NORTHSHORE CHURCH OF CHRIST

John 6.26 Jesus answered them and said, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate some of the loaves and were filled. 27 Do not work for the food that perishes, but for the food that lasts for eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you, for on Him the Father, God, has set His seal.” 28 Therefore they said to Him, “What are we to do, so that we may accomplish the works of God?” 29 Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.”

Jesus baffled these Jews with His talk of food that lasts for eternal life. That sounds lovely, doesn’t it? So they wanted to know how they could accomplish the works of God. Jesus said the work of God was that “you believe in Him whom He has sent.”

I thought Paul, especially, pointed out that faith and works are not the same. How is believing a work?

This is a good question out of this context.

Notice Jesus did not say just “a work” but “the work.” And it is singular, so He’s not talking about all the possible good works we can do but only the primary work. And that work is “of God,” meaning it either belongs to God or comes from Him. The context shows their question is about doing “the works of God” (verse 28), so when they said, “of God,” they meant the works belonging to Him. It’s not the work that God does, but the work we do which is from Him, commanded by Him, pertaining to Him.

It is THE WORK because faith in Jesus as the one the Father sent is the key to eternal life, the food that endures to eternal life. You can perform no good work outside of faith by which you can earn eternal life. Even as you obediently do the good works which God commanded and created you to do, it is not the doing of those works which saves you. On the other hand, you are not saved without doing good works because they are the fruit of your genuine faith, just as you bear fruit when you genuinely repent.

In this way, we understand we are saved by faith apart from works (Eph. 2.8-9; Tit. 3.5).

As Jesus calls faith “the work of God” here, He differentiates it from other works. Belief is a work done internally, in our minds and hearts. It’s a change of attitude when one graduates from unbelief to belief, and it is not simply our human effort of trying really hard to believe. God breaks into our lives in some way, breaks us down, knocks us off our donkey (like Paul), shows us His glory (like Peter in the boat), shines the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ (2 Cor. 4.6). In other words, God always acts first in some way to call us, and all who are converted to Him can look back and see God’s work in our lives and give Him the glory for our faith and salvation.

Do you want to know God? Get to know Jesus. Do you want to see God? Look at Jesus. Do you want to be saved? Believe in Jesus as the one whom God made both Lord and Christ. Do you want eternal life? Work for the food which lasts unto eternal life. Feed on Jesus.

Life is all about Jesus!

For most of the world, Jesus is just another guy. Perhaps a wise guy. Perhaps a charismatic, gifted, insightful guy. But the world, at best, places Jesus alongside all the other wise guys and gals of history.

In a recent conversation, a friend of mine was surprised to discover I believe in a historical Jesus; I believe He was a flesh-and-blood man who actually accomplished all the things we read about in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

A number of reasons lead me to this conclusion. One is historical. Even if you discount the biblical accounts as non-historical, extra-biblical references to Christ and the early Christians certainly exist.

Josephus

Flavius Josephus, a Jewish historian born just a few years after Jesus' death, wrote copiously of his people's history in two major volumes: The Antiquities of the Jews and The Wars of the Jews. (See his works online or pick up a copy. It's good stuff!) He lived to see his precious Jerusalem fall by Titus' hand in A.D. 70. Included in his history are a few references to Christ (he was not a Christian), John the Baptist, and James (brother of Jesus and elder in Jerusalem).

The most explicit reference is this:

(63) Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works—a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; (64) and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day. (Antiquities 18.3.3--which means book 18, chapter 3, paragraph 3--emphasis mine, NW)

This reference to James also mentions Jesus:

Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the Sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned; (Antiquities 20.9.1--emphasis mine, NW)

For a reference to John the Baptist, see Antiquities 18.5.2

Now, some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod’s army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist; for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness. Now, when [many] others came in crowds about him, for they were greatly moved [or pleased] by hearing his words, Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion (for they seemed ready to do anything he should advise), thought it best, by putting him to death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulties, by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it should be too late. Accordingly he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod’s suspicious temper, to Macherus, the castle I before mentioned, and was there put to death. Now the Jews had an opinion that the destruction of this army was sent as a punishment upon Herod, and a mark of God’s displeasure against him.

