, particularly the consumption of bread and wine symbolizing Jesus' body and blood.
Why were the early Christians accused of cannibalism?
-The accusation of cannibalism arose from the scriptural concept of consuming Christ's body and blood during the Eucharist, which outsiders did not understand as a metaphorical act but rather as a literal consumption.
What does the script suggest about the importance of the resurrection in understanding the 'Bread of Life' discourse?
-The script suggests that the resurrection is integral to understanding the 'Bread of Life' discourse, as it represents the living presence of Christ that believers are to internalize and embody in their lives.
How does the script interpret the Greek word used for 'eating' in the context of the 'Bread of Life'?
-The script interprets the Greek word as 'noshing,' which implies a more intense and active form of eating, suggesting a deeper engagement with the spiritual consumption of Christ's flesh.
What role does the Holy Spirit play in the script's interpretation of the 'Bread of Life' discourse?
-The Holy Spirit is presented as God's gift to believers, enabling them to internalize and live out the teachings of Jesus, thus becoming part of the eternal life and the continued body of Christ.
How does the script differentiate between the Catholic and Protestant understandings of the Eucharist?
-The script notes that Catholics view the Eucharist as a transformation of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ (transubstantiation), while Protestants generally do not believe in this transformation but still recognize the spiritual significance of the act.
What is the script's perspective on the necessity of grappling with the 'Bread of Life' discourse?
-The script emphasizes the necessity of grappling with the 'Bread of Life' discourse because it represents a transformative and living experience of Jesus within believers, rather than a mere memorial or symbolic act.
How does the script relate the 'Bread of Life' discourse to the broader Christian understanding of salvation and eternal life?
-The script relates the 'Bread of Life' discourse to the broader Christian understanding by suggesting that through the internalization of Jesus' teachings and presence, believers become part of the eternal life and the ongoing work of God in the world.
Outlines
đ Spiritual Interpretation of Bread in Christian Discourse
This paragraph delves into the fourth part of the 'Bread of Life' discourse, building upon previous discussions about the feeding of the 5000 and the cultural symbolism of bread in Hebrew traditions. It highlights the evolution of understanding Jesus' teachings from different perspectives and emphasizes the challenging statement of consuming Jesus' flesh and blood, which was culturally grotesque in the first century. The speaker also touches on the accusations of cannibalism, incest, and infanticide that the early Christian church faced due to misunderstandings of their rituals and teachings.
đ Theological Misunderstandings and the Early Church's Response
The second paragraph explores the accusations against early Christians, focusing on the misinterpretations of their rituals that led to claims of cannibalism, incest, and infanticide. It clarifies how these accusations stemmed from the church's practices and narratives, such as the sharing of bread and wine symbolizing the body and blood of Christ. The speaker discusses the early church's efforts to explain their beliefs to those in authority, emphasizing the importance of understanding the spiritual, rather than literal, consumption of Jesus' body and blood.
đ Embodiment of Christ's Presence and the Transformative Experience
In the final paragraph, the speaker discusses the deep theological implications of consuming the 'bread of life,' which represents the living presence of Christ within believers. It addresses the discomfort with the literal interpretation of eating Jesus' flesh and blood, advocating for a spiritual understanding of this act as part of the Eucharist or Communion. The paragraph emphasizes the importance of internalizing Jesus' teachings and recognizing the transformative power of his life, death, and resurrection within the believer's life, suggesting that believers are part of a larger, ongoing divine narrative.
Mindmap
Keywords
đĄBread of Life Discourse
đĄFeeding of the 5000
đĄHebrew Culture
đĄKosher
đĄAccusations against Early Christians
đĄEucharist
đĄTransubstantiation
đĄResurrection
đĄHoly Spirit
đĄInternalization
đĄCommunion
Highlights
The discourse on the Bread of Life is divided into four parts, with the fourth part being the crux and crescendo of the entire discussion.
The Feeding of the 5000 is viewed as a spiritual experience rather than just a physical event.
Symbolisms and meanings of bread in Hebrew culture during the first centuries are explored.
The importance of perspective in understanding Jesus' teachings on the Bread of Life is emphasized.
Jesus' statement 'you have to eat my flesh and drink my blood' is examined in the context of Hebrew culture and its prohibitions.
The early Church faced accusations of incest, infanticide, and cannibalism due to misunderstandings of their rituals and teachings.
The concept of 'eating Christ's body and drinking His blood' was misconstrued by outsiders, leading to accusations of cannibalism.
The early Church had to explain and defend their practices against these accusations, showing the development of theology over time.
The Gospel of John's unique approach to the Bread of Life discourse, focusing on the living presence of Christ rather than a memorial.
The idea that consuming the bread and wine represents making Jesus a part of us, embodying His teachings and resurrection.
The challenge for believers to grapple with the literal and metaphorical meanings of consuming Jesus' flesh and blood.
The living Christ concept, where Jesus' teachings and resurrection are internalized by believers, forming an ongoing relationship.
