Bible Studies

---

We continue this verse-by-verse study of John chapters 5-8 here in Part 5, starting with John 6:57.

(57) As the living [cf., e.g., John 5:26] Father sent Me [God the Father sent His unique Son into the world on an infinitely important mission, a mission that started with His virgin birth (cf., e.g., John 1:14; 3:17; 6:29, 38).], and I live because of the Father [[God the Son had (eternal) life by virtue of who He was (cf. John 1:4), but He didn't make that point here (at least He didn't emphasize that point). Here He was reiterating what He said in verse 51, for example, about His being "the LIVING bread that came down out of heaven," having been sent by the Father to give LIFE to the world through His atoning death (through giving His flesh for the life of the world). In John 5:19-29, as in John 6:32, 33, 35, 40, 47, 48, 50, 53, 54, Jesus spoke of the fact that the Father had commissioned Him to have (eternal/spiritual) life, life that He could share with those who submit to Him in faith. God the Son could not share eternal life with men until after He had condescended to become a man (the God-man), lived a sinless life, died as the Lamb of God, and was resurrected and ascended to the right hand of the Father.]], so he who eats Me, he also will live because of Me [In other words, those who partake of new-covenant salvation in and through Christ will participate in the very eternal/spiritual life of the triune God]. (58) This is the bread which came down out of heaven [cf. John 6:32, 33, 38, 50, 51]; not as the fathers ate and died [Compare John 6:31, 49. The fathers ate the physical manna and eventually they died.]; he who eats this bread [Christ and new-covenant salvation in union with Him] will live forever.' [[In this verse Jesus summarized the message that He had been conveying starting with verse 26.

Many Christians think that Jesus was teaching about partaking of His flesh and blood in the Lord's Supper here (especially in verses 51-58), and especially those who believe that Christians actually partake of the flesh and blood of Christ when they partake of the bread and the fruit of the vine. Some of them believe that was His primary subject here; others believe that He was only secondarily referring to the Lord's Supper. I agree with those commentators who don't believe that Jesus made any reference to the Lord's Supper in verses 26-58. For one thing, Jesus spoke these words a year before He was to institute the Lord's Supper on the night before His crucifixion.

It is true, of course, that Jesus' teaching here has a lot in common with the Lord's Supper in that the Lord's Supper was instituted (for one primary reason) to repeatedly focus Christians' attention on the all-important atoning death of the Lord Jesus Christ (the true Passover Lamb has been slain) ((I had a footnote: See 1 Cor. 11:23-34. I'll quote 1 Cor. 11:24-28, "and when He had given thanks, He broke it [the bread] and said, 'This is My body, which is for you; DO THIS IN REMEMBRANCE OF ME.' (25) In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, 'This cup is the new covenant in My blood; DO THIS AS OFTEN AS YOU DRINK IT, IN REMEMBRANCE OF ME.' (26) FOR AS OFTEN AS YOU EAT THIS BREAD AND DRINK THE CUP, YOU PROCLAIM THE LORD'S DEATH UNTIL HE COMES. [my emphasis] (27) Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. [His body was broken and His blood was shed for us in His atoning death, and the new covenant was established on the basis of His atoning death. We (eat the bread and) drink the cup "in an unworthy manner" if we drink from the cup of the new covenant in His blood (see 1 Cor. 11:25) while being unfaithful to and violating the terms of that covenant (through not believing and/or living in agreement with the words of that covenant).] (28) But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup." 1 Corinthians chapter 11 is discussed verse-by-verse on this Christian article site.)) and on the new-covenant salvation that flowed out of that atoning death (He has become the true bread of life). ((I had a footnote: I'll quote several sentences from what Henry Alford says under verse 51 ("New Testament for English Readers," Vol. 2 [Baker, 1983 reprint], page 523). "The question whether there is here any reference to the ORDINANCE OF THE LORD'S SUPPER, has been inaccurately put. When cleared of inaccuracy in terms, it will mean, Is the subject here dwelt upon the same as that which is set forth in the ordinance of the Lord's Supper? And of this there can surely be no doubt. To the ordinance itself, there is here no reference; nor could there well have been any. But the spiritual verity which underlies the ordinance is one and the same with that here insisted on; and so considered, the discourse is, as generally treated, most important towards a right understanding of the ordinance.")) THE FOCUS OF CHRISTIANITY IS NOT TO BE ON THE LORD'S SUPPER, BUT ON THE ALL-IMPORTANT ATONING DEATH OF CHRIST AND THE NEW COVENANT THAT WAS RATIFIED BY HIS ATONING BLOOD TO WHICH THE LORD'S SUPPER POINTS. I discussed the Lord's Supper under 1 Cor. 10:16, 17; 11:17-33 in my articles on 1 Corinthians 10 and 11 on this Christian article site.