Cornelius Tacitus

Born in the first century (in the early 50s), Tacitus became a well-respected early-second-century historian, writing his Annals around A.D. 110. Emperor Nero had, in A.D. 64, burned Rome to the ground, but then had attempted to pin the atrocity on Christians, using them as scapegoats of a sort. Tacitus records the deeds Nero did to Christians at the time:

Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. (Annals Book XV--emphasis mine, NW)
 

Ponder these ancient words from men who were certainly not Christians; more often they were anti-Christian. There seems to have been no doubt in their minds that such a man as Jesus actually did live and that he had been killed by crucifixion. Naturally they did not believe He rose from the dead. But who could believe such an outrageous thing?

For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written,

         “I WILL DESTROY THE WISDOM OF THE WISE,
         AND THE CLEVERNESS OF THE CLEVER I WILL SET ASIDE.”

Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness, but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men. (1 Corinthians 1.18-25)

Pliny the Younger

Pliny is called "the younger" because he is Pliny Junior, son of Pliny the Elder. He wrote many letters which have been preserved for posterity, and one is addressed to Emperor Trajan circa A.D. 112 concerning his dealings with Christians in his area. Following is his letter and the emperor's reply.

This does not assert that Christ really lived, but it does show the early existence of the Christians and their incredible faith until death.

Pliny the Younger to the Emperor Trajan

It is my practice, my lord, to refer to you all matters concerning which I am in doubt. For who can better give guidance to my hesitation or inform my ignorance? I have never participated in trials of Christians. I therefore do not know what offenses it is the practice to punish or investigate, and to what extent. And I have been not a little hesitant as to whether there should be any distinction on account of age or no difference between the very young and the more mature; whether pardon is to be granted for repentance, or, if a man has once been a Christian, it does him no good to have ceased to be one; whether the name itself, even without offenses, or only the offenses associated with the name are to be punished.

Meanwhile, in the case of those who were denounced to me as Christians, I have observed the following procedure: I interrogated these as to whether they were Christians; those who confessed I interrogated a second and a third time, threatening them with punishment; those who persisted I ordered executed. For I had no doubt that, whatever the nature of their creed, stubbornness and inflexible obstinacy surely deserve to be punished. There were others possessed of the same folly; but because they were Roman citizens, I signed an order for them to be transferred to Rome.

Soon accusations spread, as usually happens, because of the proceedings going on, and several incidents occurred. An anonymous document was published containing the names of many persons. Those who denied that they were or had been Christians, when they invoked the gods in words dictated by me, offered prayer with incense and wine to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for this purpose together with statues of the gods, and moreover cursed Christ—none of which those who are really Christians, it is said, can be forced to do—these I thought should be discharged. Others named by the informer declared that they were Christians, but then denied it, asserting that they had been but had ceased to be, some three years before, others many years, some as much as twenty-five years. They all worshiped your image and the statues of the gods, and cursed Christ.

They asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so. When this was over, it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of food—but ordinary and innocent food. Even this, they affirmed, they had ceased to do after my edict by which, in accordance with your instructions, I had forbidden political associations. Accordingly, I judged it all the more necessary to find out what the truth was by torturing two female slaves who were called deaconesses. But I discovered nothing else but depraved, excessive superstition.

I therefore postponed the investigation and hastened to consult you. For the matter seemed to me to warrant consulting you, especially because of the number involved. For many persons of every age, every rank, and also of both sexes are and will be endangered. For the contagion of this superstition has spread not only to the cities but also to the villages and farms. But it seems possible to check and cure it. It is certainly quite clear that the temples, which had been almost deserted, have begun to be frequented, that the established religious rites, long neglected, are being resumed, and that from everywhere sacrificial animals are coming, for which until now very few purchasers could be found. Hence it is easy to imagine what a multitude of people can be reformed if an opportunity for repentance is afforded.