The significance of the Holy Spirit as God's gift to guide and lead believers, forming part of the eternal life in Christ.
The transformative experience of believers becoming the embodiment of the Word through the acts of worship and communion.
The call to internalize Jesus' message and allow it to change believers, moving beyond a simple memorial to a living experience.
The responsibility of believers to show the world the transformative power of Jesus through their actions and faith.
The concept of 'working in communion' to recognize Jesus as part of believers and to understand the broader implications of this unity.
Transcripts
this week we start on the fourth part of
the uh bread of life discourse
the first time first part was the um
feeding of the 5000 where he looked at
it as more than just a physical thing
but actually a spiritual experience
um the second week we looked at all the
other symbolisms and meanings that we
could bring into that conversation about
bread that would have been part of the
hebrew culture in the first centuries
last week we looked at perspective and
how to how to take another look at
uh what jesus could be meaning bring
more uh more into it more references
into it look at it from different angles
this week it's the money shot this is
the crux the crescendo of
the entire
uh
discourse on the the bread of life
next week we will bring it home when we
realize that a lot of the new disciples
who were really keen to follow jesus
when he was feeding them not so crazy
about what he was talking about them and
they kind of hit the road they're not
interested they take off jesus closest
core stays but the rest don't
but before they leave
and after we have all of this richness
of symbolism and perspective and meaning
to work with
we get the very small
discourse where jesus explains
you have to eat my flesh and drink my
blood
hard stuff especially in the first
century with hebrew culture where
if
animals were not killed in
the kosher manor
they were not edible they were not uh
they were not able to be eaten and no
one touched blood that was absolutely
verboten you used didn't
so
jesus is offering symbolism that is
truly grotesque
to that culture as well as it is to our
culture
in the early church right in the first
centuries when this would have been
spoken when the early church was just
developing and when there was a whole
lot of questions
about who these
christian
followers christ followers were
three things were regularly used as
accusations
one
that
we were incestuous
two that we were into
infanticide and three that we were
cannibals
and the thing is all three accusations
have their basis in our tradition not
not directly obviously because we're not
cannibalistic we're not uh
adulterous and incestuous and we
certainly don't
involve ourselves in child sacrifice
but it came with the misunderstanding of
some of the stories that the early
church told and at this point in time
there was no definite theology there's
no um teachers there's no professors
there's no preachers like we have today
people were just going based on what
they thought was going on it took
centuries for the church to work this
stuff out
so if you look at the three accusations
i mean the first one
incestuous that's really easy to dismiss
we at the early church were known for
giving the kiss of peace and calling
each other brother and sister
now everybody knew it wasn't a
biological connection and the kiss of
peace was like
kissing your grandma there was nothing
into it more than showing a level of
affection
so people who didn't understand that
misinterpreted willfully or unknowingly
who knows but that kind of takes out the
incestuous part
the third part cannibalism
kind of came from the scripture that
we're reading today and this whole
concept that we drink christ's blood and
eat christ's body
we know it's bread the early church knew
it's bread but people outside didn't
quite grasp that
so they accused us of cannibalism and by
the way we were not unique uh christians
and jews have been
accusing each other of incest and
cannibalism right down through history
it was done beforehand it's your
standard one two if you want to insult a
culture you don't exist
you accuse them of sexual immorality and
cannibalism and inappropriate use of the
body that's just to happen all over so
that wasn't a big deal the thing is that
we could explain what was going on and
some of the early church um people did
actually step up and explain to uh those
in authority what was going on
the third infant uh
infant um cannibalism and inform
mentality
that was a little bit different
so you got to follow this one that they
heard the story of jesus
being born as a baby
and jesus saying you have to eat my
bread my my body drink my blood
and that baby jesus was put in a manger
which is little more than a feed trough
for animals
so baby jesus in a feed trough
eventually the
bread and wine that people were eating
baby jesus got killed
so
follow that along and that's where you
get infanticide and the cannibalism that
goes with it
so all of these
kind of sort of logical and kind of sort
of not at the same time but this is what
the early church was dealing with and
when the writer of john wanted to
explain what was going on to the
community that they were writing in in
turkey they used some very specific
images
that followed along with paul's very
first teaching in the first letter of
corinthians
that when we gather together we do this
recognizing that
the bod the bread represents jesus body
and cup represents jesus blood and we
ingest it we make make jesus part of us
we consume jesus
john is
you can look at it as
part of
a lord's supper or a communion narrative
because there's no last supper
in john the same way there is in matthew
mark and luke at no point in the gospel
of john does jesus say do this in memory
of me
this is the only part john 6 is the only
part in john's gospel that talks about
bread and wine
you can connect to the to eucharist or
not the the roman catholics certainly do
this is where they find their scriptural
justification for transubstantiation
that jesus is the holy presence
in the in the bread and the blood is
jesus body and blood
protestants tend not to go there
