John 6:52

Joh 6:52-53. The Jews therefore strove among themselves — Greek, εμαχοντο, literally, they fought, that is, they debated with great violence, some being inclined to believe, others to reject this doctrine; some, doubtless, taking his words in one sense, others in another, and some vindicating, and others deriding and censuring them, and, as if what he had advanced was to be taken in a literal sense, the generality saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? — What a monstrous and unintelligible doctrine is this! Observe, reader, the effects of this discourse of Christ: the Jews are tried here; the disciples, Joh 6:60; Joh 6:66; the apostles, Joh 6:67. Then Jesus — Proceeding in the same figurative language he had used before, and without condescending to make any further explication; said unto them, Verily, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, &c., ye have no life in you — As if he had said, However you may censure my doctrine as unintelligible and absurd, yet nothing can be more certain than it, or more important to you. For except you be entirely united to me by a firm and lively faith in the truth and importance of my doctrine, and a cordial dependance, for acceptance with God, on the merit of the sacrifice which I shall offer for the sins of the world, thereby deriving spiritual strength and nourishment from me, through the influences of my Spirit, in the use of those means of grace which I shall institute, you can have no spiritual life in you here, nor attain eternal life hereafter. The reader will easily observe, that by eating his flesh and drinking his blood, our Lord did not mean any corporeal action whatever, but men’s receiving in faith, and with gratitude, those blessings, to confer which he assumed the human nature. The expression therefore implies a true and lively faith in “the revelation he came to make, concerning the merciful counsels of God for the salvation of sinners; or, as he himself expresses it, Joh 6:63, The word that he spake to them, especially concerning his incarnation, and his dying to make atonement for sin. Which articles of the Christian faith, being particularly understood here, give propriety to the metaphors of eating Christ’s flesh and drinking his blood, by which the whole of that faith is denominated. The reason is, of all the discoveries made by Christ, those concerning his incarnation, and the nature and ends of his death, received and meditated upon with a lively faith, afford sovereign and salutary nourishment unto the minds of sinners. They are as effectual for sustaining the spiritual life in the soul, as flesh, fitly prepared, is for nourishing the animal life in the body.” The sacrament of the eucharist was plainly intended to affect our minds with a sense of these important truths, and our Lord might probably think of that intended institution while he spoke: but as this was a future thing, and utterly unknown to his hearers, it would be very unwarrantable to interpret this text as chiefly referring to that ordinance. See Macknight and Doddridge.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh 6:52. Ἐμάχοντο, began to strive) They now did not merely murmur, as at Joh 6:41.—οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι, the Jews) The successive steps are to be observed: the Jews, in this place; the disciples, Joh 6:60; Joh 6:66, “This is a hard saying; who can hear it?—Many—went back and walked no more with Him;” the apostles, Joh 6:67, [Jesus to the Twelve] “Will ye also go away?”—πῶς, how) The How they repeat here again: comp. Joh 6:42, “How is it that He saith, I came down from heaven?” To neither the one nor the other how does Jesus reply, but proceeds with His own discourse, and saith, Thus it must be: Joh 6:53, “Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, etc., ye have no life in you.”—τὴν σάρκα, the flesh) Again they fasten on that statement, as being the one which seemed to them especially hard.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh_6:52-53. The Jews rightly add φαγεῖν, borrowing it from the preceding context; but the meaning and reference of the expression, which they certainly recognised as somehow to be taken figuratively, are to them so indistinct, that they fall into a dispute with each other (non jam solum murmurabant uti Joh_6:41, Bengel) upon the question: How can this man give us his flesh (τὴν σάρκα, also without the αὐτοῦ, a gloss in Lachm.) to eat? Not as if they had missed hearing something (Luthardt: the futurity implied in the expression, Joh_6:51), but they did not understand the enigmatical statement. Instead now of explaining the how of their question, Jesus sets before them the absolute necessity of their partaking, and in still more extreme terms lays down the requirement, which seemed so paradoxical to them; for He nows adds the drinking of His blood, in order thus to bring more prominently into view the reference to His death, and its life-giving power to be experienced by believing appropriation.

