John 6:66

Joh_6:66-69

From that time many of His disciples went back.

Those who are mentioned in regard to

I. THE CHARACTER THEY ASSUMED. Disciples. This term was first used to designate the Apostles; then it was applied to or assumed by many whom our Lord had to distinguish from His disciples indeed. How many there are who are Christians only in name!

II. THE COURSE THEY PURSUED. They went away from Him.

1. They relinquished all attendance on His ministry.

2. Disowned all attachment to His person. 3, Repudiated all sympathy with His design. ,

4. Threw off His authority.

III. THE REASONS WHICH OPERATED LEADING THE MEN TO GO ASTRAY. Because He insisted

1. That all secular concerns were subservient to the salvation of the soul, which offended their avarice.

2. That all things pertaining to salvation belonged to God alone, which wounded their self-righteousness.

3. That they could not come to God except by Himself, which went counter to all their theological prepossessions.

4. That unless there was constant progressive fellowship with Himself experimentally they could not obtain ever-lasting life.

IV. THE DANGER THEY INCURRED. Where should they go? To go away from Christ a footstep was to go to perdition. (W. Brock, D. D.)

The touching appeal.

I. THE FACT RECORDED.

1. The designation given them. Disciples.

2. Their number was considerable.

3. The period of their desertion--From that time; the delivery of the discourse.

II. THE APPEAL MADE was

1. Touching.

2. Seasonable. When others turn their backs it is well to warn those who remain.

3. Important. Backsliding is a sin of peculiar aggravation.

III. THE ANSWER GIVEN.

1. To whom shall we go?

(1) To the scribes and Pharisees? They are blind guides.

(2) To heathen philosophers? Their foolish hearts are darkened.

(3) To the law? It thunders above our guilty heads its anathema.

(4) To the world? It has proved itself deceitful.

(5) To the ways of sin? The end of them is death.

2. Thou hast the words of Eternal life--we will stay with Thee, the Son of the living God for

(1) Pardon;

(2) purity;

(3) wisdom;

(4) strength;

(5) consolation. (Anon.)

A home question and a right answer

I. THE REASON FOR THE QUESTION. It was asked because

1. It was a season of defection. In all churches and ages there have been times of flocking in and flying out; ebbs and floods; and it is well at such seasons that decisive questions should be put.

2. It was a season of defection among the disciples; not merely camp followers who went after Him for the loaves and fishes. And this sets forth the grievous guilt of those who wear their Princes regimentals and then turn aside to false doctrine or sin.

3. It was a defection on account of doctrine because of the preceding discourse.

4. This defection was a going back. They did not go off the straight road, they simply reversed their steps and went back to their old lives.

5. It was open defection. They once walked with Jesus in the public streets, but now they will have no more to do with Him. This was at least honest and better than many a modern hypocrite.

II. THE QUESTION ITSELF. He might well press it for

1. One of them would certainly do so. He only chose twelve, yet one was a devil.

2. All of them might do so, and apart from His grace would. Let him that thinketh he standeth.

3. If they turned aside it would be specially sad. The chaff had been blown away and only the wheat was left, and that mixed with a little tares. These were picked men. How sad when an office bearer falls!

4. Apostasy is very contagious. Like sheep who, if one goes wrong, the next will follow.

5. He wishes His following to be perfectly voluntary. None can walk truly with Jesus who walk unwillingly.

III. THE ANSWER WHICH QUICK-VOICED PETER GAVE. It was threefold.

1. To whom shall we go? The thought was intolerable. Would you like to follow your old sinful life again?

2. Thou hast the words of eternal life. We cannot go away when we think of eternity. Those who turn back from Christ, what will they do in eternity?

3. We believe, and are sure, etc. Do you believe that? How then can you go away? (C. H. Spurgeon.)

A mournful defection

I. WHY DO MEN GO AWAY?

1. Because they cannot bear Christs doctrine. This is a hard saying. There are many points in the gospel offensive to human pride.