Trajan to Pliny the Younger

You observed proper procedure, my dear Pliny, in sifting the cases of those who had been denounced to you as Christians. For it is not possible to lay down any general rule to serve as a kind of fixed standard. They are not to be sought out; if they are denounced and proved guilty, they are to be punished, with this reservation, that whoever denies that he is a Christian and really proves it—that is, by worshiping our gods—even though he was under suspicion in the past, shall obtain pardon through repentance. But anonymously posted accusations ought to have no place in any prosecution. For this is both a dangerous kind of precedent and out of keeping with the spirit of our age.

While these letters do not directly deal with the historicity of Jesus, they do show a large number a men and women who were so convinced of His reality they were willing to die for Him. And this was a mere 80 years after Jesus' death.
 

Lucian of Samosata

Lucian was a satirist around A.D. 170. He showed himself hostile against Christians, which makes his testimony in Passing of Peregrinus concerning them quite believable. Lucian's protagonist Perigrinus was a philosopher who decided to take advantage of some gullible Christians (in his satirical story):

 

11.    “It was then that he learned the wondrous lore of the Christians, by associating with their priests and scribes in Palestine.   And—how else could it be?—in a trice he made them all look like children, for he was prophet, cult-leader, head of the synagogue, and everything, all by himself. He interpreted and explained some of their books and even composed many, and they revered him as a god, made use of him as a lawgiver, and set him down as a protector, next after that other, to be sure, whom they still worship, the man who was crucified in Palestine because he introduced this new cult into the world.

....

13.   “Indeed, people came even from the cities in Asia, sent by the Christians at their common expense, to succour and defend and encourage the hero. They show incredible speed whenever any such public action is taken; for in no time they lavish their all.  So it was then in the case of Peregrinus; much money came to him from them by reason of his imprisonment, and he procured not a little revenue from it. The poor wretches have convinced themselves, first and foremost, that they are going to be immortal and live for all time, in consequence of which they despise death and even willingly give themselves into custody; most of them. Furthermore, their first lawgiver persuaded them that they are all brothers of one another after they have transgressed once, for all by denying the Greek gods and by worshiping that crucified sophist himself and living under his laws. Therefore they despise all things indiscriminately and consider them common property, receiving such doctrines traditionally without any definite evidence. So if any charlatan and trickster, able to profit by occasions, comes among them, he quickly acquires sudden wealth by imposing upon simple folk.

Lucian's testimony is over 100 years after Christ's death, but he exposes the believes of the Christians, at least, of his time, which was that the man Christ actually lived. He calls Jesus "the man who was crucified in Palestine" and "their first lawgiver" and "that crucified sophist himself."

In Luke 9, a huge crowd went out into a desolate place outside Bethsaida to find Jesus. About 5000 enjoyed the words and the powerful healing Jesus brought; all day they listened until the day began to wane. The disciples suggested that Jesus send the crowd into the surrounding villages so they could get something to eat, but Jesus surprised them with a challenge: "You give them something to eat" (Luke 9.14)!

"We have no more than five loaves and two fish," they answered, not for a moment considering a boy's lunch (John 6.9) ample provision for such a great multitude. I would have agreed with them, I'm afraid. (I sometimes stare into my fridge thinking, "There's nothing to eat," when really there is plenty...)

Jesus was not obligated to feed this multitude, and no one expected Him to provide a meal. He must have had a purpose to this miracle. Why did He do it?

1. Jesus increased the faith of the disciples.

After His disciples said they couldn't feed the multitude, Jesus didn't just say, "Okay, fine, if you won't do it I'll do it Myself." Rather, He launched into action to multiply the bread and fish, and He "gave them to the disciples to set before the crowd" (Luke 9.16). In other words, the disciples ended up giving the crowd something to eat, just as Jesus had instructed! Jesus does not command anything for which He doesn't also equip.

