Verses 5:16-30 offer interesting insights into who Jesus is but also who God the Father is. This passage reveals how Jesus humbled Himself to submit to full obedience to the Father.

It reveals about the Father:

• He is always at His work (5:17)
• He is the model for the Son's behavior (5:19)
• He loves the Son and shows the Son all He does (5:20)
• He raises the dead and gives them life (5:21)
• He does not judge . . . but leaves that duty to the Son (5:21, 27)
• He sent the Son (5:23)
• He has life and granted to the Son life in Himself (5:26)

When they were filled, He said to His disciples, “Gather up the leftover fragments so that nothing will be lost" (John 6:12).

Jesus miraculously fed over five thousand people with a boy's five barley loaves and two fish. After everyone is satiated, Jesus commanded His disciples to completely gather up the leftovers.

Why were the leftovers gathered up? 

There have been any number of explanations and even spiritualizations of the command. The latter is simply folly, but perhaps there is at least one sensible explanation that Scripture seems to attest. 

Some time after the miraculous feeding, in fact, two feedings (i.e. five thousand and four thousand), Jesus told His disciples to beware of the "yeast of the Pharisees and that of Herod" (Mark 8:15). The disciples thought Jesus was indirectly rebuking them for not bringing bread with them on the boat (cf. Mark 8:16). But Jesus was not talking about their lack of bread. Yet, He takes the occasion to bring up the significance of the miraculous feedings, as well as the tremendous amount of leftovers they picked up:

Aware of their discussion, Jesus asked them: “Why are you talking about having no bread? Do you still not see or understand? Are your hearts hardened? Do you have eyes but fail to see, and ears but fail to hear? And don’t you remember? When I broke the five loaves for the five thousand, how many basketfuls of pieces did you pick up?”

“Twelve,” they replied.

“And when I broke the seven loaves for the four thousand, how many basketfuls of pieces did you pick up?”

They answered, “Seven.”

He said to them, “Do you still not understand?” (Mark 8:17-21).

Jesus had twice demonstrated His power over creation. He could create bread. More than this, He could create a lot of it. Even more than this, He could create an overabundance, so that even after feeding so many, they still had many basketfuls of leftovers.

Here then is a possible explanation for the gathering up of the leftover fragments. When God did the miracle, it was not simply so that the people could subsist, but so that they would be satiated, so much so that they left a lot of fragments uneaten. 

Consider Jesus' first miracle, when He turned the water into wine. Notice that the text explains that when He did so, it was not simply common wine, but the very best (cf. John 2:9-10). 

Remember Pharaoh of Egypt. God said that He raised Him up and purposely hardened Pharaoh's heart so that He could multiply the plagues and demonstrate His greatness in delivering Israel from captivity. God could have simply destroyed Pharaoh all at once and brought the people out, but He didn't because He wanted to show His greatness and might through the ten plagues (cf. Exodus 9:15-16) and later through the dividing of the Red Sea.

The gathering up of the fragments was not so that they would have food to eat later. It was not to be frugal. It was not because God valued "broken" people. It was to show the greatness and power of Jesus, the Son of God. After the multitudes were fed by Jesus, they asked him, "What must we do to do the works of God." Jesus answered them, "The work of God is this: to believe in the One He has sent" (John 6:28-29). The purpose of the miracle was to show them Jesus, the One Whom God had approved. The greatness of God was in the greatness of Jesus. 

Friends, we do not need to spiritualize this text to draw a relevant application. If the point of the miracle was to demonstrate and remind of the greatness of Jesus, we can certainly apply this to our ministries. On the one hand, we recongize that the current claims to faith healing are shams and done by charlatans, for they always fall short of the greatness of the miracles of Jesus. On the other hand, our charitable works should not simply be done to meet "felt needs" but to exalt Christ. 

For this reason the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because He was doing these things on the Sabbath (John 5:16).

Let me ask a somewhat religiously incorrect question. Why didn't Jesus heal on some other day than the Sabbath? There were six other days in the week. If He did it on any of those days, wouldn't He have saved Himself the unnecessary altercation with the religious leaders? 

Yet, the Gospel accounts seem to suggest that Jesus may have even gone out of His way to heal on the Sabbath. It was on the Sabbath day that He healed a man’s withered arm (cf. Luke 6:6-11). It was on the Sabbath day that He cured the demoniac in the synagogue (Mark 1:21-28). The woman who was afflicted with an infirmity for eighteen years was cured by His mercy on the Sabbath day (Luke 13:10-18). It was the Sabbath day when our Lord Jesus healed the man with dropsy (Luke 14:1-6). In our passage today, it was on the Sabbath day that He healed the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (John 5:16). And it was on the Sabbath day that He healed the man born blind (John 9:1-12).

