God's Eternal Purpose

[OBW]

Originally Posted by zeek

The note on John 6:54 in the Recovery Version states "Here flesh and blood are mentioned separately. The separation of blood and flesh indicates death. Here the Lord clearly indicated His death, that is, His being slain. He gave His body and shed His blood for us that we may have eternal life. To eat His flesh is to receive by faith all that He did in giving His body for us; and to drink His blood is to receive by faith all that He accomplished in shedding His blood for us. To eat His flesh and drink His blood is to receive Him, in His redemption, as life and the life supply by believing in what He did for us on the cross. By comparing this verse with v. 47 , we see that to eat the Lord’s flesh and drink His blood is to believe in Him, because to believe or to believe into is to receive ( 1: 12 )." That's a figurative interpretation.

At least part of that is true. The problem is that the way it is presented is as "simply true." To me, this was one of Lee's most problematic features. He simply had the answer to everything. He was never unsure. And he seldom gave a reason. Just said it was so.

Was he right (or at least mostly so) here? Probably. Despite seldom referencing anyone but himself or Nee, he was not isolated from basic Christian theology. It had to be the underpinning of his little following or he would have only had basket cases and no "good material" to work with.

And while the important parts of what he put in that footnote are generally true, they are not unique to him. I can pretty much see it. Might not have described it in such "this is clearly (simply?) that, and this is that" terms. More like "this seems to indicate . . . ."

But being certain was part of how we got to his version of GEP and GE (God's economy). Those overlays, along with a couple more, like the ground of locality, redefined too much of scripture. And left us with a decimated Bible (as is being discussed in the inerrancy thread). Once you gut some important parts of the Bible, how can the actual purpose of God be imagined to arise from only the remainder?

As for the "clearly" part, it is only clear in hindsight. Not saying that the allusion to his death is not present. But it was not clear. Despite all of the prophecies and his own hints (maybe some before this?) no one was thinking in terms of the Messiah dying. They were expecting him to reign in the place of Pilot, not die so that he could reign in the hearts of many more than just the Jews in Judea.