Jesus had told these disciples He would make them fishers of men (Luke 5.9-10). These twelve (Luke 6.13) would be the seeds which started a worldwide planting operation. How in the world would they accomplish such a monumental—dare we say, impossible—task? By faith these men would come to understand all they had to do was obey—God handles the multiplication!

God can take an oil jug with just a bit of left-over oil in the bottom and make it outlast a famine (1 Kings 17.8-16). God can feed and water a couple million people in the desert for forty years. Man's road blocks and impossibilities are nothing to God.

2. Jesus identified Himself.

Continuing the previous thought, Jesus identified Himself with Moses in the wilderness. John (in John 6) accounts a conversation the day following the feeding of the 5000 in which the Jews tried to provoke Jesus into feeding them again: "Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat’" (John 6.31). They did well to connect Jesus' power with the feeding of the Israelites in the wilderness, and Jesus continued the thought, identifying Himself as the true bread from heaven.

Not only did He identify Himself as the bread of life, but this even also identified Him strongly with Moses—Moses being a type of Christ. How could Jesus do such awesome things unless God had truly sent Him? And if God had sent Him, He was a true prophet. Moses had prophesied in Deuteronomy 18.15, "YAHWEH your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your midst, from your brethren. Him you shall hear..."

The feeding of the 5000 proved that God had raised up The Prophet!

Matthew focuses on the Messiah (Christ) of Old Testament prophecy, proving and explaining Him. He quotes many Old Testament scriptures throughout his book. More than any of the other gospel writers, Matthew uses “kingdom of heaven” (32 times) rather than “kingdom of God” (5 times). The other gospel writers never use the term “kingdom of heaven.” Matthew also applies the term “son of David” to Jesus 10 times in his book, whereas Mark and Luke use the term 3 times each and John never does. This makes sense, when you realize Matthew is focusing on the Jews as his primary audience, while the others have a wider audience in mind.

The Five Sermons

Jesus preaches five major sermons recorded in Matthew’s gospel, each which ends with the marker, “When Jesus had finished all these sayings” and some transitionary language immediately following.

Matthew 5.1–8.1: The Sermon on the Mount begins with, “He went up on the mountain, and when He sat down, his disciples came to Him.” It transitions to the next events with, “And when Jesus finished these sayings, the crowds were astonished at His teaching…When He came down from the mountain…”

Matthew 10.5–11.1: The Sending of the Twelve begins with, “These twelve Jesus sent out, instructing them…” It transitions to the next events with, “When Jesus had finished instructing His twelve disciples, He went on from there to teach and preach in their cities.”

Matthew 13.1–53: Parables on the Kingdom of Heaven begins with, “Jesus went out of the house and sat by the sea.” It transitions to the next events with, “And when Jesus had finished these parables, He went away from there.”

Matthew 18.1–19.1: Lessons on Humility and Forgiveness begins with, “At that time the disciples came to Jesus.” It transitions to the next events with, “Now when Jesus had finished these sayings, He went away from Galilee…”

Matthew 24.3–26.1: The Return of Christ begins with, “Jesus left the temple and was going away.” It transitions to the next events with, “When Jesus had finished all these sayings, He said to His disciples…”

The Kingdom of Heaven

Matthew helps us understand the nature of the Kingdom of Heaven. Next time you read through the gospel, keep your eyes open for “the kingdom of heaven” and related terms like “Our Father who is in heaven…”

Jesus talks about…

The timing of the kingdom. “The kingdom of heaven is at hand,” He preached. He taught His disciples to pray, “Your kingdom come” (6.10), and John the Baptist was not in the kingdom (11.11–12). Peter was to be given the keys to the kingdom (16.19), and their generation would see the kingdom (16.28).

