 This video is part of a study series titled Biblical Salvation Settled Wonsome for All. Please see the playlist link in the video description. Welcome back. So we're now in John chapter 6 of our study through the Gospel of John 4, the series Biblical Salvation Settled Wonsome for All. This is going to be a very powerful chapter where there's a lot of things that we need to unpack here. And understanding this chapter, if we can get this right, it will pretty much set a lot of other stuff in the Bible in its place to be properly understood because people like me will turn to John chapter 6 and will use verses from this and say, well, see, you can't lose your salvation. Once you have eternal life, it's forever. You can't lose it. But then someone who believes in conditional security will say, well, what about all these verses in this passage and that passage and so on? And then they'll accuse me of misapplying John chapter 6. So we need to be very careful about how we handle this chapter. We need to spend a bit more time on this than we've done in the other chapters that I've done so far of John. Go through it quite, quite carefully. And if we can understand properly the role of what God plays in our salvation and the role that Christ takes, if we can understand this, then everything else in the Bible will make sense in light of this. So we will really solidify the doctrine of eternal security, but we'll also show, we'll see the lens as to how we can interpret other verses in the Bible that deal with the issue of falling away or, you know, wandering from the faith and things like that. So we're really going to throw a few punches to conditional security in this video. We're really going to settle that issue. We'll also look as well in the later half of the video about what it means for Jesus to be the bread of life and to eat of that bread. Because John chapter 6 is one of the big go-to passages for Roman Catholics in the East and Orthodox to say, well, communion is a sacrament. You have to do it to be saved. And this is the chapter that they will justify that with because Jesus says some quite challenging phrases about eating his flesh and all this kind of thing. So we really need to properly understand exactly what Jesus is saying there. And also as well tying in with eternal security, understanding what it means for the Father to draw those who come to Jesus as well. Obviously that's something that the Calvinists will often use. I'm not a Calvinist, but we will need to interpret that and understand what's going on from a heavenly perspective and what God sees, but also what's going on from a carnal perspective and what we see and how those things tie together. And then once we can grasp that, you know, everything else in the Bible starts to make sense about abiding in Christ and continuing Him and the risks are falling away and so on and so on. So I'm not actually going to go through the first 24 verses because they're the stories of the 502 fish and Jesus walking on the sea, which many people will argue that in their own right those stories picture salvation, which is not unreasonable, but there's no salvation instructions. There's nothing telling us how to be saved or get eternal life. So for the scope of this particular study series, there's not really anything that I reckon I need to cover in there. So we'll introduce this starting at 25 for our study and the context is that some of the people that were fed in chapters 1 to 15, they've then approached Him in verse 25 and so that's the context of who Jesus is going to be talking to and it's a Jewish audience so that will be important for understanding what comes in the rest of this chapter. So we see starting from verse 25 and when they had found Him on the other side of the sea, they said onto Him, Rabbi, when did you come here? Jesus answered and said to them, truly truly I say unto you, you seek me not because you saw the miracles but because you did eat of the loaves and were filled. So we see quite quickly here that the people approaching Jesus seem to be only interested or at least only focusing on carnal needs, not spiritual needs and that will set the context of Jesus' upcoming conversation. Something that I want you to remember, so I'm going to tell you something I want you to hold onto this thought for later. Jesus obviously points out that they seek Him because they're only interested in sort of eating of the loaves but Jesus seems to be implying that they did see the miracles. That's not the reason why they're seeking Him but they saw the miracles though. OK, so that's going to be quite important. I want you to remember that later because they're going to be asking Him for signs but this verse would indicate if this is this crowd here, they already saw miracles, they already saw signs. So I want you to remember that as we get to later in the chapter. So then continuing this conversation in verse 27, Labour not for the meat which perishes but for that meat which endures onto everlasting life which the Son of Man shall give unto you, for Him has the Father, God the Father sealed. Then they said unto Him, What shall we do that we might work the works of God? Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God that you believe on Him who we have sent. So there's a few things going on here. So just to point out that when it says meat, it doesn't mean meat specifically. It just means food generally. Other translations say food. King James is just using an archaic way that meat was used. Jesus has clearly started talking about eternal life or everlasting life. They're obviously just the same word there, just different words meaning the same thing really. So this sets the context of the upcoming dialogue. We're clearly talking about eternal life so whatever this passage is dealing with has to do with salvation. Notice that Jesus doesn't say Labour for everlasting life itself. It says to Labour for the meat or the food which endures onto everlasting life. So we've already established up to now throughout the series that we can't work for eternal life but that's going to carry on being clear through the rest of the series. But there is some Labour involved here and what's the Labour for? Well if we are to do any work at all it should at least be to find out how to obtain this eternal life. So you can't work for eternal life but you can do work to find out how to obtain that eternal life. Okay, you know reading the Bible maybe you're looking at different perspectives. You're looking at this study series perhaps you're looking at other people with different points of view. Maybe even people that would be completely opposite to me. You're comparing it with the Bible. See who's lining up with the Word of God. You just want to know how to be saved. You're just trying to find out what the correct way to heaven is. Well that's all part of that Labour. It's finding out the meat which endures onto eternal life. And that's ultimately what this study series is for. If you've read this far and you're still not sure but you're prepared to put in the hours to listen and go through the Bible with the whole point of this study is to help you find that meat which endures onto everlasting life. That's the whole point of it. Okay. So that's the Labour that we do. Find out how to be saved essentially. But there's quite a lot of stuff to unpack here. So that's just one aspect that we're looking at. Let's focus on some other aspects of these verses. Focusing on 28 and 29 we see that this group of people ask Jesus what shall we do that we might work the works of God? And why are they asking that question? In response to Jesus saying Labour or work for the food which endures onto everlasting life. So work for the food that endures onto everlasting life. What work do we do? How do we work the works of God for this everlasting life? What's Jesus's reply? Well he says this is the work of God that you believe on him who he has sent. So they ask what works are supposed to be done for everlasting life but Jesus flips it around and says well no it's believe on him it's not work. So when we read Romans we see by grace you know we say through faith not of works we're justified by faith not by works throughout Romans Ephesians etc etc this is the same thing here it's just said a slightly different way. This is the work of God for eternal life that you believe on Christ. Okay so man with his works based mentality because man has obviously a works based way of thinking all of his other religions think that you have to work your way to heaven somehow. So we always ask this kind of question what must I do or what works must I work in order to obtain eternal life and notice how Jesus brings eternal life back to himself away from the questioners. Okay so they ask what must we do he brings it back to himself believe on me. Okay that's very important and so we see that elsewhere in the Bible as well actually so for example in Acts 16 30 to 31 and the the prisonkeeper brought them out and says sirs what must I do to be saved again asking what he must do not what you must believe but they what do they say well they say believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved in your house. In Luke chapter 18 in verse 18 things take a little bit of a different turn in this story but a certain ruler asks him very similar thing really good master what shall I do to inherit eternal life now this is quite an unusual example actually because Jesus doesn't specifically tell this guy to believe on him but I haven't obviously unpacked that story here because it's not in the Gospel of John it will it will crop up more as the series progresses but Jesus does say very crucial thing none is good save one that is God and if you're familiar with that story Jesus will then say to him well you know the commandments and oh I obey all these since my youth says this this ruler but even though Jesus just told him there's none good but God so whenever man asks what must I do for eternal life what must I do to be saved well remember there's none good but God so believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved okay Christ brings it back to belief and he's going to do that again in this chapter so keep watching so moving along then in verse 30 and this is why I wanted you to remember that bit earlier in the chapter when Jesus said they saw the miracles so this is where you need to remember it right here they said they that said therefore on to him what signs do you show then that we may see and believe what do you work okay well Jesus already clarified back in 26 this specific crowd being addressed already saw his miracles but that wasn't the reason why they approached him was it you know they were concerned with their carnal needs despite seeing miracles they don't believe yet they're demanding to see these signs so you notice the hypocrisy coming very quickly here and so a very similar thing that Jesus says in Matthew 16 for a wicked and adulterous generation seeks after a sign and there shall no sign be given on to it but the sign of the prophet Jonas and he left them and departed and so well why is it wicked and adulterous to ask after a sign because even when Jesus shows signs there's still not having it basically so then continuing this conversation they reply to him our fathers did eat manner in the desert as it is written he gave them bread from heaven to eat then Jesus said on to them verily verily I say on to you Moses gave you not that bread from heaven but my father gives you the true bread from heaven for the bread of God he see which comes down from heaven and gives life on to the world then they said on to him Lord ever more give us this bread and Jesus said on to them I am the bread of life he that comes to me shall never hunger and he that believes on me shall never thirst but I said on to you that you also have seen me and believe not so verse 36 clarifies what the problem here is with this crowd and it's pretty much the same as all the people that Jesus has dealt with in in John's gospel they won't believe him okay he's telling them to believe him they won't have it they won't believe on him okay there's quite a lot of things to unpack here in terms of the bread of heaven and the bread of life so focusing on this then so Jesus says he gave well they say he gave them bread bread from heaven to eat but Jesus says my father gives you the true bread from heaven et cetera et cetera well we've just read the verses so this is in reference to when they said that he gave them bread from heaven this is perhaps a reference to exodus 16 and 15 and it says and when the children of Israel saw it they said one to another it is manner for they did not know what it was and Moses said on to them this is the bread which the Lord has given you to eat okay so that that's what it's a reference to so we see clearly Jesus is the bread of God he came down from heaven notice as well that in this these verses he's used bread of God bread of heaven and bread of life interchangeably and that's quite similar to how in John chapter 3 it said heaven eternal life in the kingdom of God interchangeably this is a very crucial point I want you to notice this Jesus says that he who comes to me and believes on me he says shall never hunger okay and never thirst this is very similar to what he said to the woman at the well that we shall never thirst after drinking the water of life so that there's quite a lot to unpack about what's going on here and what it means for Jesus to be the bread and I'm not going to cover that right now because we need to get a more holistic view of the entire chapter to understand the bread of life a bit more but as we saw from verse 36 that the problem was is that they wouldn't believe in it and that's ultimately the problem and so if you can remember that as the key focus when we start to look at the rest of the chapter going into this but for now let's just look at eternal security versus conditional security in light of what Jesus said about the bread of life and what I'm telling you here is very similar to what I said back in the study of John chapter 4 with the living water so under the eternal security model that you know once saved always saved he cannot lose his salvation he will not lose his eternal life so he eats the bread of life well we can objectively say about that man that he will never hunger okay he will never thirst now as for this guy under the conditional security model if we can lose our salvation well if he eats of the bread of life but then he loses his salvation well he goes hungry again okay so then he has to eat the bread of life all over again but then there's still propensity for him to lose his salvation and he goes hungry again and then he has to eat yet another bread of life so if he's you might say the word lucky I don't like using that word but if he's lucky or if God it's favorable towards him maybe he might die okay but we might not you might die hungry if God's favor isn't you know quite so good towards him it's all just a gamble really and none of this matters if it's all about what happens either here or here none of this at all matters and we've covered this really in previous studies that I've done about you know John chapter 3, 4 and 5 we looked at that whole thing about how conditional security objects that you know you're giving someone an excuse to sin in this model but the thing is even so this could still happen here really so we already unpacked that previously in the series but the thing is what we can conclude from this is that advocates of conditional security have not eaten the bread after which man can never hunger because we can't really say that he will never hunger okay he might not hunger maybe we don't really know okay he might die hungry for all we know so you might wonder well okay let's suppose somebody believes in conditional security but throughout their life they carry on believing they never stop believing are they still saved them see based on this I would logically conclude that they're not because the thing is even if they give lip service to faith without works conditional security somewhere it always comes back to works eventually always has to do with man always bring it back to what you do to stay on the path so they're already sneaking in works anyway but the thing is if if they supposedly believe on Christ that he died you know he took their city was rose again but then at any moment we have to be watchful because we could just fall off and stop believing and just wander away from all of that do you really then believe it with any serious conviction it is sort of my question and we'll actually understand this more as this chapter progresses that this idea that we can just wander off and lose it all is very contrary actually to what actually happens later in this chapter when some disciples want wander off but then some disciples stay with Jesus so hang about and we will obviously understand that more a little while later so moving along then we'll park the issue of Jesus being the bread of life for now because he's going to say more on that later in the chapter so it's better to get a holistic view of the chapter before I can really unpack that so carrying on then in verse 37 all that the Father gives me shall come to me and him that comes to me I will in no wise cast out for I came down from heaven not to do my own will but the will of him that sent me and this is the Father's will which has sent me that of all which he has given me I should lose nothing but should raise