2. For the sake of gain.

3. Because terrified by persecution. Although the fires of Smithfield are extinguished there is much persecution still. Godless husbands tyrannize over their wives; employers over their servants; workmen over each other.

4. Out of sheer levity. In a list of wrecks you will find some which have gone down through collisions, or by striking on a rock; but sometimes you meet with one foundered at sea; how, no one knows, on a calm day. So there are many who make shipwreck of faith in easy circumstances. At the space of a moment they profess Christianity, and then suddenly, to everybodys surprise and without troubling themselves about it, renounce it.

5. Through wicked companions and unequal marriages. It is hard to keep religion when one pulls one way and one another.

6. For the sake of sensual enjoyments.

7. Through change of circumstances.

(1) Some because they have become poor and cannot look and do as they did.

(2) Some because they have become rich and religion is unfashionable with the set to which they now belong.

8. Unsound doctrine occasions many to apostatize.

9. Laziness causes others to turn aside. They do nothing, and as a consequence soon have nothing to do.

II. WHAT BECOMES OF THEM?

1. Some are very unhappy, and return.

2. Others are hardened in their obduracy and go from bad to worse.

III. WHY SHOULD NOT WE GO AS OTHERS HAVE GONE? Only because of the grace of God.

IV. IF YOU WOULD BE PRESERVED FROM FALLING you must

1. Keep humble and rely on the Holy Spirit of God.

2. Be jealous of your obedience, be circumspect.

3. Watch and pray.

4. Shun profane company. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Apostasy

I. OUR LORDS QUESTION was

1. The language of affection. Spoken in view of the loss of friends and immortal souls He came to save.

2. An implied warning. The propriety of such a question now rests on two grounds.

(1) The possibility, so far as they know, that professed disciples are not real disciples.

(2) The possibility that if real disciples they may apostatize. How our Lords declaration (Joh_6:70) must have constrained each to ask Lord is it I?

3. Anxious concern in view of abundant reasons for it.

(1) Many disciples had already forsaken Him.

(2) They were all the subjects of much weakness and prejudice.

(3) They were to be exposed to many temptations and dangers.

4. They were ignorant to a great extent of the nature of Christs salvation, and similar reasons exist in the present day for anxious concern and it may be useful to consider some of the sources of danger.

(1) The deep depravity of the human heart. How easily does this depravity

(a) lead men to deny or disregard the great practical truths of the gospel;

(b) to lose all just impression of the distinction between Christians and the world;

(c) to disregard the comparative worth of temporal and eternal things;

(d) to become insensible to the danger of small departures from duty;

(e) to banish the thought of eternity;

(f) to become more solicitous to preserve appearances before men than reality before God;

(g) to neglect the means of grace.

(2) The power of temptations without us, arising from wealth or poverty, business, society, etc.

II. THE DISCIPLES ANSWER, which bespeaks a just sense of his wants as a sinner and of his dependence on Christ as a Saviour.

1. As sinners we need the forgiveness of God, and can obtain the blessing only through Christ.

2. As sinners we need sanctification, guidance, support, consolation which no one but Christ can give.

3. We need eternal life: Christ only has the words of eternal life. (N. W. Taylor, D. D.)

The uses to be made of the falls of Christians

It behoves us

I. TO THINK WITH GRATITUDE OF THOSE WHO YET STAND, Many went away, but some, and they of the most value, remained. To despond would

1. Unduly magnify the importance of the apostles.

2. Give too much pleasure to the enemies of God.

II. TO FEEL AND ACKNOWLEDGE OUR OWN DANGER.

1. Because others have gone their own way and there is no likelihood of our following them, that is not to say that we are not in danger of pursuing a way of our own from Christ. You are in no danger of drunkenness, are you in danger of pride?

2. This sentiment will provoke charitable sentiments respecting falls of others.

III. TO COME WITH ALL FAITH AND SUPPLICATION TO THE SAVIOUR FOR PROTECTION AND MERCY. Neglect of this is the fruitful cause of backsliding. (S. Green, D. D.)