The nature of the kingdom. “The kingdom of heaven is like…” He preached at least nine times in the gospel, six of which are in chapter 13’s sermon (13.24, 31, 33, 44, 45, 47; 18.23; 20.1; 22.2). Those in the kingdom are poor in spirit (5.3) and persecuted (5.10). They have a high view of Scripture (5.19) and of righteousness (5.20). They don’t just preach, they practice (7.21). They are like little children (19.14), and the rich can only enter the kingdom with great difficulty (19.23). Jesus called it, “My Father’s kingdom” (26.29), and it would be open to the Gentiles (21.41–43).

King Jesus

As the Messiah (Christ), Jesus is marked as the King of prophecy who now sits on the throne of David as a forever king. He had a humble beginning, born to poor parents (13.55–57) and raised in an obscure village of Nazareth. As a travelling rabbi, Jesus was homeless (8.20) and spent His time with the dregs and fringes of society (11.4–6) and was gentle in spirit (11.28–30; 12.18–21). He continually frustrated the Jewish leadership, entered Jerusalem as a humble king riding on a donkey (21.1–11), and was finally crucified in a shameful and painful death—rejected by His own people.

But He taught with authority (7.28–29). There was not a physical problem He couldn’t fix (see chapters 8–9). He didn’t just argue with the Jewish leaders but often confounded and cornered them (12.1–14; 15.1–9; 21.23–27; 22.15–46).

After His resurrection (glory and praise to God!), Jesus said to His disciples: “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me.” Amen!

Summary

Jesus is the son of David, heir to the eternal throne of the Kingdom of Heaven.

Jesus is the Son of Man, God made flesh.

Jesus is the Messiah, the anointed one, with all authority over all things.

In The Message—an interpretation, not a translation (so read with caution!)—the introduction to Galatians includes the following:

Through Jesus, Paul learned that God was not an impersonal force to be used to make people behave in certain prescribed ways, but a personal Savior who set us free to live a free life.

The Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary includes under its entry for "Logos":

In relation to humanity, Jesus the Logos was not the impersonal principle of Stoicism, but He was a personal Savior who took on human flesh in the incarnation (John 1:4–14).

Most of the evangelical world employs this phrase. Perhaps "Are you a born again Christian?" (isn't that redundant?) is even more popular, but "Have you made Jesus your own personal Savior?" definitely competes.

Can we claim Jesus as our own "personal Savior"?

Personal is used here in the relational sense—that Jesus saves me personally; He and I share a personal relationship. The alternative to this personal relationship, I suppose, would be a relationship between Jesus and His body, the church, which does not somehow translate into a relationship between Him and me or Him and you, personally.

What does the Bible teach on this?

The Bible does not contain those exact words—"personal Savior"—but what about the concept? Consider two of the most God-fearing and God-loving men in the Bible, one who lived under the Old Covenant and one under the New: David and Paul.

David

David wrote of his relationship with God, even as his Savior, in the Psalms.

I love you, O LORD, my strength.
The LORD is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer,
my God, my rock, in whom I take refuge,
my shield, and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold. (Ps. 18.1-2)

I cried aloud to the LORD,
and he answered me from his holy hill. (Ps. 3.4)

Do not forsake me, O Lord!
O my God, be not far from me!
Make haste to help me,
O Lord, my salvation! (Ps. 38.21-22)

Do you sense a personal relationship in David's words? Yahweh was not just the God of Israel; He was David's God! This relationship comforts and empowers because it does not depend upon the state of anyone else in the world—it's directly between a man and his God.

Paul

Paul also helps us understand the nature of our relationship with Jesus the Savior.

I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. (Gal. 2.20)

Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. (Phil. 3.12)

I thank him who has given me strength, Christ Jesus our Lord, because he judged me faithful, appointing me to his service, though formerly I was a blasphemer, persecutor, and insolent opponent. But I received mercy because I had acted ignorantly in unbelief, and the grace of our Lord overflowed for me with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. (1 Tim. 1.12-14)

You

Can you say Jesus is your personal Savior? Do you have a personal relationship with Him? I dearly hope you do! It is the single most important relationship any human being can have—and you either are His or you aren't.