Why did Jesus not explain this verse as a Parable John 6:66

If Jesus spoke only symbolically in John chapter 6, then why did they leave Him, never more to return, for only a symbolic gesture? It would have made no sense whatsoever for them to do so.
Also, if He was only speaking a parable, why then did He not call them back and tell them so?
After all, He did explain every one of His parables since no one understood them, did He not?
I would like for someone to explain to me why non-believers of the True Presence take the whole Bible literally, except for John chapter 6?

Well, a lot is being made of little, I think. Eating the bread and drinking the wine has become a big deal. There are scriptures where it wasn’t such a weighty issue.

If you feed people they will keep coming back, its human nature. The ritual insures the survival of the church.

Thank you for your repley but you did not answer the question.

Well it is a very important part of our faith. You fail to understand the meaning of this in a our religion.

Yup. I can just see the people back in the day now saying “Hey i don’t know what to really make of Christianity. But i think the ostracizing , torture and threat of public exocution, is sure worth that piece of bread and sip of wine on sunday”. You’re thinking of such matters is simplistic at best.

Because in general, a person will believe what is told to them. But for those who actually read themselves, they would find this passage:

Is 28:10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept, line upon line, line upon line, here a little, there a little.

So we gotta compare scripture to scripture? I wonder why? Is it possible the parables and metaphores can be defined by the context of other similar passages? Hmm, Only further study will answer this question.

Then you read that Christ only spoke in parables.

(**NEW T)Matt 13:34 All these things Jesus spoke to the multitude in parables; and without a parable He did not speak to them,

(NEW T)Matt 13:35 that is might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying: “I will open My mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.”

(OLD T)Ps 78:2 I will open my mouth in a parable.

(NEW T)Mark 5:33 And with many such parables He spoke the word to them as they were able to hear it.

(NEW T)Mark 5:34 But without a parable He did not speak to them. And when they were alone, He explained all things to His disciples.**

Then you find out that the old testament verse is the reference to all these new testament verses. that it is a complete picture. That even as it was, it still is. That the word is spoken as a parable.

Then you get John 1:14: the word became flesh, and dwelt among us.

So the word became flesh? But the whole bible is the word, right? So in essence, Christ became in flesh, what God has declared as His Word, And that word is Truth, is everlasting Life, is Salvation. And we learn that His Word is the Law. The whole bible is His law book. Christ embodied the fullness of the Law, Gods law.

So if Christ is the word, and the word was spoken in parables, then it is safe to bet that the whole bible, from cover to cover, is also a parable. Seeing how every word is from the mouth of God.

But really, unless you study and figure this out, you would only have your church to define passages for you, and then you would get the mess you get out of Luke 16:

Catholics still cant fathom that this is a parable. An earthly story with a spiritual meaning. This particular parable, did not literally happen. It is made so clear by the discoure begun in Luke 15, and from this confusion, stems the idea about how to interpret Hell. And because of the misunderstanding from the beginning, the theories of Hell and death have prevailed and been wrongly taught. And if you go to church you will believe what the priest tells you.

This is how you study a parable. for example is Luke 16
The Rich man and Lazarus, Luke 16

The parable describes two individuals. The rich man has all of the joys and comforts this present world can bring, but he is not saved. The poor man, Lazarus, has none of the good things of this world, but he is a saved man. Finally, both men die. The rich man is buried, and Lazarus is carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom (Luke 16:22). To be in the bosom of Abraham is a picture of being in the highest blessing in the presence of God. To be buried is to be placed in the grave. The parable then continues with a conversation between the dead rich man and Abraham (GOD), who is in heaven. Remember, “grave” and “death” is the same thing as hell. Therefore, it is not incorrect to say that the rich man was in hell (Luke 16:23)

But you must understand, that lifting up his eyes and seeing Lazarus in Abraham’s bosom, and speaking to Abraham, are all hypothetical. That is, God has set up a completely imaginary tableau, or a three dimensional picture, or in other words a parable, in order to convey spiritual truth. These truths include important doctrines such as the following.
#1 The rich man asked Abraham to send Lazarus with a drop of water to cool his tongue (Luke 16:24). There is NO MERCY or GRACE to those who have died unsaved.
#2 There is a great gulf between heaven and hell. Heaven is eternal life. Hell is death forevermore. Never, never will those who are dead ever come to life again.
#3 The rich man wanted Abraham to send Lazarus to his five brothers because he thought that such a miracle will cause them to become believers. The truth is, they have Moses and the prophets, the Old Testament. If they will not believe the Bible, then they will not believe even if they witness some great miracle.
#4 The rich man is tormented in this flame. The Greek word that is translated “tormented” is used only in verse 24, in verse 25 (“thou art tormented”), in Luke 2:48, and in Acts 20:38. The “flame” emphasizes the rich man is being punished by God, who is a consuming fire (Hebrews 12:29). The word “torment,” which is defined by its usage in Acts 20:38 and Luke 2:48, indicates the nature and character of the torment he is experiencing. Now we will look carefully at this word and its usage in these two verses.
Acts 20:38: Sorrowing most of all for the words which he spake, that they should see his face no more. And they accompanied him unto the ship.
Luke 2:48: And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? Behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.

In both of these verses, the word that is translated as “tormented” in Luke 16 is translated as “sorrowing.” This sorrowing has nothing to do with physical pain. It is the sorrow of not seeing a loved one again. The rich man was in torment because he was sorrowing that he could never again have the joys and comforts he had experienced in his life on earth. While Lazarus was safe and secure with the greatest blessings forevermore.

In other words, the parable of the rich man and Lazarus teaches us nothing at all about eternal pain in a place called hell. It is teaching us about the penalty of losing all the blessings of this life, and gaining none of the blessings of eternal life.

Thank you for your answer but I do not pul much trust in people use private interpretation 2 peter 1:20;21 and we need guidance Acts 8:31 2Pet3:16 Thank you for your time and your answer and have a good night.

The same reason he did not explain the details of Transubstantiation? Or the proper type of vessels to be used?

Why asnwer a Question when you do not know anything is that a little dumb

Okay. :slight_smile:

I must be the dumb one I was think ing we ask a question and if you can ,you answer it,help me I,M I Iwrong

To the unbelievers - Jesus had nothing to explain, he was speaking literally and his disciples understood and left because they could not accept what they heard. It was even written that Jesus knew from the beginning the ones who WOULD NOT believe and the one who would betray him - you guess right - Judas Iscariot…Now let me ask you, if your time is called and you face Jesus who now ask you ‘Child, why did you not believe me?’ would you have a good answer?
God bless.

Nothing to worry about. I am just tossing out some reasons why Jesus did not explain everything in details. He may have delegated these things to others. There seems to be some solid evidence from early church fathers that indeed, it was a literal thing Jesus was speaking of.
The problems with this passage for some non catholics, but not all are still based on an interpretation of the bible alone, and no references given to what the actual christians did believe. So, the earliest documentation seems to be in favor of the catholic view IMHO.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.