Going and staying

I. THE SADNESS OF APOSTASY.

1. Many take up a profession of Christianity who afterwards go away.

(1) The matter of fact. They ran well, and to all appearances judged by outward standards, were excellent Christians.

(2) To what this is owing.

(a) Largely from the want of the root of grace within;

(b) From insufficiently counting the cost.

(c) The want of a sensible joy in Christ as soon as was expected.

2. The sadness of their case.

(1) In general it is worse than if they had never made a profession of Christ (2Pe_2:20-21).

(a) As the Holy Spirit is grieved, and it may be, retired, their recovery is more doubtful.

(b) As they have put themselves out of the way of the Spirits influence it cannot be expected that it should follow them.

(c) As Satan has got faster hold of them.

(2) As their case is now worse than it was at the beginning, so by forsaking Christ they judge them- selves unworthy of eternal life and out of the way of heaven. In the day of judgment they will be convicted of base ingratitude, the greatest treachery and unfaithfulness and of the most unaccountable folly.

II. CHRISTS TENDER CONCERN FOR THE SAFETY OF HIS REAL DISCIPLES.

1. How this appears.

(1) In His incarnation and death;

(2) In His intercession;

(3) In His approachableness.

2. Whence it proceeds from.

(1) Their being ransomed by Him (1Pe_1:18);

(2) Their being entrusted to Him by the Father (Joh_6:38-39);

(3) Their being not only His servants and friends, but the members of His body;

(4) Their being specially loved by Him;

(5) Their danger through apostasy and their blessedness through abiding with Him.

III. THE BELIEVERS REASON FOR CLEAVING TO CHRIST.

1. They are sensible that they have no one but Christ to whom to go.

2. They dread the thought of going away, considering its sin, folly, misery and ingratitude.

3. How many soever revolt from Christ, sincere believers will and ought to cleave to Him still.

(1) To repair the dishonour cast upon Him by apostates and to witness that He never gave any just occasion to leave Him.

(2) To show that their choice of Him is not built on what others say, but upon what they know and experience of Him. (D. Wilcox.)

Experience and hope conservative of faith

1. In the discourse of this chapter we have many dark sayings, which gave great offence to many, and were the occasion of the apostasy of some of our Lords disciples.

2. The men who replied to our Lord felt the mysteriousness of His teaching as deeply as others, and at different times confessed as much. But in spite of all difficulties they did understand that their Master had what no other teacher had--the words of eternal life, and for that reason they would cling to Him. So with many of His disciples in the present day.

I. THE MEANING OF ETERNAL LIFE.

1. It has been said that Eternal is expressive of the character and quality of a thing not of its continuance, and stands for what is divine and spiritual in present enjoyment, e.g

(1) If any being possessed of animal or intellectual life were to have its being perpetuated for ever, though this would be life everlasting it would not be life eternal.

(2) If an angelic or human being possessed of this divine life were to be annihilated for a period it would still be proper to say that they had been made partakers of eternal life.

2. This is only half a truth and needs completing before we can grasp what was in the disciples minds. Let all this be granted, yet the subject of our Saviours teaching must have included perpetuity. He called them to a subjective life now, and declared that that in its ultimate issues, was to be their everlasting possession.

II. LET US SEE HOW THIS MEANING MAY BE ILLUSTRATED IN THE ANSWER OF THE DISCIPLES. This answer could not have embodied all that we know. It was given previously to our Lords redemptive work which throws such light on our Lords teaching, aud previously to the dispensation of the Spirit. Moreover, they were slow to learn and misunderstood the meaning of much which our Lord did teach. Nevertheless, they knew something about eternal life from

1. Our Lords teaching.

(1) He demanded of them a present divine life in its origin, continuance, and outward graces.

(2) He authenticated the popular belief in a life after death.

2. Our Lords example embodied the first and was connected by Him with the prospect of entering upon an endless life which they were to share. There was no uncertainty about this, and when asked if they would abandon Him of whom they had learnt it, they felt it to be impossible.