it up again at the last day and this is the will of him that sent me that's everyone which sees the son and believes on him may have everlasting life and I will raise him up at the last day so there's there's loads of stuff going on here these short four verses so much to unpack here but first of all just notice that Jesus associates though those who believe on him in him as being those who the Father gives at John's gospel uses these sayings elsewhere so for example in 17 too as you have given him power overall that he should give eternal life to as many as you have given him 1724 father I will that they also whom you have given me be with me where I am that they may behold my glory which you have given me for you loved me before the foundation of the world and 1029 my father which gave them me is greater than all and no man is able to pluck them out of my father's hand so there's a repetitive theme across John's gospel that those that the Father gives me the Father gave them me and that's just synonymous with those who believe on him because he uses them synonymously as he does in this chapter so we obviously need to unpack exactly what that means now to start with we all obviously need to wonder them well what exactly does it mean the Father gives them me what does that mean well Jesus will explain this in verse 65 later in the chapter so park that question and we'll deal with it when we've got more verses to work with so focusing on different verses at different parts of the verses we have so Jesus said quite declaratively I will in no wise cast them out those who've come to me I should lose nothing and should raise it up at the last day that's what Jesus said so notice that Jesus notice how Jesus phrases this statement I will in no wise cast out or in modern terminology you might say under no circumstances will I expel them as opposed to saying I will not deny the Mentory it then further clarifies this truth in chapter 39 by declaring I should lose nothing and even though it says nothing it's just referring to each individual person given to him by the Father this is because once you come to Jesus it's not a case of oh you might come to him and then you know he might not let you in obviously he'll let you in but it's not just that he'll let you in he'll also not cast you out and he shall lose nothing so once you come to Jesus he will not lose you so this further really solidifies the doctrine of eternal securities that Christ will not lose those who are his he will not cast them out once they are in so those who advocate conditional security they will invent a condition where maybe Christ will cast them out or they won't say Christ will cast them out they'll say something that well you can walk away from Christ but Christ already said I should lose nothing if you can walk away from Christ that still forces you to admit that Christ can lose some so we will unpack that as the slides progress but this this will just be further proven when Jesus confirms later in this chapter what is meant by the Father giving them to him and it's just solidified in this chapter very indisputably as we will see and the next important thing to unpack from these verses particularly in 39 and 40 read this carefully so it says this is the Father's will that of all which he has given me I should lose nothing and then in verse 40 says this is the will of him that sent me the Father's will that everyone which sees the Son believes on him may have everlasting life and I will raise him up at the last day now the reason I want to focus on this issue of it being the Father's will is that these verses are very important because they literally quite literally define what doing the will of God for eternal life entails now this is important because there's a passage particularly in Matthew 7 that's heavily misconstrued to propagate works based salvation or conditional security so let's have a look at Matthew 7 and you'll see what I mean so in Matthew 7 between 21 to 23 Jesus says not everyone that says Lord Lord shall enter into the kingdom of heaven but he that does the will of my Father which is in heaven many will say to me in that day Lord Lord have we not prophesied in your name and in your name have cast out devils and in your name done many wonderful works and then while I profess onto them I never knew you depart from me you that work iniquity so we quite clearly see from Matthew 7 very clearly we need to do the will of God to enter heaven because he says not everyone that says to me Lord Lord shall enter but he that does the will is he that does the will of my Father in heaven which will go to heaven okay so then many people will misconstru that statement that we need to do the will of the Father as you know we must do all of these works of obedience and endure to the bitter end you know in order to be saved but first of all we can quite clearly see these that say Lord Lord did we not do this did we not do that they bred about their works okay well guess what all class does workers of iniquity there's no mention of their faith they did not say Lord did we not believe or Lord did you not say that whosoever believes in you they brag about their works so if you want to say that well to do the will of the Father you must be doing all these works and walking in obedience well that's exactly what this group claimed to do and guess what they're still categorized as you that work iniquity okay so Matthew 7 is very clear we obviously need to do the will of God in order to enter into the kingdom of heaven but the thing is in Matthew chapter 7 that's part of the sermon on the Mount okay Jesus did not actually specify what doing the will of God actually entails well we just read that in John chapter 6 okay now in Matthew 7 it says we've got to do the will of God 107 okay well what is doing the will of God 107 Matthew doesn't define it but John did define it in chapter 6 first 40 okay now there are obviously other scriptures that deal with doing the will of God but eternal life is not necessarily the context so we need to understand what doing the will of God for eternal life actually entails so let's have a look at these verses on the next slide so we've just read John 640 and this is the will of him that sent me that everyone which sees the Son and believes on him may have everlasting life okay that's very eternal life explicit believe on him have eternal life that's the context so doing the will of God to enter into heaven is what believing on the Son that you may have everlasting life so if we compare John 640 with Matthew 7 well then we can immediately understand what doing the will of God for eternal life involves now there are other verses that obviously mention the will of God so we have for example 1st Thessalonians 4 3 for this is the will of God even your sanctification that you should abstain from fornication we have another example 1st Peter 2 verse 15 for so is the will of God that with well doing you may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men 1st Thessalonians 5 18 in everything if thanks for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you and Romans 12 2 and be not conformed to this world but be you transformed by the renewing of your mind that you may prove what is that good and acceptable perfect will of God so we've clearly got four other verses there that mentioned the will of God but there's something that we must do and it's not about belief it's about things that we actually do but none of those are eternal life explicit okay they never mentioned doing that for everlasting life and actually all of those letters are actually addressed to people that are already in the church they're addressed to save people now John was written with the intention that you would believe in everlasting life that's the purpose of John okay so John brings it back to believe these other verses things that you must do but they're addressed to people that are already in theory already Christian okay already believers now one thing to unpack in the Thessalonians example it does say sanctification and sanctification does fit into the full package if you like of salvation because there are the passages in the New Testament that say that believers are sanctified and also deal with an ongoing sanctification but the thing is with the word sanctification it's not in of itself synonymous with salvation or being saved because for example Jesus will say later in John in 1790 he says I sanctify myself well we know that Jesus doesn't need saving from sins 1 Corinthians 7 talks about how an unbelieving husband or wife is sanctified by the believing husband or wife but I don't think you can make a strong enough case that they're saved by being virtue of being married to a believing spouse okay so sanctification can be for different purposes not necessarily for salvation itself okay so that's still not approved text that abstaining from fornication is a very specific commandment in order to enter into eternal life okay so when it comes to eternal life we see that it is believing on him that's what doing the will of God for eternal life entails now if you believe on him and you are saved and you're doing the will of God in that aspect well there yeah then we can focus on doing the will of God in other aspects of your life like abstaining from fornication and so on and so on and so on okay now going back to John there is an issue a very important issue to be addressed here and that is that does everything happen because it is God's will so we've got verse 39 saying this is the Father's will that I should lose nothing and then in verse 40 the Father's will that everyone that sees the Son believes on him and have a lasting life now we saw in the verses on the previous slide that certain things are God's will but that doesn't mean that they all happen so Thessalonians said to abstain from fornication and to in everything give thanks but we don't but believers don't always succeed in doing those things so does that mean then that the will of God always happens so with that in mind is it possible then that Jesus will lose some of those that the Father has given him aka they will lose their salvation because not everything that is described as the will of God actually happens I mean this is the case in point this is the will of him that sent me that everyone which sees the Son believes on him well we know that the people that Jesus is talking to sees the Son quite literally and doesn't believe on him so even though it's the Father's will they're not doing it so then you know does the Father's will always happen and if it doesn't always happen well where does that leave us then if it's the Father's will that Jesus should lose nothing okay so that's what we need to unpack here so in order to properly understand this I want you to notice so repeating then again some of the verses about doing the will of God I want you to notice that in some passages it's Jesus's responsibility to do the will of God but in other passages it's our responsibility to do the will of God if we just assume that the will of God means the same thing every time it says it well in John chapter 6 in the 37 to 40 verses that we've read okay we saw that him that comes to Jesus he will in no wise cast out Jesus came down from heaven not to do his own will but of the will of him that sent him so that's Jesus doing the will of the Father and then this is the Father's will that all which he has given Jesus Jesus should lose nothing but should raise it up again at the last day so again it's Jesus doing the will of God and then in verse 40 it says this is the will of him that everyone which sees the Son and believes on him may have a everlasting life but that's obviously us doing the will of God because we've got to believe and then obviously we already cross referenced verse 40 with Matthew 721 where he that does the will of my Father which is in heaven shall enter into heaven well 640 defines what that means if we do the will of God it's us believing on him so that's the emphasis then is on us to do the will of God there so in the example that we looked at with 1st Peter 2 15 for so is the will of God that in well doing you may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men well again that's our responsibility to do the will of God then in Thessalonians where it says that you should abstain from fornication and it also says that in everything if thanks well again that's our responsibility to do the will of God when Romans told us to be not conformed but be transformed again our responsibility to do the will of God and in chapter 4 of John earlier in the series we read that Jesus said my meat is to do the will of him that sent me and to finish his work so again that's Jesus doing the will of God so we have verses that say that Jesus does the will of God but then we have verses commanding us to do the will of God okay so very important that we make that distinction between when we do the will of God and when Christ does the will of God so there are obviously many things that we should do to meet the will of God but we already know it goes without saying really that we've already proven ourselves to have failed we fail to fulfill the will of God at times you know we all come short of the glory of God as it's written now when it comes to eternal life so according to John 640 we know that many will fail the will of God because many will not believe on him many people will reject Christ okay or they will believe on him with a very vain belief like work salvation or whatever it is but for those who do believe they're the ones and if they are saved well they're the ones that the Father has given to Christ again we haven't unpacked what that means yet but that's the Father giving them to Christ if they if they believe once the Father has done that so once the Father has given them to Christ notice from John's passage that Christ assumes responsibility for losing nothing Christ assumes responsibility for not casting any out so he doesn't say all that the Father gives me if that person will continue in me and stays with me then they will stay with me now it's I will lose nothing I will not cast them out Jesus assumes responsibility for not losing them and for not casting them out so we have the responsibility to believe that's what we're commanded to do for the will of God but for those of us who already believe while it's Christ doing the will of God to hold on to us to lose nothing to not cast us out very very important that we understand that distinction so then when it comes to our everlasting life man cannot be trusted to do God's will we already have and do fail we can only therefore be told to believe on Christ to trust him to carry out the will of God in order to give us eternal life and to trust him not to lose us and to trust him not to cast us out and this is ultimately where works salvation or conditional security falls apart because the emphasis is taken away from Christ to do the will of God for eternal life and towards ourselves okay so conditional security essentially invents a new type of person that well Jesus will not cast them out but because of their free will they can walk away but ultimately that means advocates do not believe Christ when Christ says I will lose nothing you cannot claim then to believe in that okay Jesus assumes the responsibility for not losing us Jesus assumes responsibility for not casting us out and this truth will be further solidified in John chapter 10 when Jesus will describe himself as being the shepherd looking out for the sheep now an objection that people will throw to this is that Jesus quite clearly commanded us to believe in him for example John 15 later in this same gospel of John the epistles warn us about falling away so then doesn't the doctrine of eternal security nullify these warnings you will wonder well let's just look briefly abiding I mean it does it does really need its own in depth study really but in John 15 7 so Christ said if you abide in me and my words abiding you you shall ask what you will and it shall be done on to you so there's an instruction you need to study and if you know my words abiding you but in our study in our previous study when we did John 5 we didn't actually focus on this verse really because I'm still holding it for when we get to John 15 but this is the problem 538 and you have not his word abiding in you for whom he has sent him you believe no so when we actually do an in depth study of John 15 later in the series it will probably take a few weeks or a few months from now but we'll see that abiding in Christ does come back to belief not works okay so yes it will need its own careful study it's too early in the series to expand what it means now but later in the series we will understand why Christ needs to give such an important introduction despite the fact that he also said he will not lose those who is so for now we can continue through John 6 and we will understand what happens when someone falls away and then all the other warnings in the epistles will start to make more sense from an eternal perspective as we understand the meaning of the Father giving us to the Son and then we can understand why Christ warns about not falling away and staying with him moving along in John then Jesus is going to start talking about the bread of heaven again so I'm still not going to expound the meaning of the bread of life just yet because we need to reach the end of the chapter and get a more holistic view so I'm going to skim through this for the