τοῦ υἱοῦ τ. ἀνθρ.] This prophetic and Messianic self-designation (Joh_1:51, Joh_3:13-14), which could now less easily escape the notice of His hearers than in Joh_6:27, serves as a still more solemn expression in place of μου, without, however, affecting the meaning of the eating and drinking.

οὐκ ἔχετε ζωὴν ἐν ἑαυτ.] ye have not life in yourselves, life is foreign to and remote from your own inner nature,death is the power that ye have in you, spiritual and eternal death; life must first, by that eating and drinking, be inwardly united with your own selves. In that appropriation of the flesh and blood of Jesus, this life flows forth from His life (Joh_6:56-57; Joh_5:26); and it is attached to faith only, not to the use of any outward element (comp. Harless, p. 124).

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh 6:52 . Ἐμάχοντο … The further explanations sprang from a fresh question put not directly to Jesus, but to one or other of the crowd. They differed in their judgment of Him. Some impatiently denounced Him as insane: others suggesting that there was truth in His words. The discussion all tended to the question πῶς δύναται … φαγεῖν . He had only spoken of “giving” His flesh for the life of the world: but they not unreasonably concluded that if so, it must be eaten. Their mistake lay in thinking of a physical eating.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Flesh cannot put a difference between fleshly eating which is done by the help of the teeth, and spiritual eating which consisteth in faith, and therefore is condemneth that which it understandeth not: yet notwithstanding the truth must be preached and taught.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Jews strove among themselves--arguing the point together.

How can, &c.--that is, Give us His flesh to eat? Absurd.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 52. How can this man give us his flesh to eat?] Our Lord removes this difficulty, and answers the question, in Joh 6:63.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

52. The Jews therefore debated among themselves. He again mentions the Jews, not by way of honor, but to reproach them with their unbelief, because they do not receive the well known doctrine concerning eternal life, or, at least, do not inquire modestly into the subject, if it be still obscure and doubtful. For when he says that they debated, it is a sign of obstinacy and contempt; and those who dispute so keenly do, indeed, block up against themselves the road to the knowledge of the truth. And yet the blame imputed to them is not simply that they inquired into the manner; for the same blame would fall on Abraham and the blessed Virgin, (Genesis 15:2; Luke 1:34.) Those persons, therefore, are either led astray through ignorance, or are deficient in candour, who, without taking into account the hardihood and eagerness to quarrel, which alone the Evangelist condemns, direct all their outcry against the word how; as if it had not been lawful for the Jews to inquire about the manner of eating the flesh of Christ But it ought rather to be imputed to sloth than ascribed to the obedience of faith, if we knowingly and willingly leave unsolved those doubts and difficulties which are removed for us by the word of the Lord. Not only is it lawful, therefore, to inquire as to the manner of eating the flesh of Christ, but it is of great importance for us to understand it, so far as it is made known by the Scriptures. Away, then, with that fierce and obstinate pretense of humility, “For my part, I am satisfied with that single word of Christ, when he declares that his flesh is truly food: to all the rest I willingly shut my eyes.” As if heretics would not have equal plausibility on their side, if they willingly were ignorant that Christ was conceived by the Holy Ghost, because, believing that he is the seed of Abraham, they make no farther inquiry. Only we ought to preserve such moderation about the secret works of God, as not to desire to know anything more than what he determines by his word.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(52) The Jews therefore strove among themselves.—They have passed beyond the murmuring of Joh_6:41. They understand that He means, though His own words have not yet expressed it, that His flesh is to be eaten, and is thus to supply the principle of life. They contend one with another as to how this can really be.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

52. strove among themselves] Their excitement increases; they have got beyond muttering among themselves (Joh_6:41).

give us his flesh to eat] ‘To eat’ is their own addition; they wish to bring out in full the strangeness of His declaration.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood,.... Spiritually by faith, as explained in the preceding verse:

hath eternal life; the principle of spiritual life, which is evidently implanted in him, as appears from his eating and drinking; and is a durable and lasting principle: grace is an incorruptible seed; every part of it is abiding and permanent; and it is itself the beginning, pledge, and earnest of everlasting life, and is inseparably connected with it: moreover, such have eternal life itself, not only in Christ their head, but in themselves: they have a right unto it, and a meetness for it: and may be assured of it, as if they were personally possessed of it, from their election to it; the security of it in Christ; from the grace they have received, which is the beginning of glory; and the earnest of it in themselves:

and I will raise him up at the last day; to enjoy it in soul and body; See Gill on Joh 6:39, See Gill on Joh 6:40.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?