III. TO WHOM COULD THEY GO?

1. To the Sadducees--the rationalists of the age? They rejected immortality, and this being gone, what room was there for the culture of a divine life, or even of secular virtue, seeing that we might eat and drink for to-morrow we die.

2. To the Pharisees--the ritualists of their day? They believed in a future life, but held such views of what constituted the present religious life of man as to rob it of everything, spiritual and divine,

3. To the Essenes--the ancient monks and ascetics? These went further than the Pharisees. They tried to reach the Divine by ceasing to the human, and by practices which, if universal, would have brought society to an end, showed that they could not have the words of eternal life. (T. Binney.)

A critical hour

What the first battle is to an army whose general wishes to test its courage, so was this trial to the disciples. In this crisis there were two causes of trouble and temptation for their faith.

I. THE FORSAKING OF JESUS BY THE MULTITUDE.

1. The inclination of most men is to yield to the authority of numbers. This is seen in the camp of the freest philosophy as well as in that of religion. Nothing is more rare and difficult than adhesion to truth in the face of dominant opinions, as is shown by the history of great inventors, teachers, martyrs. In the eyes of the multitude truth, like victory, lies on the side of great battalions.

2. All is not absolutely false in this assumption. True religion should be the lot of all; and the gospel is universal. Yet it has never made any appeal or sacrifice to popularity and has triumphed in the teeth of antipathy and resistance.

3. On the other hand, as in the text, there are defections from it, and these defections severely try those who abide.

II. THE STRANGE CHARACTER OF THEIR MASTERS TEACHING. At present the subject of the discourse seemed fantastic and impossible. But by and by in the Cross they understood it, which teaches us that the gospel contains mysterious points which raise difficulties and objections which are only to be overcome gradually. Most accept it on a side which responds most to their inmost aspirations, and accept the rest on trust; and, after years of Christian experience, they come to a comprehension of the harmony of revelation. Suppose, then, one of you in a situation like the apostles, what must you do?

1. The partisans of absolute authority say, Submit yourselves, and the more difficult the submission, the more valuable the faith. But it is never safe for a man to go against his conscience, and it is no honour to God to bring him the heart of a slave and the blind obedience of a fanatic.

2. Reject every doctrine that wounds the conscience or the reason. This is what these disciples did, and forgot many admirable discourses and works of mercy. And how many to day yield without a struggle, never trying to get to the bottom of their doubt, nor asking if there is not a deeper meaning!

3. The faithful apostles by their example seem to say, Wait. Why?

(1) Because religious truth must be full of mystery. A Divine revelation which should not surpass our comprehension would be no revelation.

(2) Because the fault may be less in the doctrine than in our minds.

(3) Because an experience a thousand times repeated proves that that which hurts us is precisely that which ought to heal us. Were the Pharisees right in being offended at the universality of the gospel?

(4) Because the greater part of the gospel enlightens, consoles and sustains. Will you reject this for the fraction which you misunderstood?

(5) Because experience may, and will, show you the futility of your objection, If any man will do, etc. (E. Bersier, D. D.)

The dividing point

In the state of Ohio there is a courthouse that stands in such a way that the raindrops that fall on the north side go into Lake Ontario at the Gulf of St. Laurence, while those that fall on the south side go into the Mississippi and the Gulf of Mexico. Just a little puff of wind determines the destiny of a rain drop for two thousand miles. And how small apparently the influence which decides whether the current of our lives shall flow towards Christ or away from Him.

Speculation and faith

1. The chief cause of declension in the Church is the pre-occupation of the mind with an imaginary Christ. This narrative teaches us that a miracle is no match for a pre-determined judgment. These men believed on Christ because they saw His miracles, and they framed in their minds a conception of what that Messiahship should mean; but when they found that Christs conception differed from theirs, in spite of the miracles, they rejected Him. They could not understand a Messianic empire over the hearts of men.