context and just pluck some bits out so the Jews then murmured at him because he said I am the bread which come down from heaven verse 41 and they said is not this Jesus the son of Joseph whose father and mother we know how is it then that he says I came down from heaven Jesus therefore answered and said on to them murmur not among yourselves no man can come to me except the Father which has sent me draw him and I will raise him up at the last day it is written in the prophets and they shall be taught of God every man therefore that has heard and has learned of the Father come to me so as with earlier verses 37 to 39 we will look later at what it means about the Father sending them to him when we get to verse 65 so verse 46 not that any man has seen the Father save he which is of God he has seen the Father truly truly I say on to you he that believes on me has everlasting life I am that bread of life so when we do get to studying the bread of life verse 47 will further clarify what is the actual meaning of that so then verse 49 49 your fathers did eat manner in the wilderness and are dead this is the bread which comes down from heaven that a man may eat their oven not die I am the living bread which came down from heaven if any man eat of this bread he shall live forever and the bread that I will give him is my flesh which I will give for the life of the world the Jews therefore strove among themselves saying how can this man give his flesh to eat then Jesus said on to them truly truly I say on to you except you eat the flesh of the son of man and drink his blood you have no life in you who so eats my flesh and drinks my blood has everlasting life and I will raise him up at the last day for my flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drink indeed he that eats my flesh and drinks my blood dwells in me and I in him again we need a holistic view of the dialogue so I'll come back to that later and then verse 57 as the living Father has sent me and I live by the Father so he that eats me even he shall live by me this is the bread which came down from heaven not as your fathers did eat manner and are dead he that eats of this bread shall live forever and then so this is where I'm going to stop and go back to expounding the passage so in verse 59 these things said he in the synagogue as he taught in Capernaum many of his disciples when they heard this said this is a hard saying who can hear it when Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it he said on to them does this offend you what and if you shall see the son of man ascend up where he was before it is the spirit that quickens the flesh profits nothing the words that I speak on to you they are spirit and they are life but there are some of you that believe not for Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believe not and who should betray him and he said therefore said I on to you that no man can come on to the father I come on to me except it were given on to him of my father from that time many of his disciples went back and walked no more with him so we see disciples departing here they stumble at Jesus words we're now understanding what it means to be given by the father we're understanding the meaning of the bread of life now that we're getting a more holistic view of the chapter so verse 63 will help us to define the bread of life when I deal with that but we'll we'll do that later so focusing on this bit then so these disciples that it's not the 12 by the way because the 12 ones that stay with him but there's two things going on here okay so first of all verses 64 and 65 define what is meant by the father giving or drawing men to Jesus okay so verse 64 said for there are some of you that believe not okay Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believe not and who should betray him and he's saying that to the disciples who are stumbling at his teaching and are going to walk no more with him okay so these are the disciples that followed him but are not not going to follow it anymore and he said therefore said I on to you that no man can come on to me except it were given him on to him of my father so if man comes to Jesus but it's not given him by the father then he will ultimately just fall away he will stumble okay the second point is that concerning the the disciples who had followed Christ for a while verse 64 says very very important this Jesus knew from the beginning that they did not believe okay so there's no analogy here or example or idea of them believing for a bit while being saved but then stopping believing and then losing it their salvation that is not conceptualized here at all the disciples that walk no more with him well the implication here is that they were never given by the father therefore and they believe not okay whatever belief they had was a vain belief it was a pointless belief it wasn't true belief they didn't genuinely believe it they just liked bits about Jesus but then they ultimately stumbled they fell away they walked no more with him but Jesus knew from the beginning they did not believe okay that's going to be really important in setting the context for more or less all the Bible we have all of this stuff about falling away and departing from Christ and so on and we'll see that in the next few slides coming up so now that we've got a bit more of a holistic view of the chapter let's recap then about what exactly it means that the father draws believers onto Jesus so we had John 6 37 all that the father gives me shall come to me and him that comes to me I will in no wise cast out and then in 39 and 40 and this is the father's will which has sent me that all which he has given me I should lose nothing but should raise it up again at the last day and this is the will of him that sent me that everyone which sees the Son and believes on him may have everlasting life and I will raise him up at the last day excuse me so we saw from verses 39 and 40 that we could quite clearly see that the father giving and drawing men to Jesus is synonymous with said men believing on Jesus for eternal life okay Jesus is using them very interchangeably there we also saw that as a consequence of the father drawing them they actually believe so as to inherit eternal life and Jesus will never cast them out so they are truly saved with an eternally secure salvation okay later on then in the chapter so we have 40 40 45 and no man can come to me except the father which has sent me draw him and I will raise him up at the last day it is written in the prophets and they shall be taught of God every man therefore that has heard and has learned of the father comes to me and then later in the chapter 64 to 65 but there are some of you that believe not for Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believe not and who should betray him and he said therefore I said onto you that no man can come on to me except it were given on to him of my father so those that the father did not draw are in this passage at least the disciples who follow Jesus for a while again not the 12 but they eventually stumbled at his teachings and fell away okay so that but then they fall the category of believe not because that's how Jesus defined it okay he said it says Jesus knew from the beginning who believe not so they do not therefore lose salvation okay they were never saved because they did not truly believe now based on one Corinthians 15 you might use this phrase that they believed in vain although Paul uses that phrase slightly in a different context though still in relation relevant so that's what's going on here okay those who walk away the father did not draw them therefore they did not believe that's how we can frame it so let's have a look at a chart just to try and for those who are more visual than worthy perhaps this chart will help to explain in a more visual way so forgive me that this is a bit messy there's a bit much going on the screen I recognize that but we've got believers on the top half who abide in Christ and we've got believers so-called who don't abide in Christ and this is now under the eternal security model because we've just been defending it so for believers who abide in Christ so the father draws him he saved well Christ will lose nothing okay Christ will not cast him out so if he trusts Christ to faithfully carry out the will of God Christ will not lose this man okay and Christ will not cast him out for believers that don't abide in Christ so they believe for a while and then walk no more with him well father did not draw him Christ did not keep him well there are some of you that believe not for Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believe no so if you want to assert that the latter was temporarily saved but then lost his salvation then according to the standards of John chapter 6 this can only lead you to either one of these two conclusions number one you make Jesus a liar because you say that he will lose some and he may cast them out which is contrary to what Jesus himself said now you want to say well we have free will we can walk away okay so you say that Christ can lose people then well that's the opposite of what he said you have to make Christ a liar alternatively the other option then that you can come to is that you make Jesus a failure because you say that Jesus did not successfully fill his role to lose nothing and casting nobody out okay so the only way to reconcile this then to not make Jesus a liar and to not make Jesus a failure is to say that yes while this guy did believe for a while he still falls under the category of Jesus knew from the beginning who believed not okay and the father did not draw him I'll repeat it as many times until people get it and so then throwing a few more punches than at conditional security so if we compare eternal security one saved always to trust the words that Jesus said and to let him assume the responsibility for keeping you okay whereas conditional security or workspace salvation is to trust in your own watchfulness to stay in the right decision making process okay so under eternal security well Christ said I Christ will lose nothing Jesus said I Christ will in no wise cast them out Jesus said I will raise him up at the last day Jesus said my meat is to do the will of him that sent me into finish his work Jesus will later say in John I shall not let any man pluck them out of my hand so and then whenever it comes to man we point this then at what you must do well you must believe on me says Christ you must come to me you must come to my father you must abide in me so under this model whatever you must do for eternal life always comes back to Jesus okay whatever you have to do for salvation always comes back to Jesus that's why you have to believe on him okay it's not about your works it's not your righteousness it's what he did you must believe on him because it's what he did under the conditional security model well they use all these different phrases but like you must stay on the true path you must continue in good works you must play your part or do your part you must be walking in obedience and enjoy to the end and then any reference to Jesus is just well I died so that you can start this path I did this for you so that you will obey me enough to do the will of God to get into heaven I am giving you this free gift but you must prove yourself you're worth in in order to keep it so whatever Jesus did for eternal life under this model always comes back to you okay you're taking the emphasis away from Jesus and putting on you if you have that kind of a salvation so it's inescapable if you believe in conditional security you don't really believe in him you believe in you okay this is contrary to the role that the father and the son taking giving you salvation and people actually interestingly who proclaim work salvation or proclaim conditional security they'll often quote verses like deny yourself well the thing is under the conditional model you're not denying yourself you're confessing yourself you need to deny yourself and confess Christ that puts you in the eternal security model to confess Christ deny yourself and follow him because it's him that will not lose it's him that will complete the work you must believe on him you must come to him okay now there is a causality issue to be addressed and and that is that do we believe because the father draws us or does the father draw us because we believe and and you know Calvinists and Armenianists constantly arguing over which one is the cause but really that's a false dichotomy because God already for knowing those who will believe that the two go hand in hand I'm neither a Calvinist or an Armenianist so I'm not I'm not hindered or hampered in any way by such infirmities but there are people that will be bothered by this that they'll struggle with this and that they'll want an answer so I'm going to give you one but really this whole Calvinism versus Armenianism thing it's just a bunch of Protestants arguing over how can we make the gospel sound as complicated as possible without sounding like a Catholic while we do it but Jesus obviously when Jesus describes the father as drawing all men on to him he's giving a salvation fact okay you can't come to God unless the father draws you that's just a fact that's just what Jesus says that's just the way that it is but when he says to believe on him and he's telling you to believe on him he's giving a salvation instruction okay so the very reason that man must believe to be saved and not work to be saved is because man cannot boast that's Ephesians 2 8 and 9 for by grace he saved through faith not of works it is the gift of God lest any man should boast sorry I think I said not of works it actually says not of yourself but other parts of the Bible say not of works and the point is that man cannot take credit for his salvation by boasting about how he believes all the right things because he's just so good at decision making okay the father gets the glory for drawing man okay he gets the credit for salvation that being said though if you were presenting the gospel and telling somebody else how to be saved you wouldn't say oh well you need to be drawn by the father to be saved because the thing is it does not prompt man to repent so believe believe is the instruction that prompts repentance but the father drawing is the fact that enables repentance that's just the easiest simplest way of thinking about this so we don't have to pitch these as a cause and effect or in opposite to each other the two just go hand in hand those who believe are the ones that the father draws however that way plays out we don't need to know all the ins and outs of that but as it said in John chapter 3 the wind blows where it will so is everyone that's born again and the thing is you know if I went around to people saying oh to be saved you know you need to you need to have the father draw you well and there's nothing to respond to other than to just go away and sit around until you hear a voice in your head that says go and get saved okay today is the day of salvation the Bible says so you know being saved as a matter of urgency so it would be ridiculous to go around you know evangelize saying you need the father to draw you to be saved you need the father to yes that's the fact it's true but you need to prompt repentance that's why Jesus tells you to believe first and foremost okay you need to believe him and when he talks about the father drawing them it's in response to people that won't believe him okay and you know the same with acts you know when people when he said in acts says what must I do to be saved they said they didn't say oh you must have the father draw you they said believe on him that's the instruction okay so if you have already believed the gospel and are now saved I would guess that to you it didn't feel like you were being forced into it it felt kind of like a willing choice obviously feelings mean nothing really hopefully you are glad that you place your faith in Christ I mean for me like I don't feel like I'm being forced to be a Christian but then on the flip side of that I am compelled to believe it I don't I don't look at the Bible and look at salvation and look at eternal life and look at what Jesus did I don't look at that and then say how can I like why I can't believe I don't understand how you would not believe it like it's a free gift eternal life here take it I honestly don't understand why you wouldn't take it that being said though you cannot go around gloating to unsave people about how you make all the right decisions in life and how you got saved because you just know what the crack is and you know you get everything right because ultimately the glory goes to God it doesn't go to you and since it is the father who draws to the effect that Jesus will not cast you out you know that you feel compelled to believe in it that's what that is and so you know that there's what we're going through as a carnal specter because we can't see the bigger picture but obviously there's everything that God sees and so God sees while I drew you we just see while I believed you know one person does another person doesn't that's just the way that is but for those of us who are saved while knowing this gift of God we ask ourselves why would I not choose it it's ludicrous to choose otherwise so this is even why the free will argument falls apart say that we can choose to walk away from God why would you that that's a stupid decision to make and we will actually see this in Peter's very spirit filled