Ver. 52. Strove among themselves] They tumultuously contradicted, murmured, mutinied, which was a sign of their obstinance and contempt. For otherwise it is not only lawful, but needful, modestly to make inquiry how we may eat Christ spiritually.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The bread which I will give, is my flesh for the life of the world.[2] In most Greek copies we read, is my flesh which I will give for the life of the world. Christ here promised what he afterwards instituted, and gave at his last supper. He promiseth to give his body and blood to be eaten; the same body (though the manner be different) which he would give on the cross for the redemption of the world. The Jews of Capharnaum were presently scandalized. How (said they) can this man give us his flesh to eat? But notwithstanding their murmuring, and the offence which his words had given, even to many of his disciples, he was so far from revoking, or expounding what he had said of any figurative or metaphorical sense, that he confirmed the same truth in the clearest and strongest terms. Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat, &c. And again, (ver. 56.) For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. I cannot omit taking notice of what St. John Chrysostom and St. Cyril, in their commentaries on this place, have left us on these words, How can this man do this? These words which call in question the almighty and incomprehensible power of God, which hinder them, says St. John Chrysostom, from believing all other mysteries and miracles: they might as well have said: How could he with five loaves feed five thousand men? This question, How can he do this? Is a question of infidels and unbelievers. St. Cyril says that How, or, How can he do this? cannot, without folly, be applied to God. 2ndly, he calls it a question of blasphemy. 3rdly, a Jewish word, for which these Capharnaites deserved the severest punishments. 4thly, He confutes them by the saying of the prophet Isaias, (lv. 9.) that God’s thoughts and ways are as much above those of men, as the heavens are above the earth. But if these Capharnaites, who knew not who Jesus was, were justly blamed for their incredulous, foolish, blasphemous, Jewish saying, how can he give us his flesh to eat? much more blameable are those Christians, who, against the words of the Scripture, against the unanimous consent and authority of all Christian Churches in all parts of the world, refuse to believe his real presence, and have nothing to say, but with the obstinate Capharnaites, how can this be done? Their answers are the same, or no better, when they tell us that the real presence contradicts their senses, their reason, that they know it to be false. We may also observe, with divers interpreters, that if Christians are not to believe that Jesus Christ is one and the same God with the eternal Father, and that he is truly and really present in the holy sacrament of the Eucharist, it will be hard to deny but that Christ himself led men into these errors, which is blasphemy. For it is evident, and past all dispute, that the Jews murmured, complained, and understood that Christ several times made himself God, and equal to the Father of all. 2ndly, When in this chapter, he told them he would give them his flesh to eat, &c. they were shocked to the highest degree: they cried out, this could not be, that these words and this speech was hard and harsh, and on this very account many that had been his disciples till that time, withdrew themselves from him, and left him and his doctrine. Was it not then at least high time to set his complaining hearers right, to prevent the blasphemous and idolatrous opinions of the following ages, nay even of all Christian Churches, by telling his disciples at least, that he was only a nominal God, in a metaphorical and improper sense; that he spoke only of his body being present in a figurative and metaphorical sense in the holy Eucharist? If we are deceived, who was it that deceived us but Christ himself, who so often repeated the same points of our belief? His apostles must be esteemed no less guilty in affirming the very same, both as to Christ’s divinity, and his real presence in the holy sacrament, as hereafter will appear. (Witham) --- Compare the words here spoken with those he delivered at his last supper, and you will see that what he promises here was then fulfilled: "this is my body given for you." Hence, the holy Fathers have always explained this chapter of St. John, as spoken of the blessed sacrament. See the concluding reflections, below.