2. But they ought to have understood something; that the position of Christ would invest Him with mystery, and that His teaching would be original, and that His disciples should have no pre-occupations and be able to distinguish between statement and parable, and that Jesus required childlike honesty and docility in his hearers.

3. The chief disputants on this occasion were leading Jews striving to turn the current of popular favour from Jesus. The declaration at which they affected to stumble was that of Joh_6:51. How can this man, etc. (Joh_6:52), was the carnal reasoning of the adversaries. The Masters reply afforded no help, but rather otherwise (Joh_6:53). The disciples were silent, but these strange words shocked the men who had imagined that fellowship with Jesus would be a steppingstone to power (Joh_6:60). His explanation (denied to incorrigible adversaries)to them preserved a medium between the indulgence of curiosity and the repression of an honest desire to learn the truth (Joh_6:62-65).

4. These went away because no proof could touch them which threatened their anterior conception of Christ. Not miracle, nor the unique personal influence of Jews.

5. This picture of the force of a pre-judgment inspired by passion will guide the Christian Student in interpreting modern unbelief. Science is supposed to have no prejudgments; but then it affirms that a miracle is inconceivable, and therefore no testimony can make the record of a miracle credible. What is this but a prejudgment I And since Christianity is based upon the resurrection of Christ, then, according to this, it is logically a fraud. Let us now consider

I. THE APPEAL OF CHRIST.

1. It should be regarded as an appeal when the Church is surrounded by an unstable mood of thought concerning Christ.

2. This mood is highly dangerous and brings death with noiseless footsteps, and its ravages are seen, when, in connection with some sentiment of passion or selfishness, it puts back the faith or destroys it; and it is answerable for the loss to Christ of thousands of our youth, and the wide failure of initial steps of Christian profession.

3. It may be traced in modern secular literature when the writer simply refers to a Christian doctrine or fact, indicating no bias whatever, so different to those firm strokes which fifty years ago showed us if the public mind was pervaded by an impression of the Divine authority of the Scriptures.

4. Not that this necessarily threatens an unusual reverse to the Christian faith, but everything depends upon the way in which this unstable mood is dealt with during the next fifty years.

5. The appeal of Jesus is intended to bring into conspicuous contrast the immovable form of the Rock of Ages.

II. THE ANSWERING CONFESSION OF THE CHURCH. Are we prepared to drift? or to prosecute a new search? If Christ has failed to give us the words of eternal life, where shall we go to fro them?

1. To some ancient religion? Thanks to modern research, the new science of comparative theology is now accessible to every one. The question is not whether the religious systems of India or China are not possessed of fine sentiment, but whether they can compete with Christianity.

(1) What are they all but at best obscure impressions of mysteries which in Christianity are definitely proclaimed!

(2) What have they done for the people I Instead of elevating the general mind, they have narrowed, impoverished and depraved it. Modern research therefore pronounces that the religion of the future must be the Christian or none.

2. To modern philosophy?

(1) Where is its moral power to come from?

(2) How is this moral power to be disseminated? With all its boasts, it is built upon an hypothesis which, as yet, has constructed no thing: whereas we have a faith which has been attested by the history of centuries, whose Divinity is verified this day by the only civilization which is living. (E. E.Jenkins.)

Temporary discipleship

I. THAT JESUS CHRIST AND HIS DOCTRINES ARE NECESSARILY OFFENSIVE TO UNREGENERATED HUMANITY. But let us inquire what were the hard sayings, the unpalatable truths, that offended the crowd.

1. That Christ was greater than Moses. This was a mortal offence to the Jews. While Moses was yet alive the treatment he received was anything but respectful, but after his death their veneration for the great lawgiver knew no bounds. Again, they spoke of the manna in the wilderness very highly indeed, but their fathers had a very different opinion of it.