response in in the next slide so that that's actually going to be a great response to come back to just to further solidify this point so then going back to the passage at verse 67 let's have a look at Peter's spirit filled response so then Jesus said on to the 12 will you also go away and you know you cannot just help but love Peter's answer here Simon Peter said on to him Lord to whom shall we go you have the words of eternal life and you know what top answer Peter that is a great answer you have to love that answer and even better and we believe and are sure that you are the Christ the son of the living God so Peter sums it up perfectly here where else would we go Jesus has the words of eternal life those who are saved know that there is nowhere else to go and this is just where the free will argument for salvation losing it falls apart because if a man believes in he saved he's born again he's a new creature the bible says all things are made new so the burden is on you then to explain why a new creature someone who is born again someone who has the mind of Christ says no I don't want this anymore see you you know that that's ridiculous okay there's nowhere else to go and verses 17 71 will clarify what was said in verse 64 Jesus answered them have not I chosen you 12 and one of you is a devil okay he spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon for he it was that should betray him being one of the 12 so verses 17 71 just compliment and verify verse 64 Jesus already knows from the beginning those who don't believe and those that would betray him I'll pick up on Judas in a little bit but let's just focus on this issue about walking away from from Christ or not being able to rather so let's try to visualize the things that are going on between the disciples that wandered off and and Peter okay so here we have Peter he's born again okay well Lord to whom shall we go Jesus has the words of eternal life all that the Father gives Jesus he will lose nothing and will in no wise cast out so Peter for Peter to lose his salvation where would we go Lord we believe and are sure that you are the Christ he's sure okay look at those words are sure that you are the Christ sounds like Peter believed sound like Peter was saved sounds like Christ would not lose him and guess what we know in hindsight Christ did not lose Peter okay now the disciple the departing disciples and Judas have not what I chosen you tough and one of you is a devil okay this is a hard saying who can accept this they depart okay they don't stay with Christ but guess what Jesus knew from the beginning who believed not and who should betray him who so ever doesn't believe in him is condemned because he has not believed in him that's what it said earlier in John okay so Peter once saved always saved now it doesn't mean that Peter doesn't mess up he will mess up later when you know he doesn't follow Jesus to death on the cross and he denies him three times but Peter still loved him we'll look at that later in the series we'll come back to that but as for these they don't get saved and lose salvation they're twice lost always lost okay if they were lost here and they're lost here they were always lost okay it's as simple as that so this is very important in our study of the rest of the Bible because now that we can see of this clear dichotomy in John chapter six we now have the lens through which to interpret the rest of the Bible so when we see things like for example in in Hebrews once enlightened once tasted the heavenly gift once partakes of the Holy Ghost they shall then fall away or you know locate give Jesus gives the parable of the seed that falls on the stony ground that those who believe for a while in time they fall away the sinner that airs from the truth that's in James Christ has become no effect on to you who are justified by the law you are fallen from grace branches that do not abide in Christ and are cut off and cast into the fire that's later in John's Gospel in chapter 15 and second Peter chapter two after they escape the pollutions of the world they are again entangled and the latter end is worse than in the beginning one Timothy five having damnation because they cast off their first faith so I've chosen these passages here because these are all the verses all the talking points of conditional security that where we can fall away we can depart from the faith we can lose our salvation but if we just compare it to John chapter six then we know that those who fall away Jesus knew from the beginning who would betray him Jesus knew from the beginning that they did believe not okay it's meaningless to say that they were temporarily saved if Jesus already knows that that they're not ultimately okay so another point on this is the same the same then that people can be temporarily saved but then lose salvation it's really a meaningless statement because it defies the very idea that Jesus knew from the beginning who did not believe okay Jesus promised he would lose nothing and not cast out those who are that are given to him by the Father so those who believe for a while and fall away clearly not given by the Father okay because Christ's promises did not apply to them but I saved Christians we believe in Christ promises they apply to us so those who fall away were never saved they believed in vain however you want to phrase it they were they just weren't saved we can explore this a bit more actually in John 14 and 15 when Jesus will have a more intimate conversation with his disciples and we have some disciples that are not quite sure about things and we have John 15 with the whole issue of abiding in Christ and branch has been cut off as I mentioned there so that will obviously need a lot of unpacking because that's quite a difficult scripture to wrestle with when you're defending eternal security so we can obviously come back to that in time and so going back to this diagram to make it really visual and simple for you believers who abide in Christ and enjoy to the end or however you want to phrase it Jesus will lose nothing Jesus will not cast him out Jesus has the words of eternal life the Father has drawn in Lord who shall we go you have the words of eternal life and we believe in our show that you are the Christ the Son of the living God okay he's not going to fall away from that truth Christ will hold on to him Christ will not lose him because he is sure that Christ is the Christ the Son of the living God these believers so-called who don't abide in Christ they don't continue they believed for a while then walk no more with him well Jesus knew from the beginning who believe not who would betray him who so ever doesn't believe in him is condemned because he has not believed in him so all of these concepts once enlightened once tastered to them fall away or the seed that fell on the stony ground believed for a while and fell away the sinners that err from the truth you fall them from grace the branches that don't abide are cut off escaping the pollution as you once again entangled having damnation because they cast off their first faith it all comes back to this Jesus already knew from the beginning that he did not believe therefore Jesus's declaration that Jesus will not lose him doesn't apply to this person because this person wasn't sure that he really is the Christ looking then at a different slide we can see then that for this first guy Christ has fulfilled his obligations to this man okay Christ did not fill his obligations to this guy the guy that believed for a while and walked no more Christ didn't fulfill his obligation to not lose him so if we trust in Christ to fulfill his obligations okay we believe and are sure that he will do what he said he's going to do but he didn't follow through with this with the latter but we have to say that Jesus does not lie we have to say that Jesus does not fail the will of God we're left with one conclusion the father did not draw this man this man did not truly believe he was never saved and so once this has just been shown to be so blatantly clearly and just indisputably obvious you start to understand the spiritual blindness of people who have a workspace salvation and conditional security which really is conditional insecurity actually because there's the ultimately they don't trust Christ to fulfill his responsibilities they trust in themselves to fulfill something that's Christ's responsibility okay it's Christ's responsibility to save it's his responsibility to keep it's his responsibility to not lose now yes we have our responsibilities to follow him to do what he said if you love me keep my commandments but we have a tendency to fail we cannot be relied upon to always follow the will of God that's why salvation is based on believing in Christ because he has to fill those obligations that's the very reason why he died on the cross is because we can't save ourselves if we can't save ourselves we can't keep ourselves it's that simple it's so obvious once it's just pointed out to you and you can just see the blindness of people who are just willing perhaps even willing to ignorant to this matter that they are just defending a house of cards when they try and stand on conditional security so next i want to introduce the issue of Judas specifically because Judas is often the what you might call the poster child for Bible characters who supposedly lost their salvation and King Saul is another example people use but Judas is obviously the one mentioned in John 6 so that's the best one to address here so people might start with a verse like Matthew 10 1 when it says he called them his 12 disciples and he gave them power to cast unclean spirits and you know heal all manner of sickness and so on so they'll use arbitrary reasoning such as Jesus Jesus wouldn't give Judas the power to do this or send him out to do this if he wasn't saved well we'll come back to that in a bit these are other verses used to justify that that Judas lost his salvation so in John 17 12 Jesus is praying a prayer to the father on behalf of the disciples and it says while I was yet with them in the world I kept them in your name those that you gave me I have kept and none of them is lost but the Son of perdition referring to Judas that the scripture might be fulfilled and also in Acts 1 24 25 the apostles prayed and said you Lord which knows the hearts of all men show whether of these two you have chosen that he may take part of his ministry in apostleship from which Judas by transgression fell that he might go to his own place so that's replacing the office of Judas there and so these are sometimes used to say that Judas lost his salvation as their proof text or they'll use reasoning that Jesus wouldn't give Judas this power if he wasn't saved at that time well that seems to go against then what we're reading in John 6 so Jesus knew from the beginning who should betray him Jesus already knew that Judas was false okay so it's not that like Jesus said he will be a devil he will be false he already is a devil okay so one of you is a devil present tense okay but then we also read in John 6 that Jesus won't lose those that are his so then we have to deal with what looks like a contradiction here so just thinking this through then when we read John 6 70 71 Jesus chose the 12 including Judas but already knew Judas would betray him so despite choosing him he knew Judas would betray him okay Jesus said earlier in that same chapter any which the father gives me I should lose nothing Jesus declared he would lose none that the father give it but then when we will read later in John's gospel in his prayer well then we see here that the father gave him and Jesus lost him or Judas was clearly lost so then we wonder well does the John the gospel of John contradict itself or even another way of looking at it does then Jesus not keep all that are his does he lose some even though he said I will lose nothing and as we mentioned earlier we don't obviously want to make Jesus a failure or a liar because that would create a huge blasphemous and doctrinal problem if we did that so then how do we answer this contradiction well whenever it seems like the Bible says something here and then it says something else here I'll give you just some helpful rules that will help you to try and make sense of all of that and these rules will probably be helpful again later in the series when we deal with passages like John 15 about not abiding in and being cast as a branch into the fire branches that were in him but are then cast off that seems to contradict everything that we're reading in John chapter 6 so how do we answer those contradictions so these are just a few helpful rules that we can apply so rule number one go with what the majority of or at least the clearest scriptures say okay so whatever's most clear on an issue or whatever the majority of scriptures say because this is one where for example we have loads of scriptures that say that salvation is by faith not of works but then people will just take that one little tidbit of James and then just completely redo all of these majority verses instead of going with the majority and then reinterpreting James okay look carefully at the specific language that's being used and that will be quite an important one because in the language that we've seen in John chapter 6 we're seeing words like eternal life when we read passages in Romans we're seeing words like saved but then when we go when we have all these go to verses about losing salvation it doesn't use those words in many cases so look carefully at the language although having said that funnily enough in this particular example rule number two will actually do the opposite of actually making it clear it clear but it can be fixed by rule three and four so rule three look carefully at the context of the statement being made because context changes everything we see context of eternal life in John 6 but but not John 17 so we'll explore that in a moment rule number four consider where you put your mental comma in a sentence that could actually be interpreted in more than one way and I am referring to John 17 12 there so I'll show you what I mean by these rules so rule number one then what what does the majority or the clearest scriptures say well in John 6 we've got clear statements okay we're clearly talking about eternal life Jesus clearly already knew that Judas was false and already knew he was a devil Jesus already knew from the beginning who they were that believe no okay and who should betray him so we have clear statements here now when it says none of them is lost but the son of perdition comparing it also with rule three about context we don't know that that's clearly talking about eternal life we don't know that that's clearly talking about Judas's salvation if that's the way in which he was lost okay we that's not clear enough on its own so if we were to apply rule number one these win okay as the clearer statements rule number two then what is the specific language that's being used so in John 6 Jesus chose Judas himself but but in John earlier in John 6 when he says that I should lose none that the father gave those that the father gave him so there's clearly did a difference between Jesus choosing for himself and the father giving okay that being said though in this particular instance rule two actually seems to cause the contradiction rather than undermine it because in John 17 it seems to apply that actually the father did give Judas to Jesus so then but this issue can be solved by rule three and four okay so rule three what is the context of the statement well we've been doing a study of John 6 okay we've been looking at it in detail we've been looking at all the verses that Jesus is talking about in this dialogue we've clearly seen Jesus is talking about eternal life and belief specifically that's what he's talking about that's the context of his conversation in John chapter 6 with this group of people when we read Jesus's prayer in John 17 when we get to verse 12 he is specifically praying about his disciples he's not actually praying for all believers generally because he'll do that in a later verse where he'll flip it towards all other believers so he's praying specifically for his disciples and he's not explicitly talking about or praying about eternal life so when Judas is lost we have to consider well in what manner is he lost because it doesn't necessarily mean that he's lost as in terms of salvation he's lost as a disciple okay so yes Judas is lost as a disciple but not lost in regards to salvation because he was already false and therefore already not saved okay rule number four if we were to disobey rule three and not look at the context and just assume that eternal life is the context of Judas being lost breaking rule three can still be fixed by rule four and that's to consider where in your mind you put a mental comma in a sentence that could read either way so if we put our mental comma here and separate the sentence in this way then it does look like all that the father gave him none of them is lost except Judas who was the one that was lost out of those that the father gave him that's what it looks like if we put our mental comma there and break the sentence in that manner however if we move our mental comma and put it there those that you have given me i've kept to none of them is lost apart from the Judas because Judas is not one of those that you have given me so you see how where the sentence can actually read either way depending on how you actually divide the