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Quomodo potest hic, &c. Greek: pos dunatai outos; St. John Chrysostom, hom. xlv. in Joan. in the Greek, hom. xlvi. tom. 8, p. 272. Greek: otan gar e zetesis tou pos eiselthe, sunerchetai kai apistia. St. Cyril, lib. iv. in Joan. p. 359. Illud quomodo stulte de Deo proferunt, Greek: to pos anoetos epi theou legousin. --- Hoc loquendi genus omni scatere blasphemia, Greek: dusphemias apases. --- Judaicum verbum. Greek: to pos Ioudaikon rema. He takes notice how much the nature and power of God is above human capacity; he shews it by examples, and then concludes, (p. 360) De quibus miraculis si tuum illud quomodo subinde inferas, omni plane Scripturæ Divinæ fidem derogabis, Greek: ole pantelos apeitheseis theia graphe.

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

They will still understand spiritual things in a carnal sense; yet it is hard to conceive how they could imagine that Christ spake of giving them his flesh to eat, as men eat the flesh of oxen or sheep; but which way soever they did understand it indeed, their captious temper inclined them to conceal any other sense they had of it, and to represent what our Saviour said as exceedingly absurd.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

52. Jews… strove among themselves—The contest is expressed in Greek by a word that signifies fought. One section (probably the low Nazarene party of Joh_6:42) would give a base, cannibal sense to his words; others (like the respectful speakers in Joh_6:34) might hold that the great feeder of the five thousand has some mysterious meaning in his words; others still (embracing perhaps some like his doubtful disciples of Joh_6:60) held that he meant, by eating his flesh, only faith in his supernatural person.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vers. 52-59. (d) The conflict among the Jews leads Christ to insist further on separate participation of his flesh and blood as the condition of life.

The Jews therefore strove one with another (emaconto represents more vigorous demonstration of their difficulties than the egogguzon of ver. 41). They were not unanimous in their judgment. Some said one thing, and others said another. The "Jews" had not yet come to a unanimous opinion that this wonderful Being was talking sheer heresy or incomprehensible mystery. They knew his habit of metaphoric speech, and that underneath common imagery he was in the habit of conveying doctrines the full purport of which was not at once apparent. Some denounced him as uttering an intolerable riddle. Some saw, in a measure, through it, and hated the doctrine that was thereby conveyed. How could he be so essential to the life of the world? and how, said the pure materialist, "how can he give us his flesh to eat?" A question of great interest arises. He has already identified, in ver. 35, "coming to him," "reaching him" under the drawing of the Father, with the transcendent blessing of life eternal, of victory, over death, and resurrection. In ver. 40 "beholding" and "believing" are cognate or equivalent conditions of life and resurrection. In ver. 47, again, "believing," per se, is the essential and all-comprehensive condition. Now, has Christ added, in this verse, anything fresh to the fundamental ideas? Let it be pondered that he has already equated "believing" with eating a bread that endureth to everlasting life (vers. 27-29). He has declared himself to be the "Bread of life," and to be appropriated by "coming" and "believing." He has spoken of himself as "living Bread," which, coming for the life of the world from heaven itself, is offered as food. Now, what more than this has he said when he declared that he will offer his flesh" as heavenly food? The Jews undoubtedly show, by their mutual contest, that he had put some part of the previous oracle in a still more enigmatical, if not offensive, form. So far the imagery was not altogether beyond them. Here it takes on a form which excites angry controversy. If they understood him to mean "doctrine," "truth," "cause," even "office," as Head of a spiritual school as one providing by his gracious will ample nutriment for all who would eat of the rich banquet of his words they would, to some extent, follow him. The eating of the tree of life was a well known figure in Hebrew Scripture; (Pro_4:17 Pro_9:5) cf. the language of Isaiah, (Isa_55:2) the action of Ezekiel, (Eze_3:1-3) and the imagery of Hosea. (Hos_10:13) In the "Midrash on Ecc_2:24 Ecc_3:12 Ecc_8:15," "eating and drinking" is said always to refer to the Law (Edersheim and Wunsche). But when he spoke of giving his flesh" for the life of the world, he passed beyond the limits of their interpreting power. They did not see through his imagery; nor did Jesus exactly answer the angry query which they were putting one to another.

Vers. 52-59. The increasing difficulties of Jewish unbelief.