2. That God is the God of the Gentile as well as the Jew (Joh_6:37). Another hard saying

3. That the atonement (the bread from heaven) is the life of the world. Millions wilfully reject this heavenly food, to pine away and die on the unwholesome, adulterated fare dearly supplied by pleasure, ambition, and philosophy, falsely so called. Such were the hard sayings that made many of the disciples turn back and walk no more with Jesus. But what offended the Jews is no longer offensive to us. Yet many forsake Him in our days.

(1). Because they do not know Him. One may be acquainted with all the facts of His life, from the manger to the cross, and yet be totally ignorant of the principles that animated that life.

(2) Because they cannot have Christ and their sins at the same time. The people of Rome demanded of Brutus why he had stabbed Caesar, by his own admission the foremost man of all the world; and he answered to this effect, Not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more. The surgeon of intemperate habits kills himself by degrees, and knows it; does he hate life? No, he loves drink more, and is content to fall into a premature grave. Men are loth to admit this, and many try hard to deceive themselves and others that they are kept away by doubt, as though intellectual pride was pardonable and praiseworthy. Samson perished under the ruins of his prison--why? Was it for the want of evidences? I trow not. His burning lust for Delilah brought him to that vulgar, shameful end. Demas turned His back upon the Redeemer, and forsook Paul and the churches when they greatly needed his sympathy and help. Was it doubts that caused his apostasy? No; he loved the present world. Your iniquities have separated between you and God.

II. JESUS CHRIST HAS NO DESIRE TO SEE PEOPLE FOLLOWING HIM AGAINST THEIR INCLINATION. Will ye also go away? The question suggests two things

1. That the gospel is a moral influence, and not a coercive agency. In making a personal appeal to the undecided, once and again have I been told, by way of self-justification, that they expect some irresistible power, some messenger from the dead, to compel them to believe the gospel. Oh, false and foolish expectation! In a speech of the Earl of Chatham the following passage occurs, which, with a little modification, will help to illustrate this point:--George the Third endeavoured to give undue influence to the prerogative of the Crown; but the great orator strenuously opposed him, and stood up for the constitution, saying, The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail--its roof may shake, the wind may blow through it, the storm may enter--but the King of England cannot enter. All his forces dare not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement. You are at perfect liberty to stay with Him or go away with the multitude that do evil--choose ye.

2. That religion without love is no religion at all. In this commercial age people are apt to introduce a mercenary spirit even into spiritual things, and ask with the apostate Jews, What profit shall we have if we pray to Him? Many of us, in our visits to rural districts, where the inhabitants cling tenaciously to primitive customs, have been made sad and solemn by meeting a funeral procession bearing a dead one to his burial; and although strangers to us, no one need tell us who the relatives of the departed one are--they are easily distinguished from all others both by their nearness to the coffin and their willingness to endure any inconvenience in order to follow him they loved to his long, long home. Others may, and will, turn back half-way, if the distance be far and the weather foul, but such is their grief after the departed that, however rough the way and stormy the weather, they will walk to the brink of the grave, and shed the tears of affection on his coffin-lid as they look down and bid their last farewell. The relatives of the Saviour likewise are easily recognized by their nearness to Him in thought and duty, and also by their fidelity to their beloved Redeemer, through honour and dishonour, through evil report and good report, even unto death.

III. THERE ARE A FAITHFUL FEW IN EVERY AGE AMONGST THE FAITHLESS MANY. To whom shall we go? Go to the service of mammon with boats and fishing-tackles, and leave others to become fishers of men. Go to swine-land, the far country of self-indulgence and carnal pleasures, and spend your substance with the prodigal in riotous living. Go to Vanity Fair and the City of Destruction: follow the crowd! No; we have already been to all those places, and failed to find a resting-place for a weary, heavy-laden soul. You had better stay, then. Peters reasons for staying were

1. Because no one else could give such a clear account of the future. Thou hast the words of eternal life.

2. Because He was the Divine Redeemer. And we believe, and are sure, that Thou art Christ, the son of the living God. (W. A. Griffiths.)