sentence okay so in conclusion then if we follow these rules well yes Judas was chosen and lost as a disciple yes by transgression he fell from apostleship but no he did not lose salvation because Jesus already knew from the beginning concerning his eternal life that he was false he believed not he would betray him Judas was not given by the father in an eternal life context he was only given as a disciple with the already having the foreknowledge that he would betray Jesus okay he was given as a false disciple who was not saved and would betray Jesus all right why so that the scripture would be fulfilled that's what it said now that that does prompt a slight issue why did Jesus choose Judas as a disciple if he wasn't saved and this comes from an objection why would Jesus send Judas out to preach the gospel why would Jesus give Judas the power to cast out devils if Judas was unsaved but the thing is this is really arbitrary reasoning at best it's not really a scriptural argument because if we read the scripture that I read earlier from Matthew chapter seven we looked at that earlier in our John 6 study well many are going to say to Jesus did we not prophesy in your name and in your name cast out devils and do many wonderful works many people are going to say that to Jesus but then he's going to say I never knew you okay he's not going to say well I knew you once but then you fell too far in iniquity and I don't know you anymore he never knew them so the fact that they cast out devils or they prophesied is really meaningless now yes these people it only says that they say that it doesn't mean that they did that obviously Judas presumably did that but that's still arbitrary reasoning anyway it's like so what if you if Jesus gave him that power doesn't change the fact that he was a false disciple that you know that's kind of a subject in itself I'm not going to delve too deeply into that but you see how we can now wrestle that whole problem and so we can still acknowledge that Jesus is faithful not to lose those who the Father gives him for eternal life but the Father did give him a false disciple that would betray him who wasn't saved if you want to look at it that way okay now one last thing that I briefly want to cover is the heavenly perspective versus the carnal perspective this this will just wrap around that the whole issue of eternal security versus conditional security okay because you might wonder well okay if Jesus is not going to lose us if we're saved sealed Jesus cannot lose we cannot wonder of we you know we cannot lose salvation well then why does the Bible use terminology like falling from grace or casting off their first faith you know why doesn't it say something along the lines of confirmed their false belief or just you know whatever you might say instead well the thing is we have to understand the difference between man's perspective who does not know the end from the beginning and can only witness historic events he can't witness forward events okay I think my hands are going the wrong way for you um God's perspective obviously already knows the end from the beginning and can witness future events so everything that is going to happen that we can't see yet God already knows that's going to happen due to being a case in point okay so mankind this is man's perspective you know I don't know if this man will endure to the end okay I think he's a brother in Christ if he appears to be on this part of the scale at the moment he seems to be abiding in him at least for now but you know in the past I've seen other people fall from grace and cast off their first faith so I need to encourage him to continue okay so from our perspective yes someone has cast off their first faith that we thought they had you know a Christian that stops being a Christian however you want to play that out yes people fall from grace people were walking in the light you know they were hearing the truth sharing the Bible we were praying together and they fall away from that but from God's perspective God already knows the end from the beginning okay God already knew he did not believe God wasn't surprised by this right here okay so to say that he was temporarily saved here is is really meaningless if God already knew that he was going to die in his sins anyway because he basically saying well if he would have died round about here if you would have croaked to then you would have had eternal life but you know you're gonna die here now because you've lost it well God already knew he was gonna die then okay God knew that he's not gonna die during this phase so it's meaningless to say that he was saved in the sight of God you think he was saved but in God's perspective he wasn't because God's already foreseen that God already knows from the end from the beginning if he was truly God's God would have kept him God didn't keep him because he was not truly God's okay that way we can still understand why people fall the way people cast off their first faith we need to warn people about this we need to warn people about not abiding in him yet the father himself Jesus himself God is still faithful to hold on to his believers who believe on him with an everlasting belief who are sure that Jesus is the Christ the son of the living God okay so I hope that that helps put things into perspective helps you understand all the verses about falling away still makes perfect sense with eternal security in mind so I think we can bring that issue to a close and we can now move on to what it means to eat the bread of life because I haven't covered that even though we've read the scriptures but we've now got a more holistic view so we can start to understand that so that's what we're going to look at next so then with a holistic view of the chapter we can now examine exactly what Jesus means when he says to eat the bread of life or that is to eat his flesh and drink his blood so as you may very well know this chapter is used by as proof text by the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches as well as factions within Protestantism as well to justify the doctrine of transubstantiation and essentially in layman's terms that just means that during their communion or what they tend to call the Eucharist service that the bread literally becomes Jesus's body and so Catholics will literally be eating his body during the ceremony as per John 6 but on top of this for them this is actually required for salvation okay you have to be taking part in that process as part of the salvation package and Protestants will then try and get around that by insisting that the passage is just symbolic or metaphorical of eating his body in communion but then that still has problems too because they're still assuming then that this passage is talking about communion to begin with and they're misapplying what Jesus means by eating his body and flesh and I'm being super general here because some Protestants might actually agree more with the view that I'm going to portray and some Protestants may actually agree more with the Catholic kind of dogmas whereas some Catholics actually might agree with the Protestant view on this matter so there's a bit of crisscross there and also if you look on YouTube and look at a lot of conversion stories about Protestants who became Catholic I've found in quite a lot of cases it seems to all hang on interpreting John 6 in regards to communion which tells me that that's how perhaps they've been you know they've used John 6 in their Protestant faith to talk about communion and so then obviously when they've read John 6 they've then converted to Catholicism because then they thought the Catholics were following John 6 much more substantially so I'm not going to focus too much on the issue of transubstantiation itself to be honest so that whether Jesus is literally in the communion bread or just spiritually or however that debate would go I'm not actually going to focus on that because I'm actually going to assert that John 6 is not actually communion related and this series is more about salvation so it's about whether we have to do it for salvation so because that's the hook of my argument and what I'll be dealing with I don't really need to deal with transubstantiation or consubstantiation because A I wouldn't argue about that from John chapter 6 anyway I wouldn't go for or against those doctrines based on this chapter and B it's the issue of whether we have to take communion for our eternal life that's the issue okay whether Jesus is in the bread or not we can worry about that you know in another debate this is about salvation so that's what I really want to focus on now before we actually start to look at this passage and interpret it properly I want to state the obvious with just some common sense points before I even delve into the chapter I'm just going to read you some plain common sense okay so warning may contain common sense that some viewers will find offensive so common sense point number one the ordinance of communion or Eucharist whatever you prefer to call it has not actually been instituted yet in John chapter 6 Jesus and his disciples aren't observing it themselves they won't observe it until the last supper and that's going to be some time after this current point in time which I will demonstrate later in the study so to make this passage about partaking of the bread and wine and church would mean essentially that Jesus is telling people to observe an ordinance that doesn't exist yet in a church ordinance which sorry a church institution which doesn't exist yet okay so in a way you would have to say that the bible is written backwards because Jesus would have to say well you have to go to church take communion eat the bread eat my body to have eternal life but my church doesn't exist yet my disciples don't even know that communion exists yet okay so because the ordinance does not yet exist even the 12 disciples that accepted Jesus as teaching and stayed with him still would not associate eating his flesh with communion bread at least not yet anyway okay so that's common sense point number one common sense point number two is that Jesus has had multiple conversations with multiple groups of people across the gospels for at least three entire years prior to his death all right he instituted communion with his choice disciples in the final hours of his life prior to his crucifixion so there's no apparent or seemingly obvious reason why for this particular random group of unbelieving Jews he would need to tell them that they need to observe communion when he has not told this to anybody else there is no church institution for them to receive communion following this conversation anyway okay so that's point number two we I've been doing a study on John up to now you can see my previous videos on three four five and the other people that Jesus spoke with he never told them that they need to eat his flesh right so why is he telling this particular random group of Jews for no particular apparent reason why they need to hear it and somebody else doesn't okay so that's common point sense point number two common sense point number three the group Jesus is talking to in this particular passage are unsafe they do not believe on him as the passage demonstrates whereas the communion or the Eucharist is an ordinance specifically for people already in the church okay the apostles in the book of acts do not evangelize by telling people to come and take communion at their local catholic church and even the catholic church or the orthodox church I just include that in the word catholic they will require members to be baptized into the faith before allowing them to participate in communion so there's no reason why Jesus would need to give this instruction to non believers who are not baptized in the faith there's just absolutely no reason to tell them you'd have to get them in the faith and then we'd have to worry about communion so that's common sense point number three common sense point number four Jesus said I am the living bread which came down from heaven so if we're going to start talking about literal interpretations and well the catholics we interpret it literally well communion bread didn't actually come down from heaven okay it was baked in the same way as any other bread moreover according to transubstantiation the bread actually becomes the body whereas Jesus said his flesh is the bread so they're essentially doing it in reverse order so if you are to take an uber literal translation to this passage the disciples would have had to start gnawing at Jesus's flesh because that's the literal interpretation of that passage which they did not do so even the catholics cannot take a fully literal view of Jesus sayings in this passage okay and no christian that I've ever heard of is weird enough to believe that you know Jesus became a living breadstick or something you know he's not like the ginger man from you know gingerbread man from shrek 2 or something like that so that's common sense point number four common sense point number five is that repeatedly throughout john's gospel so far Jesus has said believe have eternal life believe have eternal life believe have eternal life he did not say eat my flesh have eternal life eat my flesh have eternal life eat my flesh have eternal life so to make eating communion bread a sacrament i.e you have to do this for salvation is to say that Jesus was then very inconsistent with what he is telling people in various conversations to enable them to obtain eternal life okay he never he never told the woman at the well to eat his eat his flesh he never told nicodemus to do it so he's not being consistent with what he's telling people that they need to do to have everlasting life okay and john's gospel is written for the purpose to tell you to believe and have life through his name it doesn't say this these things are written so that you will come down to church get the bread and then you will have everlasting life okay we saw in earlier slides that jesus said he who eats this bread shall never hunger but catholics keep getting hungry again because their salvation requires self maintenance and they can lose salvation so their bread of life by definition isn't working okay whatever they're interpreting it as their interpretation isn't working because the bread's not doing what jesus said it was going to do and point number six i mean i've already mentioned this but the gospel of john is the only gospel that specifically declares it is written for the purpose of giving you eternal life 2031 and it is also the only gospel that does not document the last supper itself okay so if the last supper was so essential to salvation and we trust john to faithfully write a consistent and complete gospel letter john really should have mentioned this event and when he mentioned that event he should have related this event to his earlier narration in chapter six but he doesn't do this okay when john starts narrating the events that come just before the crucifixion starting from chapter 13 he immediately starts after the last supper has already ended so john's writing to tell us how to have eternal life doesn't bother documenting the last supper at all doesn't even just say this is the last supper which is in reference to what i said earlier in john chapter six he doesn't do that at all so just before we begin then i essentially just want to give a quick run through for the different viewpoint so catholics claim to take a literal application but obviously they do not literally eat christ's actual flesh so there is still some degree of metaphorical interpretation even if they use the communion bread and wine as somehow becoming his flesh and blood to get around this some catholics may actually agree with consubstantiation as the the protestant view so that leads me on to the next one so protestants claim to take a metaphorical or symbolic interpretation of this passage so this is essentially to defend the doctrine of consubstantiation that jesus is present spiritually in the bread but not literally in the communion bread and wine so this is still a weak defense that catholics will easily dismantle though because the protestant view still asserts that john six is talking about communion um some protestants as well may actually agree more with the catholic view of transubstantiation even if they remain protestant so the view that i will assert quite simply john six is not talking about communion at all now although john six clearly does relate to jesus's body and blood and communion obviously does as well there is obviously a link there in that respect john six itself is not directly talking about communion supper therefore how i will define jesus's flesh or body or bread allows me to take just as much of a literal application of john six as the catholics reckon they do but without applying it to communion bread as being a sacrament so yes i can eat jesus's flesh and drink his blood i already have done so i don't have to do it metaphorically because i do it without communion bread and wine becoming his body and blood in substance based on how john chapter six actually defines it now yes i still take communion at my local church in remembrance of him i'll get to that later okay so going back to verses 26 and 27 in john six when this conversation was introduced so i already covered the context way back at the beginning of the video so jesus answered and said on to them very severely i say on to you you seek me not because you saw the miracles but because you did eat of the