The further teaching in the synagogue of Capernaum only developed the more decidedly the unbelieving temper of the Galilaeans.

I THE STRIFE AMONG THE JEWS. "The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can he give us his flesh to eat?

1. Some of them evidently were in his favour, and understood his words in their true sense; but the majority were as evidently opposed to him.

2. Those who are carnally minded are apt to put a wrong sense upon the words of life, to their own undoing.

3. Yet our Lord does not alter his words to meet the moral difficulties present to their minds.

II CONSIDER HOW OUR LORD DEALS WITH THEM QUESTION. "Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day." Here he gives his explanation, first in a negative, then in a positive form, to the effect that the atoning obedience of Christ is the cause of life to men. (Rom_5:18) He had first connected the life with his Person; he now connects it with his work.

1. Our Lord does not, as some imagine, refer here to the Lord"s Supper,

(1) because this ordinance had not then been instituted, and the Jews could not possibly have understood his reference to it;

(2) because it is not true to say that every one who partakes of the Lord"s Supper either has or shall have eternal life;

(3) and Roman Catholics, who insist upon this interpretation of the text, are not consistent, by denying the cup to the laity, though "drinking his blood" is expressly declared to be as essential to life as "eating his flesh.

2. He does not refer these words to his doctrine, or his system of ethics, or his example. Such an interpretation is exceedingly shallow.

3. He does not refer to the Incarnation, as the sole channel for the communication of life, according to those who hold the mystical theory of the atonement, as if his death were the mere climax of his dedication to God, and not a true sacrifice for sin.

4. He refers, in these expressive words, to his atoning death on Calvary, of which the Paschal lamb was but the shadow. With their awe of blood, the Jews would think it strange to hear Jesus assert the necessity of drinking his blood; but the strangeness disappears when he virtually says to them, "I am the Substance or Reality of that type.

(1) Consider the import of the life that is thus imparted to the sinner.

(a) It presupposes men as without life, as alienated from the life of God, (Eph_4:18) because they have not the love of God in them. (Joh_5:42)

(b) It is something freely provided and bestowed by God.

(c) It is eternal in its nature, incapable of break or interruption, finding its completeness in the final resurrection of the body.

(2) This life, so far from being an absolute or unpurchased gift, is secured through the atoning obedience of Christ. The Prince of Life submits to death; he gives his flesh for the life of the world. The words point to a priestly act of oblation. (Eph_5:2)

(3) This life is received through faith. Our Lord uses the terms "eating his flesh" and "drinking his blood" as interchangeable with believing in him (vers. 35, 40, 47). The terms imply that sinners are to receive Christ, as a hungry man partakes of food. Thus the atonement becomes not merely a divine expedient for man"s salvation, but a profound personal necessity.

5. The crucified flesh of Christ is the essential food of the immortal soul. "For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed." The reason is that the food of the old sacrifices was only the type of which Christ crucified was the transcendent reality.

6. Explanation of the life-giving virtue of Christ"s flesh and blood. "He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him." This implies a union of the closest kind.

(1) Believers dwell in the heart of Christ as in a place of refuge and rest.

(2) Christ dwells in the heart of believers by faith (Eph_3:17) a wonderful instance of condescension on the part of our Divine Redeemer. This indwelling secures to the believer all that is Christ"s.

7. The true ground of the common life of Christ and believers. "As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father, so he that eateth me shall live by me.

(1) Jesus himself has access to the Source of life;

(a) for he has his life by the Father, and

(b) has been sent by the Father, who is the Fountain of life.

(2) Thus the believer who feeds on Jesus lives upon the Father himself. "The true God, the living Father, gives himself to One alone, but in him to all who feed upon this only One.

(3) Thus is realized the great mystery of the gospel gathering together of all things in one". (Eph_1:10)

1. Jesus now reaches the climax of his revelation to the Jews, for he tells them plainly that death or life hangs upon their acceptance or rejection of himself. "He that eateth of this bread shall live forever.