It was as if Jesus was deliberately seeking confrontation with the religious rulers, or at least he was not trying hard to avoid it. Today, we temper our speech and our activities based on our audience and environment. In this way we feel we are gently introducing Gospel truths without providing undo offense to anyone. We think that in this way we will be granted future occasions, where we might be more direct. But, this was hardly the method of Jesus, or for that matter, John the Baptist, Peter or of even Paul. These are our primary biblical examples of evangelistic witness, and they were all quite confrontational. 

One minister made this astute observation:

Our Lord Jesus Christ deliberately confronted the Pharisees, both by his words and his works. He always does. The Son of God always confronts sinners at their point of rebellion and demands that they surrender to him as their Lord. That is the way he dealt with both the rich young ruler (Luke 18) and the Samaritan woman (John 4).

The preaching of the gospel is always confrontational. God’s servants are sent to his enemies and sent to confront them, not to coddle them, pamper them and bargain with them, but, as the ambassadors of God himself, to confront them with the claims of the sovereign Lord. There is no such thing as faith in Christ apart from surrender to Christ as Lord (Luke 14:25-33) (from Don Fortner).

I made a similar observation on a previous post, noting that we are living in a generation that teaches accomodation over confrontation. Rather than exposing error, many Christians and Christian leaders prefer compromise or "silent disagreement." They argue that this keeps the church unified, yet they fail to see how such an approach is eroding the foundations of doctrinal integrity. This approach has bled over into the preaching of the Gospel, so that there is hardly any confrontation and repentance of sin but simply a tacit acceptance of God's forgiveness - just "accept Jesus into your hearts". Thus, the Gospel is neutered and emptied of its power. The crucifixion of Christ becomes simply an emotional drama that tugs on our heartstrings. There is no sense of deep and foreboding dread before the holiness of God for which the wrath of God was poured out on Christ for our sins. 

What is more, today, pastors try hard to be politically correct, reneging on their responsibility to provide salty discernment and correction where there is personal sin, doctrinal error, cultural immorality, and political wrongdoing. Granted, the church is not called to judge the world or unbelievers in the world; however, it does have the responsibility to provide such discernment and judgment among Christians (cf. 1 Corinthians 5:12-13).

Friends, I don't encourage anyone to go out and pick a fight, whether doctrinal, moral, or otherwise; however, I would advise against the kind of evangelistic pandering that I hear encouraged today. Don't simply preach the love of God. Preach also His hatred of sin. Don't simply preach acceptance of God's forgiveness. Help people understand their depravity and total moral bankruptcy apart from the grace of God. This is what Jesus did to the rich young ruler and the Samaritan woman and Nicodemus. Preach the absolute necessity of repentance of sin along with faith in Christ. Let no one misunderstand that when they are believing in Jesus, they are not simply trusting in a Savior, they are also surrendering to Him as Lord. It is the Lord Jesus Christ that saves. And it is by His sovereign choice and power that we are saved. 

Later Jesus found him at the temple and said to him, “See, you are well again. Stop sinning or something worse may happen to you.” (John 5:14)

So, because Jesus was doing these things on the Sabbath, the Jewish leaders began to persecute him. In his defense Jesus said to them, “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I too am working.” For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God. (John 5:16-18)

“But do not think I will accuse you before the Father. Your accuser is Moses, on whom your hopes are set. If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?” (John 5:46-47).

At this the Jews there began to grumble about him because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” They said, “Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, ‘I came down from heaven’? “Stop grumbling among yourselves,” Jesus answered. “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day. (John 6:41-44).

Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. (John 6:52-53).

From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him. “You do not want to leave too, do you?” Jesus asked the Twelve. (John 6:66-67)

John 6 provides an interesting snapshot of Jesus' evangelistic method. It is one of challenge and confrontation with a dose of fatalism. There is hardly an appeal to friendship, God's love, or any other touchy-feely sentiment. Like John the Baptist, His forerunner, Jesus speaks with authority. He confronts the sinful condition of His audience. He does not request faith but demands it. His approach is not "God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life" but rather something like, "Believe in the One God sent, or else..."

There are numerous Scriptures that illustrate a bold, confrontational approach to the proclamation of the Gospel. These are not just in the Gospels but also in Acts and the Epistles, even Revelation. There seems to be a far greater number of these examples than there are of the touchy-feely appeals to God's love. Why then is this latter approach so predominant today? 

