John 6 opens with the
only miracle story that appears in all four Gospels: the feeding of the
five-thousand. It is significant that of all the miracles Jesus performed, this
is the only one found in all four Gospels. As we shall soon see, its
purpose as a precursor of the Eucharist makes it a very powerful sign.
Notice I called this
story “the feeding of the five-thousand” and not “the multiplication of the
loaves and fish,” as it is sometimes called. Jesus did not multiply anything
here. Multiplication means to add to an original quantity to make a greater
amount. (“Johnny has five barley loaves in a basket. He then he adds five more
baskets. Johnny now has thirty loaves.”) That’s not what happened.
Jesus did not make
thousands of new loaves and fish appear. That would have also been amazing, and
if it had happened that way the Gospels would tell us so. But that’s not what
happened. The Gospels tell us that the miracle was Jesus feeding five-thousand
people with the same five loaves and the same two fish. (John
tells us that the disciples “filled twelve baskets with the fragments of the
five barley loaves which were left over by those who had eaten.” Mark tells
us “the two fish He divided among them
all.”
No matter how many
people consumed them, and no matter how much they consumed, Jesus fed each of
the five-thousand people with the same fish and the same loaves, not new and
different ones. They never changed their appearance, size or number—there was
no outward change in these elements. This is physically impossible, but Jesus did
it.
Next in John 6 Jesus
does something else physically impossible—he walks on water. These two episodes
set the stage for what comes next: a teaching that likewise seems to defy both nature
and logic.
In verse 35 Jesus says “I am the bread of life. He who comes
to Me shall never hunger, and he who believes in Me shall never thirst.” In
verse 40 the Jews begin to murmur among themselves. Their objection at this
point has nothing to do with Jesus calling himself bread. They assume he is
using a figure of speech which he often did (“I am the vine, I am the door,”
etc.) They object because Jesus claims to have come down from heaven.
But the conversation
takes a new turn in verse 51, when Jesus says: “I am the living bread which
came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live
forever; and the bread that I shall give is My flesh, which I shall give for
the life of the world.”
The Greek verb John uses
for “eat” here is φάγω,
which can mean either literal eating or figuratively consuming intellectual and
spiritual nourishment. But to the Jews in this audience, the possibility at
least existed at this point that Jesus may be speaking literally, as we see in
their response in verse 52: “How can this Man give us His
flesh to eat?” Nobody raised such a question when they knew Jesus was speaking purely
figuratively. Nobody asked “How can this man be a vine?” or “How can this man
be a door?” when they understood he was using a figure of speech. But this
audience recognized that there was at least the possibility that he was
speaking literally. (Especially since in that culture to speak figuratively of
eating another’s flesh was a statement of hatred for that person—see Micah 3:3.
If Jesus was speaking figuratively the Jews would have interpreted this to mean
“Whoever hates me will live forever,” which would have made no sense.)
But starting in verse
53, after the Jews raised these objections, John uses a different verb. He now
uses σάρξ, which means only a literal
eating—in fact, it means to gnaw, to physically chew. After this change to the
exclusively literal verb, the Jews who object are no longer murmuring—now they
walk. They clearly understand Jesus to be speaking literally, and they want
nothing to do with this.
His use of the Greek word for “flesh” instead of the
more ambivalent word for “body” also reinforces that he is speaking of
literally eating his flesh.
When we put this together with the Passover context
presented in Part 1, it is clear what jesus was saying at the last Supper. This
IS his body, this IS his blood.
Some commentators raise the objection of the Jewish
prohibition against drinking blood which this would seem to violate. That
commandment was part of the old covenant. Jesus makes it clear in Luke 22:20
that “This cup is the new covenant in My blood,
which is shed for you.” That old rule does not apply here.