loaves and were filled labor not for the meat which perishes but for that meat which endures on to everlasting life which the son of man shall give you for him has the father god a god the father sealed i don't know why i always keep reading that bit wrong so jesus explains not to labor for perishable food okay but labor for the food that endures on to everlasting life now we touched on that earlier in the video so bread is perishable that's not really a secret this this physical property does not suddenly disappear because the priest has blessed it that's not going to stop bread from going malty it is therefore perishable and it is still eaten physically just as any loaf of bread is and like the loaves that jesus fed these people now yes i know they do have those crackers where they last a lot longer than the kind of bread you get in a shop but it's still perishable it won't last forever okay Eucharist bread does not endure on to everlasting life even in a spiritual sense let alone a physical one because according to Catholicism yes it is a sacrament and therefore it's required for salvation according to their doctrine it's not a one-off act like baptism it's an ongoing act Catholic salvation requires maintenance then because you have to be participating in this to receive communion you can't just do it once and then never have to do it again so this sacrament does not endure physically or spiritually it doesn't endure physically because bread perishes and it doesn't endure spiritually because you have to take it again and then you have to take it again and then you have to take it again and a Catholic can lose salvation as well so you still get hungry again it perishes either way the son of man supposedly i mean you could perhaps say that this isn't clear enough on its own but the son of man gives you the bread himself doesn't say come down to my church and my disciples will dispense it for you the son of man shall give it on to you he gives you the bread himself okay that's what he says there and that he also clarified that in verse 33 as well so it's 62 32 sorry 32 to 33 Jesus said on to them truly truly I say on to you Moses gave you not the bread from heaven but my father gives you the true bread from heaven for the bread of God is he which comes down from heaven and gives life onto the world so Jesus is the bread and he will give you the meat or the food it is Jesus himself that the father gives on to the world and we need to unpack what that means obviously it's all coming you just wait be patient with me so then in verse 34 things take an interesting turn because the Jews actually say to Jesus at first Lord evermore give us this bread so it's quite interesting later in the chapter they're going to stumble at his teaching but at first they do actually say give us this bread so Jesus explained I am the bread that come down from heaven and he's going to give this bread so they say give us this bread so give us this bread that enjoys it onto everlasting life well what is Jesus reply does he say come to my church that I will build and receive the bread that my disciples will bless and turn into my body and dispense at the altar that's not his reply his reply to them asking to eat the bread enduring on to everlasting life is that he says well I am the bread of life he says in verse 35 and then he says in verse 40 this is the will of him that sent me or the father that everyone which sees the son Jesus and believes on him may have everlasting life and I will raise him up at the last day so that's the answer Lord we want to eat this bread which endures onto everlasting life oh come down to communion not what he says he says believe on the son who the father has sent and have everlasting life so this really already before we get to the rest of the chapter is defining what Jesus means by eating the bread and this is just going to be further clarified by the upcoming verses so buckle up notice also that Jesus says I am the bread in in verse 35 so Jesus is the bread no indication that this has anything to do with bread being dispensed in a church then becoming Jesus Jesus already is the bread okay and you can see in this chapter that in between the verses about bread or flesh and when Jesus says those things in between those bits he also mentions believing on him coming to him so we can see by comparing the verses in between the living the eating the living bread is associated with believing in Jesus for our eternal life because that's the context that's in the surrounding verses in John chapter six so by putting them between each other well believing on me and eating my flesh well that's then defining it for you perfectly simple so picking up on this idea then that Jesus himself is the bread let's just wind back to some earlier verses 32 to 35 so 32 my father gives you the true bread from heaven so the father gives this bread and we know that Jesus is the bread and he also says that in verse 33 for the bread of God is he Jesus which comes down from heaven and gives life into the world and then 35 Jesus just clarifies it again I am the bread of life he that comes to me shall never hunger he that believes on me shall never thirst so we see that Jesus himself is the bread of life he is the one that came down from heaven and was given to us by the father now John says this elsewhere in his gospel but the fundamental point here is that the father is giving us this bread or giving us Jesus with what purpose well the purpose is giving life eternal life but how's that applied well we've just read in 35 come to him believe on him come to him never hunger believe on him never thirst and so when the father gives the son other verses just demonstrate as well in other passages not talking about bread that that's still the prospect or the context of God giving his son so like very famous passage John 3 16 and 17 for God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting life for God sent not his son into the world to condemn the world but that the world through him might be saved so just as we see in John chapter 6 that the father gives us the bread or gives us Jesus and if we believe in him must never hunger very similarly in John 3 God gave the son why so that we would believe on him and by believing on him have everlasting life you see how this is just further proving that that's what eating the bread means and later in John's gospel in chapter 17 he's going to pray for his disciples there and he says I came out from you father and they have believed that you did send me so again father sending the son with what purpose that people would believe Galatians I picked out Galatians 4 between 4 and 6 now it doesn't mention believing but it still uses a lot of salvation terminology and and so on so we see God sent forth his son made of woman made under the law to redeem them that were under the law that we might receive the adoption of sons and because you are sons God has sent forth his spirit of his son into your heart so we see this adoption here God sent forth his son that we might receive adoption well John said something similar at the beginning of his gospel he said to as many as believed him gave them he power to become the sons of God see all that connection they see how all the Bible connects you it all makes perfect sense so as well as the idea that the father gives or sends Jesus the Bible does also describe Jesus as giving himself like for example 1 Timothy 2 6 Ephesians 5 25 Galatians 2 20 I haven't actually put the verse on the screen though we also saw here in chapter 6 that the father gave believers on to Jesus as well so you see this sort of symbiotic relationship here the father's giving us Jesus and the father's giving us to Jesus so just like how the father giving the bread and the bread quenching those that believe on him in chapter 6 so also did the father give Jesus according to chapter 3 with a specific purpose that of the father the son to the world is that we would believe on him for the purpose of having eternal life that's the specific reason that's why God sent his son that's why he gave us that bread that we would believe on that bread and have everlasting life the bread is Jesus now again focus on verse 35 I want to drill this in until people get it Jesus said on to them in verse 35 I am the bread of life okay well what does he mean by that well he doesn't say he that eats my body shall never hunger and he that drinks my blood shall never thirst that's not what he says in verse 35 instead he says he that comes to me shall never hunger and coming to him is just synonymous with believing on him you see that elsewhere in general we see it here and he that believes on me shall never thirst I don't understand how to make it more clear this sets the context as to what Jesus means about never hungering and about never thirsting about eating this bread eating his flesh eating his body believe on him it sets the context for you john's making this really easy for people so as we have seen up to now in our study we shall never hunger or thirst because we are now passed from death on to life if we believe we've seen that in our previous studies of john but then he says in verse 36 but I said on to you that you also have seen me and believe not and so here in essentially lies the problem once again the same repetitive theme that we're seeing throughout john people would not believe on on jesus when he kept telling them to believe him and this is ultimately why they cannot understand the concept of eating his flesh for the same reason nicodemus didn't understand the concept of being born again in chapter three despite the fact that interestingly they did actually ask to receive the bread which gives such life so they ask for the bread that gives eternal life jesus said it's me believe on me but they won't believe me they've seen him and believe not there's the problem so many religious people want eternal life but they want it on their terms instead of on god's terms so like for example the catholics the jehovah's witnesses the seventh day advent is the moment and even actually many protestants and evangelicals as well they want eternal life don't we all but instead of just believing on the sun and placing all faith on him they will not let go of some aspects of themselves being necessary for life whether they think they have to do works or they have to repent of all their sins or if they have to prove their faith with their works or they have to maintain membership in the right organization in other words it's not enough for them to just believe they want eternal life but they want it on their terms not on jesus's terms the muslims want eternal life but they will not concede that god has a son the idea is so outrageous to them they still want eternal life but they're not believing on jesus they don't like what he has to say same thing with the jews in this very passage they want eternal life and they're looking for the messiah they're looking for the holy one of israel but god sent a messiah they didn't believe on him they didn't like the messiah that god gave them and even other more distant philosophies like the hindus they want some form of eternal life but they would rather merit it through the reincarnation process rather than just receiving the free gift that christianity says is a free gift and we see examples of this in the bible elsewhere like with the example of the rich young ruler he approaches jesus and says what must i do good master to inherit eternal life and he doesn't concede that only god is good and he assumes that he follows all the commandments even though jesus said only god is good so then as we progress through the chapter then to verse 41 the jews murmur at him because he says i am the bread which came down from heaven and they said is not this jesus the son of joseph whose father and mother we know how is it then he says that i came down from heaven so catholics will obviously point out here that the jews are taking a literal application to what jesus is saying in regards to eating the bread of life and then in in the next few verses jesus will actually double down on this teaching so he won't attempt to re-explain it in a different way so then they will sorry they will conclude that he must be intending to be literal in this dialogue not metaphorical and there are a few problems this which we will address when jesus doubles down on the teaching a few verses but first of all in this particular bit here notice what they actually say when they murmur in reaction to what he said what is it they actually said among themselves in objection to what jesus is saying they didn't say is not this jesus a man not bread how is it then he says i am the living bread so they're not actually objecting to jesus calling himself bread yet they're objecting to him calling himself the son of god or coming down from heaven when they already know that he has a supposedly that he has a father on earth called joseph okay that's their objection at first so it still comes to believing that he is who he says he is not that they take a literal application that he's bread there so then as we move down the passage into verse 47 once again jesus says truly truly i say on to you he that believes on me has everlasting life i am that bread of life the conversation then continues your father's delete manner in the wilderness and are dead this is the bread which comes down from heaven that a man may eat there of not die i am the living bread which came down from heaven if any man eat of this bread he shall live forever and the bread that i will give is my flesh which i will give for the life of the world so we see jesus toughening up on this teaching that he's actually the bread because prior to this he did not yet say eat this bread whereas now he's telling he's starting to tell them to eat this bread but notice first of all that the father's eat when he mentions the father's eating the manner in the wilderness that was physical eating and are dead and this is bread that very very literally fell down from heaven communion bread does not literally fall down from heaven so once again they want to say that they take a literal application to this passage but there's still an aspect where they have to take some sort of metaphorical or allegorical application to it but as i already explained the things i already dealt with this earlier anyway physical bread does not endure unto everlasting life even if there are supernatural occurrences concerning it we already dealt with that earlier because the communion bread in catholicism doesn't endure spiritually or physically so when jesus says to eat of this bread it's already been defined leading up to this point so in verse 35 he says believing on him equates to not hungering so it has nothing to do with eating his body literally or even in a communion service it has everything to do with believing on him that's what he means when he says eat my flesh or eat my body or eat this bread that's how it's defined that's how john six is defining it then as we move a few verses further down so in verses verse 52 the jews therefore strove among themselves saying how can this man give us his flesh to eat so they're obviously starting to stumble at the teaching now as we can see and this is the real crux of the matter that the catholics will jump on so then jesus said on to them truly truly i say unto you except you eat the flesh of the son of man and drink his blood you have no life in you who so eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life and i will raise him up at the last day for my flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drinking indeed he that eats my flesh and drinks my blood dwells in me and i in him and so this is really the fundamental crux of our doctrinal differences and issues here because jesus is now really slamming down this teaching eat my flesh drink my blood okay using very very strong language here so catholics will then say that perhaps that verse 53 because it now introduces this idea of drinking his blood which he hasn't yet introduced in this dialogue he's only mentioned bread so then it must be talking about communion because it's now the the body and blood or the flesh and the blood you know the bread and wine so to speak and because the blood is very colloquial to to this specific specific part of the the chapter it just wasn't mentioned before the irony that i find though if you're going to say that now because he introduces the blood that now it must be talking about communion there's a proof well i find that quite ironic coming from roman catholics anyway because as far as i understand it they don't even drink wine at communion so according to their own standards they're not meeting the requirements when they say that they take a literal application to this passage now i don't want to misrepresent what all catholics do or believe more so than perhaps they will say that i already have done but i'll just show you one of their websites that i found so i don't know how authoritative this website or this particular page is but it seems to suggest that when protestants visit a catholic mass they only receive the body or they only receive the bread they don't appear to receive the blood now this apparently may be a bit different for the eastern orthodox church because they i think what they looks like they do is they dip the bread in the blood and then it's served to the congregation so they don't actually drink the blood from a cup as jesus would have obviously given his disciples the