Departing from Jesus

In Mammoth Cave the old negro guide told us how people had been lost there from time to time. When found, they overwhelmed him with embraces and other demonstrations of gratitude. Some became insane through fright; some fled in terror from the guides. Once a woman was lost for about twenty-four hours. In that terrible darkness, in the silence in which hearts beat loud, she had waited in dreadful suspense. Superstitious dread filled her crazed heart. At last the guide came, his footfalls echoing like whispers and groans, his lantern casting ghostly shadows upon the walls. The poor terrified creature arose, and tied away into the darkness. The guide pursued--a veritable black devil he seemed! At last he overtook her--unconscious, prostrate, ashy white. In his strong arms he raised her from the ground, and carried her out to safety and light and home! How often is it so: When the Saviour comes, we flee from Him. Misconceptions of Him, distortions of Him, shadows of Him in this dark world, fancies of Him in our sinful hearts, make Him seem other than He is. And we flee from our Saviour and our Guide--flee away into the darkness. And yet He came to find us, to save us, to bear us to the light. He came to His own, and His own received Him not. (R. S.Barrett.)

The physiology of backsliding

Within the body of the Hermit crab a minute organism may frequently be discovered, resembling, when magnified, a miniature kidney bean. A bunch of root-like processes hangs from one side, and the extremities of these are seen to ramify in delicate films through the living tissues of the crab. This simple organism is known to the naturalist as Sacculina: and though a full-grown animal, it consists of no more parts than those just named. Not a trace of structure is to be detected within this rude and all but inanimate frame; it possesses neither legs, nor eyes, nor mouth, nor throat, nor stomach, nor any other organs, external or internal. This Sacculina is a typical parasite. By means of its twining and theftuous roots it imbibes automatically its nourishment ready-prepared from the body of the crab. It boards, indeed, entirely at the expense of its host, who supplies it liberally with food and shelter, and everything else it wants. So far as the result to itself is concerned, this arrangement may seem at first sight satisfactory enough; but when we inquire into the life history of this small creature we unearth a career of degeneracy all but unparalleled in nature. When the young animal first makes its appearance, it bears not the remotest resemblance to the adult animal. A different name even is given to it by the biologist, who knows it at this period as a Nauplius. This minute organism has an oval body, supplied with six well-jointed feet, by means of which it paddles briskly through the water. For a time it leads an active and independent life, industriously securing its own food and escaping enemies by its own gallantry. But soon a change takes place. The hereditary taint of parasitism is in its blood, and it proceeds to adapt itself to the pauper habits of its race. The tiny body first doubles in upon itself, and from the two front limbs elongated filaments protrude. Its four hind limbs entirely disappear, and twelve short forked swimming organs temporarily take their place. Thus strangely metamorphosed the Sacculina sets out in search of a suitable host, and in an evil hour, by that fate which is always ready to accommodate the transgressor, is thrown into the company of the Hermit crab. With its two filamentary processes--which afterwards develop into the root-like organs--it penetrates the body; the sac-like form is gradually assumed; the whole of the swimming feet drop off--they will never be needed again--and the animal settles down for the rest of its life as a parasite … There could be no more impressive illustration than this of what with entire appropriateness one might call the physiology of backsliding. We fail to appreciate the meaning of spiritual degeneration or detect the terrible nature of the consequences only because they evade the eye of sense. But could we investigate the spirit as a living organism, or study the soul of the backslider on principles of comparative anatomy, we should have a revelation of the organic effects of sin, even of the mere sin of carelessness as to growth and work, which must revolutionize our ideas of practical religion. There is no room for the doubt even, that what goes on in the body does not with equal certainty take place in the spirit under the corresponding circumstances or conditions. The penalty of backsliding is not something unreal and vague, some unknown quantity which may be measured out to us disproportionately, or which, perchance, since God is good, we may altogether evade. The consequences are already marked within the structure of the soul. So to speak, they are physiological. The thing affected by our indifference or by our indulgence is not the book of final judgment, but the present fabric of the soul. The punishment of degeneration is simply de-generation--the loss of functions, the decay of organs, the atrophy of the spiritual nature. It is well known that the recovery of the backslider is one of the hardest problems in spiritual work. To reinvigorate an old organ seems more difficult and hopeless than to develop a new one; and the backsliders terrible lot is to have to retrace with enfeebled feet each step of the way along which he strayed; to make up inch by inch the leeway he has lost, carrying with him a dead weight el acquired reluctance, and scarce knowing whether to be stimulated or discouraged by the memory of the previous fall. (Prof. Drummond.)

