Another standout is verse 59 "He said these things while he was teaching in the synagogue at Capernaum". The verse both identifies the location and describes the listeners as disciples rather than the crowd. Jesus is aware his disciples find this teaching offensive. Why wouldn't they? At best they are hearing about the sacrament of communion without the tradition or experience of that sacrament to use as their reference.
What they are being taught is equivalent of last week's story of the girl who took the words of institution literally and when her pastor said "The body of Christ given for you" let out the loud, disgusted, "Ewww". Pastor Ray said that at that moment, it was as if blood had been splattered across the altar. I can imagine the disciples in Capernaum experiencing this teaching in the same way.These "I am the Bread of Life" teachings culminate in a teaching in verse 63 "It is the spirit that gives life; the flesh is useless." I suppose this is something the writer of John and the community who loved these words needed to proclaim and hear. Perhaps this was an identity statement for them. I, like the disciples, can only ask who can accept this statement? Also, what Christian would want to? If flesh is useless why believe in a God who chooses to become incarnate and take up residence in our world? Doesn't God's action show God's desire to serve at the feet of our fragile, broken lives that pass from the only existence we know in an instant?
Yes, the spirit does give life but there is also the life in and of the flesh. Stating the flesh is useless stands against every important teaching of Jesus that I try to incorporate into my life. I may not incorporate the best of what Jesus offers well but I cannot declare that flesh is useless. Yet, as this is affirmed in scripture, this is also a deep part of the Christian tradition as it has come down to us and is not easily discounted.
Decisions to observe or break from traditions and scripture troubled me in the past. Now I see multiple stories in scripture where tradition is first honored and then the break from tradition is celebrated. The genealogy of Jesus provides a good example. Matthew and Luke both trace his genealogy back generations to David to show Jesus as a man of Israel. Yet, Jesus is the son of God and Joseph is not his biological father. The genealogies document what tradition demands while the break in genealogical tradition is also confirmed and celebrated in both Gospels.
It seems important that many of his disciples turned back and no longer went about with him in the context of his teaching at the synagogue. He teaches in the place where normally tradition is honored. Judas's betrayal is mentioned here. The other disciples will also betray him to different degrees as well.As a result I see when Jesus asks the twelve, "Do you also wish to go away?" he may not be questioning if they have a lack of faith but rather questioning if, at this moment, his teaching is meaningful to them, Even acknowledging their potential for betrayal here may demonstrate their devotion to him.
Peter's responds to this directly with his question back to Jesus "Lord, to whom can we go?'. The twelve are involved in a meaningful story for them that is in progress at this point in the Gospel. They cannot skip through the future experiences they need, including communion and the crucifixion, to become men who have faith to understand what they were taught at this moment,
OS - Short circuit (example: a man eating peas with the idea that they will improve his virility shovels them straight into his lap.
ReplyDelete