drinking a cup they seem to dip the bread so in some really weird way they don't actually dispense the blood properly in the way that christ did it at communion and there is sort of an explanation on this website as to why they do that and also the way in which the eastern orthodox serve it but it's not based on the bible or how the events at communion actually happened when jesus instituted it because they have this idea of transubstantiation they then have this really weird idea that something really bad is going to happen if we accidentally spill a little bit of the wine or or you know drop some of the bread if you drop the bread it's easy to pick it up off the floor again if you spill the wine it's harder to pick up so based on that then they don't serve blood now not being catholic it's not personally my problem whether they do or not but they then can't give you all this lip service about taking a literal application to this and applying it to communion when they're not even following it fully by their own standards so the point and the point here is not just to have a go at catholics because i'm not a catholic i don't i don't really give a rip what they do in a communion service anyway to be honest but the point is don't let them trick you with this stuff that they're trying to set you in a trap because you just won't have thought of this but when you stop and think about it you realize how ridiculous it is that they're priding themselves on properly following this passage and yet ironically they don't even follow it by their own standards they don't drink the blood and christ quite clearly said that you have to drink the blood so if you're going to take the statement eat my flesh and apply that to bread that you must do that for eternal life you are forced then to accept that drinking his blood comes with that now the eastern orthodox obviously have an answer because they dip the bread in the blood but you they're still not doing it according to the way that christ did it at communion anyway but that's all i'm really going to say about that because again this is not about the right way to do communion or transubstantiation it's purely about the issue of salvation now again just to show the link between eating his flesh and drinking his blood and believing in him i want you to look carefully look what it says in verse 54 whosoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life and i will raise him up at the last day well this statement i will raise him up at the last day where else have we seen that in this same chapter well in three other verses john 6 39 and this is the father's will which has sent me that all of which he has given me i should lose nothing but should raise it up again at the last day john 6 40 and this is the will of him that sent me that everyone which sees the sun and believes on him may have everlasting life and i will raise him up at the last day john 6 44 no man can come to me except the father which has given uh has sent me draw him and i will raise him up at the last day sorry i read that verse slightly wrong there so this statement i will raise him up at the last day again it's associated with the father drawing us believing on him very consistent once again the bible defines it whoever believes on him he will raise up the last day whoever eats his flesh and drinks his blood shall raise him up at the last day and we saw earlier whosoever believes on him whosoever comes to him shall not hunger shall not thirst that's what that means john is making it perfectly clear for us so you see how the bible makes things simple and then somewhere along the lines a bunch of unsaved weird beards somehow make a simple passage really really complicated for some reason so by allowing john's gospel to define and interpret itself we can clearly see eat his flesh drink his blood means to believe in him and to be drawn by the father that's how john defines it communion as an ordinance does not exist yet in this chapter john's gospel doesn't even document the last supper jesus said that the man who eats his the bread of life shall never hunger and that christ himself will lose nothing the catholics are getting hungry again they can lose their salvation which means christ is losing them this proves that their interpretation of this passage is not working so to believe that this passage is talking about communion or transubstantiation you have to inject that into the passage over and above how jesus actually sets up the premise for what he's talking about you have to define it in some other weird way that jesus himself doesn't define it so even though i am obviously separating john six from communion we still need to understand where there is a bridge because obviously it's no coincidence that they're both dealing with christ's flesh or body and his blood because they both cover his blood in his body even though they're not even though they're not connected they're not talking about each other there is some connection through that so we just need to understand exactly what what that connection is and it all centers on what his body and his blood actually represents so from john six we see in verse 51 i am the living bread which came down from heaven and if any man eats of this bread he should live forever and the bread that i will give is my flesh which i will give for the life of the world so notice how then in verse 51 the giving of his flesh for the life of the world that's in the future tense because obviously in the future from this point in time he's going to go to the cross and give his life as a ransom for many so christ will give his life on the cross to give life to the world so we believe on him obviously after that event because he gave his life so we cannot give our own life as a ransom for sin that's very important so just looking briefly at the actual last supper all the communion verses so luke i've just picked one from luke 22 verse 19 and he took bread and gave thanks and break it and gave it to them saying this is my body which is given for you keep out here this do in remembrance of me likewise also the cup after supper saying this cup is the new testament in my blood which is shed for you so luke does not tell us to do this to maintain our salvation or continually eat of life he tells us to do this in remembrance of him and paul says something similar when he talks about communion in carinthians so one carinthians 11 verse 24 and when he had given thanks he break it and said take eat this is my body which is broken for you this do in remembrance of me after the same manner he also he took the cup when he had sucked saying this cup is the new testament in my blood this do you as often as you drink it why in remembrance of me for as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup well what purpose are we doing that you do show the Lord's death till he come so he's not saying for as often as you eat and drink you are continually eating his sacrifice so that you can maintain your salvation no you show the Lord's death until the time when he will come so whereas in the communion ordinance we eat the bread and drink the blood in remembrance of him Jesus does not tell us to do this so as to continually eat of him after his death on the cross his death on the cross is the reference to eating of him and communion is done in in remembrance of this event so we see both john six and communion are both talking about the flesh and the bread and the blood of christ but they're not references to each other though okay they're just both references to christ's crucifixion so john six is the prelude to christ's giving his life unsaved people need to believe in what he did to his eternal life communion is for believers to remember that he gave his life okay and i'll i'll show that on a chart so then the death burial and resurrection jesus gives his life as a ransom for the world to give life to the world the father gave us jesus and jesus gave himself jesus is the bread that gives life well john six what is it it's a dialogue with unsaved jews who didn't believe on him they need to believe on him to have eternal life so eat my flesh and drink my blood he who comes to me shall never hunger he who believes on me shall never thirst whereas communion is an ordinance given to saved believers only who have already eaten christ's flesh and drank his blood by the standards of john chapter six they shall never go hungry they shall never thirst again in a salvation context why do they have communion then because they do this in remembrance of me they show the lord's death until he comes that's why we do it makes perfect sense so they both relate to this but they don't relate to each other uh directly john six is not talking about communion it's that simple and so just to bring this topic to a close i'm just going to deal with a few objections that catholics might throw um so objection one why would jesus use such a phrase as eat my flesh and drink my blood to this audience if he really meant to believe on him is it not you know is it not just being deliberately confusing or repulsive or seen especially to a a jewish audience well let's get a more holistic view of the things that john has already established leading up to this point so in in the beginning of his gospel he told us that in the beginning was the word and we we know that that refers to jesus and i think even catholics would agree with that then it says in him was life in verse four and then down in 14 it says and the word crucial point was made flesh so jesus was the word and the word was made flesh god manifest in the flesh so john already established that as a premise at the beginning of his gospel that jesus is the word made flesh john three three jesus answered and said onto them truly truly i sound to you except a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of god and he was talking to nicodemus so back when i did a study on john chapter three we discussed the issue of being born again and then now later in john 663 it says it is the spirit that quickens and we know that born again is referring to the spirit the flesh prophets nothing now that's not referring to christ's flesh it's referring to our flesh our flesh prophets nothing we need a spirit that's why we need to be born again and then what what watch how jesus qualifies this the words that i speak onto you they are spirit and they are life so jesus coming down from heaven to this earth he's the word made flesh and god is manifest in the flesh and the words that he speaks are the spirit that brings life so the clue here is christ's words okay that's the clue so picking up on this point then so the words that christ speaks they are spirit and they are life his words are the life uh a similar saying actually matthew four four but he answered and said it is written man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that proceeds out to the mouth of god so although he actually makes a separation between bread and the word there they still come in the same sentence as you'll see so bread we obviously need bread in a physical sense to live but it's christ's words that we need to live in a spiritual sense so synonymous with believing on christ we need to consume his words his words give life he is the word made flesh and that's what we must eat so the words he gives us that give life that's what we must eat eat his flesh eat his words consume his words so i've plucked a few scriptures here like uh so revelation twenty two nineteen and if any man shall take away from the words of this book of this prophecy god shall take his part out of the book of life because if you take away from the words of life well then you lose your part in in life okay john seventeen eight quite a lot of uh ones from john here actually for i have given on to them the words which you gave me and they have received them and have known surely that i came out from you and they have believed that you would send me so again the words which i've given them the words and they have believed uh john five thirty eight forty and you have not his word abiding in you for who he has sent you believe not search the scriptures for in them you think you have eternal life and they are there which testify of me and you will not come to me that you have life so again word abiding words scriptures what documents the words that's what the words are written in they testify the words word testify jesus okay so he is essentially the embodiment of all these words that testify of him john five forty six to forty seven for if you i believed moses you would have believed me for he wrote of me but if you believe not his writings how shall you believe my words once again the problem with the jewish audience they would not believe christ's words john six sixty eight and then simon peter answered lord to whom shall we go you have the words of eternal life we looked at that earlier in this study john 12 47 to 48 and if any man hear my words and believe not i judge him not for i came not to judge the world but save the world he that rejects me and receives not my words has one that judges him so again words believe it's all joining together revelation 1912 and he was closed the vest dipped in blood and his name is called the word of god first peter one at 25 but the word of the lord endures forever and this is the word which by the gospel is preached onto your gospel again good news salvation that's all relevant associated with his words now there are far more scriptures that i could use and i'm already really laboring the point you know i'm already overloading you on the screen there's just not enough room to fit all of them and we'd be here forever there's this constant association between the words that christ said and how he fulfills all of those words and all the prophecy and all the testimony that relates to christ and so we must believe on that we need to believe christ's words we need to believe in the testimony about him we need to believe what the bible says about him we need to acknowledge god's word and not take parts out or add parts to it okay so then eating jesus's words what does that mean so with a salvation or an eternal life context of eating jesus's flesh how do we literally do this how do we consume his flesh if it means to consume his words what does it mean that jesus's words are life and that his name is the word of god if this is what we're eating if this is what we're believing well it's obvious think to be saved from condemnation to have everlasting life what words did jesus say okay well here's what jesus did say jesus did say for god so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting life for god sent not his son into the world to condemn the world but that the world through him might be saved he that believes on him is not condemned but he that believes not is condemned already because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten son jesus said in fact john 5 24 very very very very i say on to you here that here's my word and believes on him that sent me has everlasting life and shall not come into condemnation but is passed from death on to life in john 635 and jesus said on to them i am the bread of life he that comes to me shall never hunger and he that believes on me shall never thirst john 647 truly truly i say on to you he that believes on me has everlasting life so what did jesus say what is the words that we need to believe what words do we eat believe on me believe on me believe on me believe on me have everlasting life believe everlasting life okay now let me show you a bunch of stuff that jesus did not say go to church that i have established and received my body in the communion bread to have everlasting life not what jesus said repent or turn from your sins to have everlasting life not what jesus said now a lot of people say that in evangelical circles that really needs its own video to deal with that because a lot of people from different denominations say that confess your sins to my apostles and do penance to have everlasting life not what jesus said come down to the altar and pray the sinners pray to have everlasting life not what jesus said surrender your life to my lordship and let me take control of your will to have everlasting life not what jesus said you need a personal relationship with me to have everlasting life not what jesus said i will do my part then you must do your part to have everlasting life not what jesus said believe on me for initial salvation then bring forth fruit obey my commandments and persevere till the end until you get your final salvation. Not what Jesus said. Okay? So if we're to eat his flesh, if we're to eat Jesus's words, let's go with the words that Jesus did say. All these words, this is just man trying to complicate it. You see, Jesus makes things simple. Unsaved men make it complicated. Now yeah, some of these do really need their own because obviously we know the Bible says over and over again, repent, but it doesn't say repent of your sins. So that one will eventually, I hope, can give it its own video. But we need to go with the words that Jesus used. If we go with the words that Jesus used, it's not confusing. If we go for all these man-centered words, it becomes very confusing. Okay? So you know, I know people will point to all the parts of the Bible to try and justify things like these statements. You know, I can't address all of them now. Of course, this is a study of John chapter 6. So all in due time, my friends. But in this diagram, I just want to issue, deal with this