Sermon Tone Analysis
Overall tone of the sermon
This automated analysis scores the text on the likely presence of emotional, language, and social tones. There are no right or wrong scores; this is just an indication of tones readers or listeners may pick up from the text.
A score of 0.5 or higher indicates the tone is likely present.
Emotion Tone
Anger
0.13UNLIKELY
Disgust
0.11UNLIKELY
Fear
0.1UNLIKELY
Joy
0.56LIKELY
Sadness
0.55LIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.7LIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0.39UNLIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.92LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.66LIKELY
Extraversion
0.1UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.68LIKELY
Emotional Range
0.63LIKELY
Tone of specific sentences
Tones
Emotion
Language
Social Tendencies
Anger
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9
Hard to hear
Have you ever been told something that is hard to hear, hard to accept?
Jesus continues with his teaching, focused on the Jews.
Jesus has been on a divine journey with some great divine times of teaching along the way.
Recently we have looked at:
Jesus feeds the 5,000 who were obedient (6:1-15)
Jesus teaching, protecting the Disciples (6:16-21)
Jesus words to the people (6:22-40)
Jesus words to the Jews (6:41-51)
Tonight we will finish with some words to the Jews and a challenge to the disciples.
Is everything in the bible literal, or is there symbolism too?
Are there things we hear in this life that are hard to accept, much less apply?
Can you think of any hard teaching Jesus had given thus far that would be hard to hear, hard to accept?
With Nicodemus you must be born again
The teaching, words at pool of Bethesda
Jesus claiming equality with God
Jesus stating he is the bread of life
Tonight, Lord willing we will look at the following, and it is a longer section so will break down in three
Dividing words (Jn6:52-59)
Deserting words (Jn6:60-69)
Determining words (Jn6:70-71)
We will see how far we get tonight.
But first, we need to go back and finish where we did not finish last week.
The True Bread from Heaven
Who likes a good illustration and teaching?
Jesus is illustrating to the theologians of the day.
Jesus uses the illustration of the manna, they previously used (v.31), that he is not like the manna that He is better.
They ate the manna and still died
The bread He offers gives life, and life eternal.
No one before ever claimed believe in me and have eternal life.
Jesus and Jesus alone did!
For we know
While physical bread is needed for physical life, spiritual bread is needed for spiritual life.
Spurgeon says this:
“Every man feeds on something or other.
You see, one man getting his Sunday newspaper; how he will feed on that!
Another goes to frivolous amusements, and he feeds on them.
Another man feeds upon his business, and upon the thought of his many cares!
But all that is poor food; it is only ashes and husks, if you did not posses true spiritual life, you would know the deep necessity there is of feeding upon Christ.”
What are you feeding on?
Both are needed, but are you feeding on both?
(Transition) I think I want to pause in the last few minutes and look at (v.51) again for many have taken it several ways.
Is Jesus speaking of the Lord’s supper (Lk22:14-23) as practiced by early church (Act2:42) and taught by Paul (1Cor11:23-26)?
Some have taken that as such and sure there could be a reference to it; but it does not convey the spiritual truths that are proclaimed, celebrated, memorialized and done in fellowship at this point.
I like the way Barclay put it, in short, don’t argue about this.
“He is saying: ‘You must stop thinking of me as a subject for theological debate; you must take me into you, and you must come into me; and they you will have real life.’”
Remember the subject at hand is to come to Him!
Not remember Him.
Keeping things in context is important.
The bread He is giving is His flesh, His flesh that was going to be an acceptable sacrifice on the cross for you and for me.
FF Bruce says “To give one’s flesh can scarcely mean anything other than death, and the wording here points to a death which is both voluntary(‘I will give.’)
and vicarious (‘for the life of the world.’)
One more quote and we will close out for the night.
BJ Clarke:
“Jesus explained that receiving Him as bread was not receiving Him as a great moral teacher, example, or prophet.
It was not receiving Him as a good or great man or noble martyr.
It was receiving Him in light of of what He did on the cross, His ultimate act of love for lost humanity.”
Remember God’s greatest gift was Love, and loves gift was Jesus who gave us the open door for salvation through faith.
May we remember how we came to Him and may we stay seeking Him daily.
Dividing words
Hard words do not mean hard to understand in many instances.
In our passages tonight the words are hard to accept, hard to apply and they bring division.
What general observations do you make in this passage?
What can we know about the Jews view from (v.52); and who were they arguing with?
They were thinking literal eating Jesus flesh, and they were arguing with one another.
There is a warning in (v.53) and a promise in (v.54), what are they?
The warning, eat and drink this, for you have no life in yourself
The promise if you eat this you will be raised up on the last day.
The reason for the warning and the promise is found in (v.55-56), what is it?
It is true food, true drink
Eat, drink and I dwell with you and you with Me.
Why does the one who eats this bread live forever (vv.57-58)?
Because the Father sent Him, whoever eats of Him will live, for He is the bread which came down from heaven, unlike the bread their fathers ate and still died.
Where did this discussion take place (v.59)?
In the synagogue in Capernaum where Jesus was allowed to teach.
Let me draw a few points before moving on.
Not everything is literal, this is a great example of misunderstanding a spiritual truth because they were looking for literal application (other examples Jn2:19-21; 3:4; 4:11)
It is not that they did not understand, it is they willfully misunderstood.
Jesus had already said he was going to give up his body (His flesh) for them, and they were looking for a literal king not a suffering servant.
Dodd said about the quarreling “They differed in their judgment of Him.
some impatiently denounced him as insane; others suggesting that there was truth in His words.”
Some think that this section is speaking of the Lord’s supper, but it does not fit proper.
He had not shared with his true followers yet, but was going to share with unbelievers in Him?
He made is clear he is not speaking literal, he is speaking metaphorically, just like with Nicodemus and the unlikely woman.
Lenski said “bread of life is a metaphor.
Bread from heaven is a metaphor.
Living bread is a metaphor.
Bread of God is a metaphor.
It doesn’t surprise that Jesus extends the bread metaphor to His action, soon-to-come sacrifice on the cross.”
He said that the eating, drinking were mandatory, absolutely essential, so that would mean anyone who did not take communion would be out of the kingdom.
Join me and look at (v.56) again.
There are some really good quotes I want to bring in here.
Clarke “He lives in them, and they in Him; for they are made partakers of the Divine nature as stated in 2Pt1:4.”
Spurgeon says: “In eating and drinking, a man is not a producer, but a consumer; he is not a doer or a giver forth; he simply takes in. . .
Eating is an act of reception in every case.
So it is with faith; you have not to do, to be, or to feel, but only to receive.”
Nothing will satisfy our hunger or bring us life except actually eating the bread.
Eat and live forever!
Deserting words
There are things that you hear that you just want to turn and away from, and these are some that many did.
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9