2. The scene of this long discourse. "Jesus said these things, teaching in the synagogue of Capernaum." Modern exploration has identified Tell-Hum as the site of Capernaum, and brings to light the ruins of an ancient synagogue, in which has been found a block of stone with the pot of manna engraved upon its face. The discovery suggests that the Jews as well as Christ may have seen this very stone.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Observe the degrees: the Jews are tried here; the disciples, ver. 60-66, the apostles, ver. 67.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

Life through Christ’s sacrifice:

v. 52. The Jews, therefore, strove among themselves, saying, How can this Man give us His flesh to eat?

v. 53. Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, ye have no life in you.

v. 54. Whoso eateth My flesh and drinketh My blood hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

v. 55. For My flesh is meat indeed, and My blood is drink indeed.

v. 56. He that eateth My flesh and drinketh My blood dwelleth in Me and I in him.

v. 57. As the living Father hath sent Me, and I live by the Father, so he that eateth Me, even he shall live by Me.

v. 58. This is that Bread which came down from heaven; not as your fathers did eat manna and are dead; he that eateth of this Bread shall live forever.

v. 59. These things said He in the synagogue, as He taught in Capernaum.

Although Jesus had been careful to explain His figure sufficiently that all might have understood Him, yet the understanding was lacking in the greater number of His hearers. There was a division, a dispute, among them. They differed in their judgment of Him. Some severely denounced Him as insane, others suggested that there might be some truth in His words. But they all thought of physical, sensual eating and partaking. Jesus therefore summarizes the lessons which He wishes to convey once more. He tells them that it is indeed essential for everyone that wishes to have eternal life that he eat His flesh and drink His blood. It is necessary for every believer to receive Jesus altogether by faith, in His full work of atonement, active and passive obedience, shedding of blood, and all. By doing so, the believer has the assurance of eternal life and will rise on the last day to see the consummation of all glories. In this way the body of Christ is the true food, and His blood the true drink. In this way, also, the wonderful union of Christ and the believers in Him is brought about. They receive Christ spiritually and are most intimately and inseparably united with Him. They dwell in the Savior and the Savior in them. And this wonderful union extends still farther. The living Father has sent the Son; the Son, in that mysterious relationship which His eternal Sonship expresses, lives through the Father; and so both persons of the Godhead are the Fountainhead of life and give to the believer the fullness of perfect life, which will last throughout eternity. He that believes on the Son places his trust, first of all, in the human nature, in the man Jesus Christ that died for the sins of the whole world. But thereby he also accepts and clings to the divine nature, to the entire, Godhead and all His gifts. Thus the human nature of Christ is like a bridge between God and man. He that believes in Jesus the Savior has the entire Christ in himself, according to both, divine and human natures, true God and man. That the Jews put their trust in the mere historical fact of the manna in the wilderness, believing that in some way they were partakers of the benefits that came upon their fathers at that time, was altogether foolish. Only by faith in Christ, the living Bread from heaven, can eternal life be obtained. John remarks, with his usual exact specification of time and place, that this wonderful sermon was held in Capernaum, in the synagogue. It is immaterial whether it was on a Sabbath or on one of the week-days when there were services, Monday or Thursday. Jesus gave a clear and unmistakable testimony concerning Himself, full of glorious comfort to the believer.

"The Flesh of the Son of Man"

Since the time of the Reformation, the Reformed sects, almost without exception, have understood the passage Joh 6:51-63 of the Lord’s Supper, in order to bolster up their false doctrine concerning a mere spiritual eating and drinking in the Eucharist. Their standpoint may be summarized in one sentence: "Even if Christ does give us His flesh in the Holy Supper, it still has no value; for everything depends upon the spirit."

