CASEY (3/12)
>Excuse me if this point has already been covered, but...
>What makes this situation even more incredible to me is the fact that these
>men were impressed enough with what jesus did that they wanted to make him
>king, (v. 15). And jesus thought that they were serious because he took off
>and went up into a mountain to get away from them.
(COURT 3/12) Chuck: Interesting point. They obviously wanted him to fill
>their needs, but when he started calling the shots in v 28-29 (by claiming
>something more then they could fathom), they weren't convinced - this is
>true skepticism at its best (and understandable - I probably would have
>acted the same way to be honest).
CASEY (3/12)
>"...when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth
>that prophet that should come into the world. When Jesus therefore perceived
>that they would come and take him by force, to make him a king, he departed
>again into a mountain himself alone." (John 6:14-15)
>So I must strongly disagree when Dave says:
>"They asked the very same questions skeptics today ask: show us proof!
>As you can see from this story, even if the proof was staring them right in
>front of their faces (which it was) they wouldn't see it."
>This was NOT a matter of convincing skeptics, rather we have people who were so
>impressed with the miracle that jesus performed that they wanted to make him
>king. Yet, they still wanted a sign!! I don't think so.
(COURT 3.12) Chuck: I don't necesaarily agree with you here - not totally.
> One question: Why do you believe these people who asked for the miracle in
>v 30 were the same ones as those who wanted him king in v 14? I don't see
>that it states this anywhere?
>Regards - thanks for your comments.
CASEY (3/14)
Thanks Dave for your input on this. I'm not claiming to know what happened.
But unless I'm missing something here, the "men" that "...had seen the miracle
[loaves and fishes] that Jesus did..." in verse 14 are the same men who, in
verse 15, wanted "...to make him [jesus] a king..." because they, (the
men),
thought that jesus was a messiah who could multiply food. In verse 26 jesus
reminds them of the loaves and fishes miracle and these same men then ask for
a "sign" in verse 30. It reads like the same men to me.
Now, I suppose one could say that out of the larger group of men to see jesus
perform his miracle, a smaller group from this larger group tried to make him
king and then a different smaller group from this larger group asked for the
sign. But if this is true, it seems to me that the "explanation" is worse
then if the story actually happened the way it reads, (at least to me).
I think someone said, and I agree, that an error of ommission is still an
error. And if the writer of John didn't make it clear enough so that people
like me wouldn't know which men he was talking about in the story, then what
good is it?
Just my opinion.
Chuck Casey