because Christ's words are spirit, but then he is the word made flesh. So then there's that thing, is he spirit or is he flesh? Like which one is it? Okay. And is there a difference between words, plural and the word? Personally, I would just say that the word is just an embodiment of his words. You know, it's just the whole package of him and his words. But the thing is with all of you see, we know that our flesh prophets nothing. That's what John 6 has said. We know that we must be born again in spirit, which I covered in more detail in John chapter 3. So we need to eat Christ's flesh and drink his blood, aka believe in him. Christ's words are spirit. They are life. He is the word made flesh. So we are dead in the flesh. We need to be born again with a living spirit, which comes from Christ's words to believe on him. But remember that Christ doesn't have that infirmity because he is without sin. So we don't really need to distinguish his flesh from his spirit in the same way that we do ourselves in that regard. Because he's without sin. Okay. He's alive in both ways. He had to allow his flesh to die and then he rose again himself. So it's not necessary doctrinally to separate his spirit from his flesh in that same regard. So believing on him, eating his flesh, that's receiving Christ's spirit. That's all in one. We don't have to make that distinction as we do with ourselves to deal with the sin issue. Another objection that people will throw is that the audience, these Jewish audience, they obviously objected to Christ's words as they were taking it literally. Jesus does not apologize for this teaching. He does not attempt to reinterpret it. Christ is content with taking it, them taking it literally and stumbling. Well, first of all, this does not change the fact that the 12 disciples who stayed with him did not yet start gnawing at his flesh. So even if you want to say his disciples took it literally, they didn't start having a chew of his thumb or his toe or anything like that. Okay. Or did they take communion after this dialogue either? Okay. Because once again, communion as an ordinance did not yet exist. Now I'll pick up on that point in a moment. But if it would not yet exist until the time of the Last Supper, the disciples then have no idea that Jesus would introduce communion later. Therefore, even though they accept his teaching and they stay with him, they don't associate it with communion at all. So even they did not take an uber-literal view to what he said. And the thing is, Jesus has already used simpler language throughout John's Gospel so far. It's not complicated when Jesus says believe on him. Yet there are millions and millions of Christians so-called who can't understand this and make it, you know, elaborately complicated. Well, I showed you in the previous slide with all the stupid words that he used and all their junk, instead of just going with Christ's simple words. And the Catholics and the Orthodox aren't the only ones to do that. Most Christianity does that. So they can't even understand language as simple as believing on him. Jesus clarified in verse 36 that the crowd he was talking to would not believe him. Okay. Now the parable of the sower from the other Gospels is a good example of how Jesus used parables talking to those who rejected him so that they couldn't understand the things of God and people stumbled at his words and yet he spoke clearly to his disciples. So let's just have a look at this briefly to show this point. So I'm not going to read it all but between five to nine you've got the parable that he gives them and then his disciples ask him saying, what might this parable be? And then he said in verse 10 and this is the crucial point. On to you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God but to others in parables that seeing they might not see and hearing they might not understand. And then he explains the parable in a more literal sense to the disciples. Now in John chapter six it wasn't really clear that he was talking in parables but the point is that the parable of the sower, Jesus gives examples of different types of people in relation to believing to the crowd he's talking to and the point is that they will not understand the kingdom yet to his own disciples he uses clear language. Now there is some symbolism behind this in so far as unsaved people just cannot understand the Bible. So they will come to these wild conclusions you know at the expense of clear passages. So we have clear passages that say whosoever believes in him over and over and over and again but they want to just throw that out and say well that's not enough because we have this tiny little tidbit where Jesus unusually says eat my flesh and it's not even explicitly talking about communion because the ordinance doesn't exist yet yet they would rather throw out all of the clear passages about salvation by faith and not of works and by its believing on him because of a less clear passage that as we've already demonstrated today it doesn't even explicitly prove their doctrine anyway. So you know it comes as no surprise that the Jews could not understand this concept of eating Christ's flesh just as Nicodemus could not grasp the concept of being born again in John 3 and the Catholics cannot grasp the simple concept of salvation by faith and not of works and they're not the only ones you know other groups of Christians wildly misapply the Bible by taking a minority of less clear verses and making these huge salvation doctrines and instructions at the expense of the vast majority of clear scripture. These are just a few examples that I've put there on the screen about you know water baptism required for salvation, salvation by faith or works that always produces faith that always produces works or you know speaking in tongues as some kind of evidence of being saved and so the thing is even if Christ does use more difficult language like eat my flesh they couldn't understand the simple language anyway so we can try and explain it a million different ways and they still won't understand it. And then just more ammunition to prove that the disciples did not relate John 6 to communion okay in the beginning of near the beginning of chapter 6 in verse 4 it was the Passover the feast of the Jews was near all right then in 17 he enters the ship goes to Capernaum it's dark it's not clear how long some of these journeys took the people then in verse 24 saw that Jesus was not there so they came to Capernaum that probably took a few hours maybe even a couple of days depending on how quickly people move I don't think it's actually that far even on foot from Capernaum to Tiberius but you know I don't know how long it would have taken them then when so in John chapter 6 then when he is talking about the bread of life that clearly does at least happen some time near the Passover and then obviously because communion takes place on the Passover you can understand why people would make that bridge in that way but the thing is John doesn't actually link that conversation with the Passover itself we just know that it took place round about the time of Passover all right when we get to John 7 in verse 2 it then says that there's the Jews feast of tabernacles was at hand now if you go just on Wikipedia and look up when these feasts take place throughout the year they take place at completely different times of the year there's several months between them so there's many months between the Feast of Tabernacles and the Passover okay several months have passed then in chapter 10 they went away beyond the Jordan that probably took quite some time wandering out in the wilderness going to the place where John first baptized then in chapter 11 we see Jesus once again traveling in the wilderness then going to Ephraim continued his disciples and then the Passover was near at hand okay and then when we get to 13 when he's having that intimate conversation with his disciples that's just after the last supper that John starts documenting it which you know it was leading up to the Passover when Jesus was actually crucified so because there's the Passover in chapter 6 but then there's several months away for the Feast of Tabernacles in chapter 7 then another Passover in the following you know later there's at least one year difference between John chapter 6 and the last supper at least one year if not more okay so you know John immediately starts the conversation with his disciples after the last supper making no attempt to document the event itself in chapter 13 he does not link that with his early narration in chapter 6 John never makes the link at all even the disciples that accepted Jesus as literal words and stayed with him did not to take did not proceed to take communion for at least a year later almost so you know there's just simply no direct connection between John 6 and communion other than the fact that they both point to Christ and his body and blood but in a different way and for a different purpose another objection that they might hit you with is that John 6 is communion relevant because they'll say that John is writing from a liturgical standpoint and again Catholics are always using these fancy words to make simple things complicated but what they mean by that is is writing it in such a way so as to prescribe like a formalised ritual like is writing it so that the church can understand how to do the communion ritual or you know how to interpret it well this is a completely made up argument from silence to propagate Catholic dogma basically it does not fit the way that John's gospel is actually written okay John specifically told us why these things are written that we may have eternal life he does not express any such liturgical intentions now as with other gospels John is just simply documenting the things that Jesus did and said now unusually in John's gospel he does provide some additional doctrinal truth about who Jesus is but at no point did he write in such a way that he's intentionally trying to make doctrines and conventions for the New Testament church to follow now if John wanted to lay out such a practice of communion for the New Testament church he would have just written an epistle to the church to do so a bit like Paul did when Paul writes to the Corinthians how to do communion okay because that's what the apostles did when they wanted to lay out church code of conduct and doctrines they wrote epistles to those churches and said this is how you're going to do it John does not do that in his gospel he wrote a gospel account and in chapter six he does not go beyond documenting a conversation that Jesus had with the Jews who were not part of the New Testament church there is no evidence that John wrote that that gospel with a specific intention to explain to the New Testament church how to do communion it's just an argument that Catholics make up to prop up a house of cards another objection is that they'll say many early Christian church fathers believed in transubstantiation and that communion is a sacrament so it's necessary for salvation well me personally I'm fundamentalist in my christian approach this argument carries no weight with me whatsoever because the bible is my own authority I don't care what somebody believed in 300 AD that means nothing to me and the thing is when you study the bible you realize Jesus dealt with many false Jews and a small portion of true Jews okay he himself said that the gate to destruction is wide the gate to life is narrow and few there be that find it very few people find the gate to life Paul warned that there's already false prophets crept in unawares the false prophets look have always plagued true Judaism but you know once and Christianity after you know people say well all the church fathers you know 200 AD 300 AD 400 AD as if like somehow the church was really pure then and everybody was right about stuff okay there is no difference in 300 AD to how it is today false gospels and work salvation have always plagued Christianity they've always been the crux of false Christianity Paul warned about it it's a problem now and it's been a problem for the whole 2000 years in between there's nothing more holy or miraculous or special about 200 AD and 300 AD and 400 AD where for that brief period they were all right about stuff but there were all loads of people wrong before that and loads of people were wrong after that okay so if the vast majority of the early church fathers believed in this doctrine then they were just probably the false apostates going through the white gate to destruction that makes it false not true and more importantly actually we only really know what the church fathers so called believed because of what the Roman Catholic and the Eastern Orthodox churches have had the means and intentions to copy and preserve their writings okay so if they believe in transubstantiation and they believe that the Eucharist is a sacrament they're not going to preserve all the letters and sermons and writings of somebody who preached against that okay they're probably just going to insult them and call them a Gnostic or whatever and just lump them with somebody else so they're not going to preserve they're right what they are going to preserve is attacks and accusations of heresy by their beloved church fathers against these Christians so you know they any Christians who would have come against this would have just been denounced as heretics by the apostate majority and of course the reason we have no record of any early Christians believing otherwise is just because their writings have been lost to the dustbin of history this early Christian these early church fathers argument is ridiculous it means nothing to me it's way overused and a lot of people when they're not Catholic use it you know to their own contradiction really it proves nothing because the righteous remnant has always been a remnant it's always been a small number of people that actually believe christ's words and actually believe the truth the vast majority of Christianity doesn't whether that offends people or not and you know i'm just more to get this kind of off my chest is that i've seen youtube channels where people who believe in conditional security that i've spent this whole study video denouncing and disproving they'll do a video where well i believe what the bible says i believe the word and then you argue eternal security from the word of god and you'll get a rebuttal like well the early church fathers believe such and such well yeah but hang on a minute i thought we were basing it on what the word of god says not what the church fathers believed so you know it just goes to prove that people use the argument while also saying that they base their arguments on the the word of god that's obviously not a catholic problem that's more of a protestant problem but i'm sure that will rear its ugly head as i do more videos as part of this series so what can we conclude from john chapter 6 then well we've seen that those who believe on christ not with a wavering or a vain faith but complete faith are those who the father draws gifts to the son and the son will not lose any or cast out those who the father has given him and so all glory for our salvation goes straight to god not to man at all okay if we tamper with that truth at all then salvation no longer becomes about god but about man and this is essentially where work salvation and conditional security comes from he's taking the emphasis away from god and it's putting it on man which is what you have to do if you want to say that john six is talking about communion rather than just talking about how the father draws those who would believe in christ will keep them because that's the context of john chapter 6 so because the father draws us and because christ will not lose any given to him for the same cause christ also knows from the beginning who is false so with eternal security solidified through this knowledge we now have the lens whereby we can understand the rest of the bible when we have passages about christians falling away or being cut off we can see it through the lens of jesus new from the beginning who believe no and we can see that to eat christ's flesh and to drink his blood we need to believe in who he is we need to believe the words that he said and we need to believe the works that he did to give us everlasting life it's all pointing back to christ it's not about you it's about christ now yes john six does point to christ and so does communion supper both referencing his body and blood john itself has got nothing to do with communion and consequently john six makes perfect sense it's not that complicated you know when you actually understand just lead it for what it says without some dogma just being pushed on to you and so this concludes our study of john six so it's been much longer than my previous videos part of this series so if you've stuck it to the end well done thank you for your patience and i'm sorry if you're sick of my voice um hopefully i hope that you've seen that it really seals the deal as far as dismantling catholicism and defending eternal security is concerned uh john ten is also though a powerful chapter that complements john six in reference to eternal security but before i get to doing a study video and that i've got plenty of interesting things to pluck out of uh john seven eight and nine as we continue this study series so a few weeks from now i'll do more videos on those release it and just keep working on this this project so thank you for your time