but it's it's scripture so how how do we
if we're part of a tradition that does
not
recognize uh
jesus as
transformed or the bread and blood bread
and cup as transformed into jesus body
how do we unpack this because it gets
really uncomfortable
we say we don't necessarily believe in
that but here it is in scripture written
right out for us and we've got a deal
we've got a deal
it'd be so much easier to just disappear
into the memorial service that we have
as communion and say we're doing it as a
memory
with the spirit as part of our entire
community not as jesus in a living form
but see that's the kind of thing it it
is living form and that's where we have
to come back to jesus did not tell them
do this later
jesus said i am
every time you consume the bread that i
give you are consuming my flesh you have
to eat my flesh to get me to get me in
you
we got to get away from the literal
meaning of jesus actual
bleeding body in this
because the bleeding body that is
connected is not necessarily us eating
his literal flesh
but the resurrection that is coming the
destruction that jesus is going to
experience on the cross
see the people who wrote john had
already lived through that as part of
their history they're writing back in
time to a time before
in the gospel itself before
people had this experience but they're
writing to an audience after
this had happened an audience who
believed in the resurrection who
understood that jesus came back to life
after three days and eventually ascended
to heaven and the holy spirit is now
god's gift to us as promised by jesus to
be always with us
jesus is speaking as that living
presence that has been resurrected
that when we look at the bread of life
in the very beginning of john's gospel
even said the word is flesh
everything about god's message in jesus
is the embodiment
of
god's message to us god's teaching to us
how we're meant to live how we're meant
to be and we're meant to internalize
that
jesus used the the metaphor of of
gnoshing and eating uh in fact in
english it's muted by the word eat but
the actual greek word means noshing and
tearing apart with your teeth like a a
dog does with
with meat left on a bone that we have to
get in there and be part of the
destruction of jesus body and the
resurrection and the coming back to life
because this is a living experience of
jesus this is not uh he's dead and we're
past this kind of thing it's not
strictly a memorial thing this is a
living we're to eat the living flesh the
real
reanimated the the
up the the ascended the resurrected
jesus in
what we are doing
it is not just simply a metaphor we
can't simply dismiss it that way
although our sensibilities wish we could
we have to grapple with this concept of
everything that jesus embodies
the word of god the
the blood of the new covenant
the life everlasting
the
vine of growth the
water that washes and quenches forever
all of that
all of those metaphors all those symbols
all those those meanings come together
in the living presence of christ
and by consuming that by internalizing
that by by getting it in us through
whatever means necessary we are
accepting that we are part of jesus
continued body that we are
part of the eternal life that on the
last days with the resurrection we're
part of that with god working in us with
god teaching us with god having
expectations we're part of that that is
in us that is part of who we are
we can't simply leave it
as this this function of shared
bread and wine
we have to look for the richer deeper
meaning that everything that jesus was
everything that jesus told us everything
jesus
could be
or was expected to be
has been eternalized in us through our
acts of worship through our acts of
following
that jesus
is in us
jesus flesh his living being
is in us
and every time we go through the ritual
of
a eucharist or lord's supper communion
whatever we're going to call it how
however theologically we're going to
look at that
we are reenacting this assumption that
jesus has come into our being
the way the word came into christ and
made christ living and made christ flesh
we are the embodiment now
of the word and is our responsibility to
listen to how god guides us and leads us
and it's not necessarily going to be a
pleasant image as we
as we look at
how
we are going to develop our faith
it might be a whole lot of gnoshing and
gnarling and snarling as we accept jesus
in ourselves could be
bland and
and almost
happenstance that we're not barely
paying attention to
whatever imagery is used whatever words
whatever symbolism is used the living
christ is in us as followers
he said just a couple of passages above
believe that's all we have to do
we're not going to become cannibals
the bread and wine we have are still
bread and wine jesus knew that too jesus
flesh and blood body needed to live and
eat the way we do but there's something
additional that jesus is trying to tell
us here that we are consuming
his entity
the word made flesh the flesh goes in us
the word ultimately
lives in us
that is a huge takeaway
that is why we have to wrestle with this
passage and not kind of dismiss it
as some form of
sacramental understanding that we might
not necessarily like or want to
understand
we are
the ones who stayed and listened to the
message
now it's up to us to internalize that
message to be changed by that message
we're no longer people who have to get
fed regularly we have been given this
gift of eternal bread what is nourishing
us is eternal it is
never ending it is ongoing it is
something that we can count on being
there
we can acknowledge it however we want
but it is jesus in us
the word made flesh
the flesh in us
that we are now able to show to the
world and through us who knows others
can come to to understand the truly
transformative world that jesus has
allowed us to see the knowledge that
anything is possible if we work in
communion there's that word again we
work in communion
recognize that jesus is part of us and
also our leader that we are invited to
be part of something so much bigger than
we can ask or imagine
so much bigger than we can understand
by jesus being in us
through the light the bread of life
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)