The Lord's Supper is an occasion where believers are to examine themselves as to whether they are being faithful to the new covenant and to determine to make any adjustments necessary. (Of course Christians are not supposed to wait until the Lord's Supper to examine themselves and to make thing right.) If "Christians" are not being faithful to God (according to the terms of the covenant) it is hypocritical for them to participate in the Lord's Supper, which commemorates that covenant which was established on the basis of the atoning death (and resurrection) of the Lord Jesus Christ. If Christians are living in sin, repentance is the only satisfactory answer. The Lord's Supper is also an occasion to meditate on and to enter into all the blessings provided by that glorious covenant. When we celebrate the Lord's Supper on God's terms, He can meet with us and bless us to the maximum. His presence at the Lord's Supper should be very real and very special, but each individual Christian should know God's presence (a very real communion with Him) all the time.

It seems clear to me that what Jesus said in verses 26-58 was intended to point to the salvation/eternal life that was being made available through believing in Him, the Lamb of God. To think that He was speaking, even secondarily, of partaking of the elements of the Lord's Supper confuses the issue. Partaking of the physical elements of the Lord's Supper cannot provide salvation and spiritual/eternal life - the physical elements (symbols) point to and remind us of the sacrifice of the Lamb of God that does provide salvation/eternal life for those who have been born again and are literally united with the Lord Jesus in His atoning death, resurrection, and ascension. "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words which I have spoken to you are spirit and life" (John 6:63).

I'll quote a brief excerpt from what D. A. Carson says under the heading, "The 'Bread of Life' discourse (6:22-58)" ("Gospel According to John," pages 276-280). "...these verses [verses 51c-58] provide a striking metaphor that makes the teaching of the previous verses more vivid, but can scarcely be taken to introduce fundamentally new (and 'sacramental') meaning. ... Eating the flesh of the Son of Man is a striking, metaphorical way of saying that the gift of God's real 'bread of life' (v. 35) is appropriated by faith (v. 47). ... 'John 6 is not about the Lord's Supper; rather, the Lord's Supper is about what is described in John 6.' " (Carson's quotation was taken from C. Brown, NIDNTT, 2. 535.)

I'll quote part of what R. C. H. Lenski (a conservative Lutheran) says under verse 59 ("St. John's Gospel" [Augsburg Publishing House, 1943], pages 502, 503), "We must now answer the question whether this discourse deals only with the spiritual eating of faith or with the oral sacramental eating in the Lord's Supper. We reply, only in the former. The eating of which Jesus speaks throughout (note for instance v. 53) is absolutely necessary for salvation. ... Secondly, the eating of which Jesus speaks is always and without exception salutary (see for instance v. 54). It is impossible to affirm this of the oral eating in the Sacrament. - Finally, it is inconceivable that Jesus should urge upon these unbelieving (v. 36) Galileans a sacrament not yet instituted and urge upon them the sacramental eating of which no one could know until the institution had taken place. ...

Recognizing the force of these facts, some seek a compromise, admitting that primarily this discourse does not deal with the Lord's Supper, yet maintaining that secondarily or indirectly it does." Lenski goes on for a page here discussing details and making it clear that he doesn't agree with this "compromise."]] (59) These things He said in the synagogue as He taught in Capernaum. [I'll quote a sentence from F. Godet here (page 42), "There was a regular meeting in the synagogue on the second, fifth and seventh days of the week (Monday, Thursday and Saturday)."] (60) Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this said, 'This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it? [[These "disciples" were referring to what Jesus had said about His being the bread out of heaven, starting in verse 32, and especially what He said about the need to eat His flesh and drink His blood in verses 51-56. What Jesus said in response to the complaint of these "disciples" didn't satisfy them, and "many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore" (verse 66). The point of view here (at least the primary point of view), as verse 64 shows, is that the "disciples" who withdrew never had become true disciples/believers in the first place. Verse 64 also shows that Jesus knew this from the beginning (cf. John 2:23-25).

Jesus frequently said things that were difficult. He demanded total commitment of His disciples and told them to count the cost before becoming His disciples (cf., e.g., Matt. 7:13, 14; 16:24-27; Luke 9:57-62; and 14:25-33). One necessary characteristic of true disciples is that they continue in His word, which includes obeying His word; I'll quote John 8:31, "So Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, 'If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine.' " He wasn't sent to gather half-committed disciples, and He knew that it was necessary for Him to shock and wake up "disciples" who were following Him in a half-hearted way and/or for the wrong reasons. (I had a footnote: In our day many prospective converts and many who have been "Christians" for a long time have not been confronted with Jesus' call for total commitment. This is a very serious problem. We can't change God's gospel.)]] (61) But Jesus, conscious that His disciples grumbled at this, said to them, 'Does this cause you to stumble? ["Does this offend you?" NIV. In Matt. 6:11 Jesus said, "And blessed is he who does not take offense at Me

---

PLEASE ENCOURAGE AUTHOR BELOW LEAVE COMMENT ON ARTICLE AS A MEMBER OR VISITOR