May I suggest that there is a cultural and religious taboo placed on evangelistic appeals that address sin, judgment, and God's righteous demands. The emphasis is instead placed on love, mercy and grace. On the face, the latter do seem more appealing and appropriate; however, on closer examination, you discover that the emphasis on love, mercy and grace are in texts that address primarily believers, even as the emphasis on sin, judgment and God's righteous demands are in texts that address primarily unbelievers. Thus, we have confused the primary approach the Bible models toward unbelievers with the approach toward believers.

In the passage, where Jesus speaks about the ministry of the Holy Spirit through the disciples, he tells them:

When he comes, he will prove the world to be in the wrong about sin and righteousness and judgment: about sin, because people do not believe in me; about righteousness, because I am going to the Father, where you can see me no longer; and about judgment, because the prince of this world now stands condemned (John 16:8-11).

Isn't that interesting. The very things we observed that Jesus and the apostles emphasized in their preaching to unbelievers, Jesus here says the Holy Spirit will unfold through the ministry of the disciples after Jesus ascends to heaven. 

Could it be that we are allowing the world to dictate how we preach the Gospel rather than the Scriptures? Where the Bible models confrontation, are we choosing instead to make appeals? Where the Bible emphasizes God's holiness, do we instead prefer and emphasize God's love? Are we confusing the Gospel that demands everything of people with a gospel that demands nothing of people? 

Certainly, people respond better to appeals than confrontation. They may generally respond better to God's love than God's holiness and wrath. More people will "accept" Christ if nothing is demanded of them than if everything is demanded of them. Such a way of salvation is not only more appealing but more possible for people to do. But is this the Gospel?!

Bill Bright, the founder of Campus Crusade for Christ, created the "Four Spiritual Laws" tract in 1952. I have heard that this tract has served to change the face of Christian evangelism the world over. I have used it myself in times past. Right from the beginning the tract introduces the Gospel as "God loves you and offers a wonderful plan for your life." As many lives as this message has touched, I wonder whether it has served to skew the biblical model of evangelism with an overemphasis on a positive appeal to God's love.

Today, you will hardly find any preachers preaching hellfire and brimstone alongside the promise of heaven. It seems a rare occasion for evangelists and preachers to affirm God's holiness and wrath when preaching the Gospel. When faith is preached, it rarely includes repentance. Rather than teaching that the good works God requires is impossible for people to achieve, preachers just don't mention good works at all. So, salvation is presented as both easy and cheap. 

Yet, rather than making it easier for people to believe in Him, Jesus consistently made it harder for them. Perhaps He wanted to absolutely convince people that everything they valued and placed their hopes in apart from Christ was completely bankrupt and vain. Jesus was quick to turn away every half-hearted follower. He did not preach a "You can bake your cake and eat it too" message.

But is this what we've been doing today? Are we converting a generation of "rich young rulers," who think they can embrace Christ without letting go of any number of their self-justifying props? Are we preaching faith without repentance; believing without a total change of life? If so, are we preaching a true faith? When Jesus comes, will He find this true faith on the earth? (Luke 18:8). 

We are saved by God's calling (grace) and election (predestination), but this does not mean that we do not totally change. It is by God's calling and because of His election that we are totally changed. Therefore, shall we not also preach a Gospel that affirms the complete bankruptcy of human efforts in justifying themselves, the absolute certainty of God's wrath for sin, and the only hope being to trust in the death and resurrection of Jesus? Shall we not also declare the righteousness that God requires us to pursue but which only God can effectively achieve in us?

Friends, perhaps it is time for us to reexamine the method and message of our Gospel preaching today.

There were two passages from todays reading that I wanted to share.

(John 5:4-6)

"Here a great number of disabled people used to lie—the blind, the lame, the paralyzed. One who was there had been an invalid for thirty-eight years. 6 When Jesus saw him lying there and learned that he had been in this condition for a long time, he asked him, "Do you want to get well?"

Jesus reaches out to disabled man near a pool and asks him if he wants to get well. The interesting phrasing made me think that Jesus had more than one motive with this question. Obviously we can assume a disabled man would like to be physically healed - so why does Jesus ask? We get a hint later in verse 14 where Jesus tells the man to stop sinning. When we accept Christ as our savior we receive his grace for our sins, but first we must repent (turn away from our sin). I always ponder that non believers are less concerned with evidence about God existence and more about what they must give up to follow him. The recognition of a moral creator brings a unsettling question to non believers - am I good enough to be loved and accepted by God? If they only new that God loves them no less before they accept Christ, and that nothing they have done will make God love them less. And nothing the do after they accept Christ will make God love them more. If they focused less on what they give up and more on what they will gain it might be easier to take that step forward.

In the following verse Jesus calls himself the bread of life - and compares it to Manna the bread that fell from the sky on the Israelites as God led them out of Egypt.

