John 6: Context
John 6: Context
The Jews claimed:
1) an unconditional national election by virtue of being “children of Abraham” (Matt. 3:9),
2) that they were disciples of Moses (John 9:28), and
3) that unlike Jesus, God was their father. (John 8:41)
From John chapters 5 through 12, you have a running dialogue between Jesus and the unbelieving Jews. They maintained that they were right with God, and didn’t need Jesus. In fact, He was totally the opposite of any kind of Messiah that they were expecting. They didn’t think that they needed salvation from sin, but salvation from the Romans.
Jesus had done more miracles than the world had ever seen, and just after performing one at John 6, they still didn’t believe in Him, and ultimately I think that Jesus played the part of the Good Physician and diagnosed their problem. Their problem? They weren’t right with God. That’s something that no one ever likes to hear. If you’ve ever had to tell someone that, recall their expression, because that’s the reaction that the Jews felt. Jesus kept emphasizing His Father, His Father, His Father, again, and again, and again, all for what I believe, was the purpose of showing them that the reason why they were not coming to believe in Him was because they were outside of a covenant relationship with God, that is, that they were not right with God. Just after the Jews professed that God was their Father, and that Jesus had a demon, Jesus answered and said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and have come from God, for I have not even come on My own initiative, but He sent Me. Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you cannot hear My word.” (John 8:42-43) They certainly could audibly hear Him. The problem was that they couldn’t bear to hear Him, nor could they bear to hear His Father, either. “It is written in the prophets, And they shall all be taught of God. Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me.” (John 6:45) The reality of why, despite so many miracles, that the Jews were not coming to Jesus, is simply sin. Sin alienated them from God, and hence they were not His sheep, and consequently, the Father was not drawing them, because they were not His to give. Had God really been their Father, as they claimed, then the Father would have gladly given and drawn them to His Son. But because of sin, since they couldn’t bear to hear the Father, nor would they bear His Son. They killed the Father’s prophets, and now they were about to kill the Father’s own Son. Ultimately, I gather that Jesus was challenging them that they were not right with God, and that if they would come to God in repentance, then God would introduce them to His Son. I can think of no better example than that of Nathanael. (John 1:45-51)
The references to “sheep” at John chapter 10 should also be considered in light of John 10:37-38, in which for those whom Jesus had already mentioned that were *not* His sheep, are nevertheless encouraged to consider the miracles and to believe. So just because someone is not one of Jesus’ sheep, doesn’t mean that it’s an uncorrectable state. They can become one of His sheep. Of course, a Calvinist could say that some were secret sheep, and not realizing it, but that’s not what the text states. As for John 6:44, this must be considered in connection with John 6:45. Jesus was not mocking the unbelieving Jews about a non-election, such as being unwanted and undesired by God, but instead, He was lovingly telling them what the real problem was: They hadn’t heard and learned from the Father; they were lost and in need of salvation. In addition to this, it is a fact that no one in the context had reflected any type of Calvinistic understanding, and issued a push-back, accordingly. So if they understood Jesus’ words as teaching something so scandalous as Calvinism, then why would they make no big deal of it (and literally making no mention of it at all), and yet, conversely, when Calvinists do openly advocate it, where it is explicitly taught by such people as Augustine and Calvin, there are strong reactions against it? So clearly, something does not add up, and that’s a red flag.