That this position is untenable is evident from the very words. For if these words of the Lord did treat of the Lord’s Supper, long before this Sacrament was instituted and known, then the real presence would certainly be taught here, a fact which all the followers of Zwingli would repudiate with the greatest severity. But the words in their connection cannot be understood but of the faith which accepts Jesus and all His works and merits. And the contrast between flesh and spirit in verse 63 has nothing whatever to do with the Eucharist, since it opposes the work of the Spirit of God to the unprofitable working of the natural condition of man. "Since, then, this is true and incontrovertible that flesh, where it is contrasted to spirit, cannot mean the body of Christ, but the old Adam, born of the flesh, it is certain, also, that here, Joh 6:63, the words ’Flesh profited nothing’ cannot be understood of the body of Christ, because Christ there places flesh in opposition to spirit. For thus His words Bound clearly: It is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profited nothing; the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. There you see plainly that He distinguishes between flesh and spirit and places the former in opposition to the latter. For He evidently teaches that life and spirit is in His words, and not in the flesh. Of the flesh He affirms that it is unprofitable. And how can it be profitable, if neither life nor spirit is found therein? If there is no life nor spirit therein, then there must be only death and sin therein. Which heretic has now been so desperate (excepting the Jews) as to understand this of the flesh of Christ? Now let the enthusiasts try themselves out; let us see what they can do; they have boasted that this was an iron wall and the certain truth; if they can make good their boast, I should like to see it. " "The eating and drinking is nothing but believing in the Lord Jesus Christ, who gave His flesh and blood for me, in order to deliver me from sin, death, devil, hell, and all misfortune. Such faith can never exist without life; therefore, he that believes must live and be just, as Habakkuk says, chap. 2:4: The just shall live by faith. Therefore the eating is done with the heart and not with the mouth. The eating with the heart does not deceive, but the eating with the mouth does; the eating with the mouth will have an end, the other lasts eternally without interruption. For the heart is nourished and fed by faith in Christ. There you see plainly that these words are not to be understood of the Sacrament of the Altar. Therefore to eat the flesh of the Son of God and to drink His blood, as has been said, is nothing else than that I believe His flesh was given for me and His blood was shed for me, and that for my sake He conquered sin, death, devil, hell, and all misfortune. Out of such faith there results a great and mighty confidence in Him and a scorn and bold courage against all misfortune, that I may henceforth fear nothing, neither sin nor death nor devil nor hell, since I know that my Lord cast them under His feet and conquered them for my sake."

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Observe here, How the Jews, understanding Christ after a carnal manner, were offended at what he had said: for they thought it was inhuman to eat man’s flesh, and could not understand how the body of Christ could in such a sense be food to all the world.

Hence note, That carnal persons put a carnal sense upon Christ’s spiritual words, and so occasion their own stumbling. But yet notwithstanding the Jews stumbling at our Saviour’s expression, he doth not alter his words, but presseth more and more the necessity of feeding upon him by faith, in order to eternal life; Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

Learn from hence, 1. That the Lord Jesus Christ is the true spiritual food of all believers.

2. That those, and only those, who do by faith feed upon him, shall obtain a life of grace, and glory from him; if we do not by faith feed upon him, we can have no evidence for a life of grace, no title to a life of glory. This place some papists produce to countenance the doctrine of transubstantiation, a bodily eating and drinking of Christ’s flesh and blood in the sacrament. But it is evident that Christ treats not of the sacrament in this chapter, for the sacrament was not now instituted; therefore it is not a sacramental, but a spiritual, feeding upon Christ by faith, that is here meant. For this eating gives life to the eater; all that eat are saved, and all that do not eat are damned; but this is not true of a sacramental eating; besides, this eating which Christ speaks of, he makes absolutely necessary to salvation; but some are saved that never fed upon Christ in the sacrament, as John the Baptist, and the thief on the cross.

Lastly, If it be understood of the sacramental eating and drinking, woe be to the church of Rome, for denying the cup to the laity; because drinking of Christ’s blood is here made as necessary, as eating of his flesh, in order to eternal life. Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

Observe farther, The close and intimate union which is betwixt Christ himself, and those that feed upon him: He that eateth me, dwelleth within me, and I in him. As meat is turned into the eater’s substance, so believers and Christ become one; and by feeding on him, that is, by believing in him, there followeth a mutual inhabitation; Christ dwelling in them, and they in him: this is true of a spiritual feeding upon Christ, but not of a sacramental eating. Nay, Christ carries it higher still, and tells us, that as there is a real union between the Father and him, and as the Father lives who sent him, having an eternal fountain of life in himself: and the Son lives by the Father, having the same life communicated to him with his essence from the Father: in like manner, says Christ, he that eateth me, the same shall live by me. All which is certainly true of our spiritual feeding upon Christ by faith; but cannot be applied to a corporal feeding on him in the sacrament, as the papists would have it.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Connecting Statement:

Some Jews who are present begin to argue among themselves and Jesus responds to their question.