(John 6:33-36)

"For the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world." "Sir," they said, "always give us this bread." Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty."

Manna was Gods daily provision for the Israelites as they remained in a wasteland (desert) without any other sustenance. Jesus uses this to explain that he like manna is our daily provision, necessary for life. This is such a profound truth - that we need a daily provision of Jesus to survive. Gods provision to Israel as they were stranded in the desert is a strong metaphor for us today. The world we live in is truly barren - like the desert the Israelites wandered in, barren from truth, barren from satisfaction, barren from true contentment. This world we live in will always keep us hungry and unsatisfied. As we accept Christ and feed on his truth (through reading the bible) we get nourishment that satisfies us and brings true contentment. As Jesus says when we come to him we will never go hungry and never be thirsty.

Friends, John 6 is both a sobering and comforting passage. It is sobering because there is every indication in this chapter that God only enables some to be saved. Yet, if you are among those who believe, you can be absolutely comforted that you are saved and will remain so until heaven. Consider the following verses.

Then they said to Him, “What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?” Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent.” (John 6:28, 29 NKJV)

This is an interesting verse because it carries two meanings (i.e. a double entendre in literature). Many commentators have astutely observed that John uses this literary device often in His writings. First, it answers the people's question about the "works of God." It is to believe in Jesus. But it also answers a question that they did not ask. What they must do is not in them to do. It is the "work (singular) of God." God must create faith in them, so that they can believe in Jesus. The following verses confirm this understanding:

All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out. This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day. (John 6:37, 39 NKJV)

This verse clearly shows that God "gives" people to Jesus. People do not just come to Him on their own. But remarkably, and as a great comfort for those chosen by God, Jesus says repeatedly that those given to Jesus by God will be secure. He says, "I will by no means cast out" and  "I should lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day."

No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day. It is written in the prophets,  ‘And they shall all be taught by God.’  Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me. (John 6:44, 45 NKJV)

Again, these verses clearly show that God must draw a person for them to be able to come to Jesus. And what is this drawing? Jesus says that they must have heard and learned from God. In other words, the draw of God is not simply a common grace that applies to every person. It is a very particular communication and instruction from God given to those chosen by God. And once again there is that comforting confirmation: "I will raise him up at the last day."

But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who would betray Him. And He said,  “Therefore I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father.” (John 6:64, 65 NKJV)

Here we have a clear linkage between people's faith and God the Father's role. Also, "coming to Jesus" is here related to "believing in Jesus." So Jesus is teaching that no one can believe unless God grants them the faith to believe. This should silence all those who presumptuously think that people are saved by a faith that is grounded in human free will. Faith is granted by God. Further, since there are people who do not believe, we can surmise that God does not grant faith to everyone.

Finally, we are told that Jesus' strong words caused many disciples to leave Him. This leaving is comparable to the rich young man's leaving Jesus on account of his riches. Like the rich young man, they could not accept Jesus' words. God had not granted this to them (John 6:65-66). But then Jesus turns to the Twelve:

Then Jesus said to the twelve,  “Do you also want to go away?” But Simon Peter answered Him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. Also we have come to believe and know that You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?” (John 6:67-70 NKJV)

As was his custom, Jesus tested His disciples with these words. Would they follow the defecting disciples and leave Him? Of course not. Why not? Is it because they truly believed? Yes. But even more, it is because Jesus chose them: "Did I not choose you..." Later, when Jesus is nearing His death, He prays for His disciples:

“I have manifested Your name to the men whom You have given Me out of the world. They were Yours, You gave them to Me, and they have kept Your word. While I was with them in the world, I kept them in Your name. Those whom You gave Me I have kept; and none of them is lost except the son of perdition, that the Scripture might be fulfilled. (John 17:6, 12 NKJV)

The disciples did not choose Jesus. He chose them (John 15:16). Further, they were given to Jesus by God, as John 17 reveals. Just as an aside, in both John 6 and 17 we are told that all the disciples were chosen for faith except for Judas Iscariot. Why? God had left him for destruction. He was destined for perdition (i.e. hell). The Scriptures prophesied this fate for him. Jesus never once tried to dissuade Judas from his awful fate. In fact, on one occasion Jesus even hurries him along (John 13:27). Now, in John 6:70 Judas was among those chosen, for Jesus signifies "the twelve," which included Judas. So in what way was he chosen? He was chosen to be the one to betray Jesus. He was chosen for destruction. 

Friends, John 6 is a sobering reminder of the sovereignty of God. Yet, to us who have believed, it is a comforting word that God, who began this good work of salvation in us, will Himself bring it to completion (Philippians 1:6).