Scripture Reference: John 6:25-59

At verse 41 is the point in the discussion in which the Jewish objections came to the forefront. The sticking point was I am the bread which came down from heaven. They could not reconcile this with their knowledge of Jesus’ humble origins. Jesus rebuked their grumbling rather than answered their objection, although when He pointed out the necessity for the Father to take the initiative, He was virtually telling them that they were out of step with the Father. They needed a spiritual revelation to understand Jesus’ words. This was further underlined by an appeal to the prophets. The passage Jesus quoted is from Isaiah 54:13, which describes the triumph of the Servant in his kingdom. It endorses the view that the initiative is with God. Yet God’s revelation comes only through Jesus, since He alone has seen God. The need for faith is again stressed and this fact is echoed in the language of John 3:15.

The theme of Jesus being the bread is once again introduced, and Jesus’ own claim is repeated. The superiority of the heavenly bread over the manna is that the former leads to life whereas the latter could not prevent death. Then Jesus claimed one of the most important statements in this discourse, He claimed to be the living bread, which although synonymous with bread of life brings out more vividly the contrast with the manna. But there is a further extension of thought in the identifying of the bread with the flesh. There is also a difference from the earlier statement in that it is now Jesus Himself who gives, whereas before it was the Father. The word flesh refers to the human life, the humanity of Jesus. It was totally misunderstood by the Jews. It differs from the word used at the Lord’s Supper (‘body’ instead of ‘flesh’), which shows that this statement is not to be read in the light of the Supper but vice-versa. The word world in verse 51 should be understood as the world of people.

It was because the Jews put a literal interpretation on the words of Jesus that he gave (He had to give) a further explanation in the following verses. It is hard to understand why the Jews could not see through to some deeper metaphorical, yet spiritual meaning. Their objection appears to be little more than ridicule. To them Jesus was confronting their lack of understanding in the oracles of God. It is not so surprising that the Jews did not penetrate to the spiritual meaning of Jesus’ words, for understanding was possible only through faith, which it has already been noted they did not possess. The eating and drinking of the flesh and blood of Jesus is clearly an act of spiritual faith. The metaphorical language can be understood only in the light of the coming sacrifice of Jesus. Dependence on what Jesus has done is, therefore, vividly described in terms of eating and drinking. The result of such dependence is seen in a mutual indwelling, in the abiding in. Jesus’ dwelling in believers means that He identifies Himself with them, but their dwelling in Him means that they continue to depend on Him. This whole discussion closes with another comparison between the manna and the heavenly bread. Then verse 58 is in fact a further echo or reference to verse 49. John leaves until the end of the discussion any reference to where this discussion took place. Since the discussion arose out of the miracle of the feeding, it is not possible to say what part of it preceded the entry into the synagogue. However, John does not consider it relevant to explain, but it is not impossible that the whole discourse took place inside the synagogue. Some synagogue services would have allowed for this.

Jesus made it very clear that He alone is the bread that imparts life to those that partake of Him in faith and those who continue to abide in Him as He dwells within.

Unless otherwise noted, Scripture taken from the New King James Version®, NKJV © 1982 by Thomas Nelson.
Used by permission. All rights reserved.