How can this man give us his flesh to eat?

This remark appears in the form of a question to emphasize that the Jewish leaders are reacting negatively to what Jesus has said about "his flesh." AT: "There is no way that this man can give us his flesh to eat!" (See: Rhetorical Question)

Truly, truly

See how you translated this in John 1:51.

eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood

Here the phrases "eat the flesh" and "drink his blood" are metaphors that show how trusting in Jesus, the Son of Man, is like receiving spiritual food and drink. AT: "receive the Son of Man just like you receive food and drink" (See: Metaphor)

you will not have life in yourselves

"you will not receive eternal life"

translationWords

Jew

anger

flesh

Son of Man

blood

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

52. πρὸς ἀλλήλους. One with another (Joh 4:33, Joh 16:17): their excitement increases; they have got beyond murmuring about Him (Joh 5:4), but they are not all equally hostile (Joh 7:12; Joh 7:43; Joh 10:19). “They strove, and that with one another, for they understood not, neither wished to take the Bread of concord” (S. Augustine).

Πῶς. This is the old vain question (Joh 3:4; Joh 3:9) which continues to distract the Church and the world. All that men need know is the fact; but they insist in asking as to the manner. ‘Cur’ et ‘Quomodo’ exitiales voculae—‘Why’ and ‘How’ are deadly little words (Luther). Οὗτος is contemptuous (Joh 6:42): φαγεῖν is their own addition; they wish to bring out in full the strangeness of His declaration.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

52.] The inference conveyed in φαγεῖν, which first comes from the Jews themselves, is yet a right one. If He is the Bread, and that Bread is His Flesh, we must eat His Flesh, though not in the sense here meant by them. They contended against one another, probably some having more insight into the possibility of a spiritual meaning than others.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

52. The Jewish interlocutors had murmured (v. 41) before this point had been reached; but now they begin to dispute with each other (μάχεσθαι does not occur again in the Gospels) as to the meaning and trustworthiness of the words of Jesus. They were not of one mind (cf. 7:12, 40, 9:16, 10:19); some probably discerning that a spiritual meaning lay behind this mention of the “Flesh” of Jesus.

πῶς δύναται κτλ.; The question is like that of 3:4, 9 (where see note). For οὗτος, “this person,” see on v. 42 above.

After σάρκα BT (with most vss.) insert αὐτοῦ, to elucidate the sense; but om. אCDLΓΔΘ. In any case, the meaning is, “How can this person give us his flesh to eat?” Their difficulty was a real one, even if they (or some of them) recognised that the σάρξ represented the whole humanity of Jesus, on which they were to “feed”; for that one human being could impart his nature to another, even spiritually, would be hard to understand.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Strove [εμαχοντο] . The murmuring (ver. 41) now breaks out into open contention among the Jews themselves.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Ver. 52. “The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can he give us his flesh to eat?”

The term ἐμάχοντο, strove, goes beyond the ἐγόγγυζον, murmured, of Joh 6:41; it is now a violent debate following after a whispered murmuring. The wordsamong themselves seem to contradict the appositional word saying, which apparently indicates that the saying was unanimous. But the same question might really be found on all lips, while yet there was no agreement among those who presented it. Some arrived at the conclusion: It is absurd. Others, under the impression of the miracle of the day before and of the sacred and mysterious character of Jesus’ words, maintained, in spite of everything, that He was, indeed, the Messiah. At the sight of this altercation, Jesus not only persists in His affirmation, but strengthens it by using expressions which were more and more concrete. Not only does He speak of eating His flesh and drinking His blood, but He also makes of this mysterious act the condition of life (Joh 6:53-56); He speaks of eating Himself (Joh 6:57); and finally, sums up the whole conversation in the final declaration of Joh 6:58. The evangelist closes by indicating the place of the scene (Joh 6:59). The true text says: “the flesh,” not: His flesh, although it is indeed the flesh of Jesus that is in question. That which is revolting to them is, that this is the flesh which must nourish them in eternal life.

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.