The effects of backsliding on the steadfast

When, at the close of the First Empire, our soldiers fought against united Europe, there frequently arose from the midst of the battle a cry that troubled all hearts. The reason was that a corps of the army, deserting the flag of Napoleon, had turned to the enemy. It was so at Leipsic: when the Saxons abandoned the French eagles the blast of ruin passed over the whole army, for treason was seen everywhere. And we also, in the desperate struggle in which the Christian army is engaged, we have often seen discouragement agitate the, most steadfast, when in the front ranks of the enemy, to have to encounter those who but the day before helped our faith and stood close around our flag. Only yesterday our allies, to-day our implacable enemies, directing their sharp, haughty, and contemptuous criticism against a cause whose weak points were well known to them. The crisis has been a terrible one, and more than one heart has succumbed under the anguish. But in this heartrending apostasy we seem to hear the voice of our Head say to us, as formerly to His disciples, Will you also go away? In reply to this appeal we have acknowledged our Master; shame has laid hold on us for having a moment submitted to the contagion of example; we have felt that never should His cause be more dear to us than when it was abandoned by the multitude; that the number and assent of masses are nothing and ought to be nothing; and with a more profound faith we have said to the Christ, Lord, to whom can we go? (E. Bersier, D. D.)

A backsliders end

Albert, Bishop of Mayence, had a physician attached to his person, who, being a Protestant, did not enjoy the prelates favour. The man, seeing this, and being an avaricious, ambitious, worldseeker, denied his God, and turned back to Popery, saying to his associates, Ill put Jesus Christ by for a while till Ive made my fortune, and then bring Him out again. This horrible blasphemy met with its just reward; for next day the miserable hypocrite was found dead in his bed, his tongue hanging from his mouth, his face as black as a coal, and his neck twisted half round. I was myself an ocular witness of this merited chastisement of impiety. (Luther.)

A brave martyr

Anne Askew, when asked to avoid the flames, answered, I came not here to deny my Lord and Master.

Where backsliding begins

In the Life of Philip Henry it is said, He and his wife constantly prayed together, morning and evening. He made conscience of closet worship, and abounded in it. It was the caution and advice which he frequently gave to his children and friends, Be sure you look to your secret duty; keep that up, whatever you do; the soul cannot prosper in the neglect of it. Apostasy generally begins at the closet door. Besides these, he was uniform, steady, and constant in family worship from the time he was first called to the charge of a family to his dying day. He would say, If the worship of God be not in the house, write, Lord, have mercy upon us, on the door; for there is a plague, a curse in it.

A backsliders misery

After poor Sabat, an Arabian, who had professed faith in Christ by means of the labours of the Rev. Henry Martyn, had apostatized from Christianity, and written a book in favour of Mohammedanism, he was met at Malacca by the late Rev. Dr. Milne, who proposed to him some very pointed questions, in reply to which he said, I am unhappy! I have a mountain of burning sand on my head! When I go about I know not what I am doing. It is indeed an evil thing and bitter to sin against the Lord our God.

Reasons for backsliding

Those who forsake God to return to the world, do it because they find more gratification in earthly pleasures than in those arising from communion with God; and because this overpowering charm, carrying them away, causes them to relinquish their first choice, and renders them, as Tertullian says, the penitents of the devil. (Blaise Pascal.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh 6:66-69. From that time many of his disciples went back — This discourse of our Lord was, in all its different branches, so offensive to many, who till now had followed him, and professed to be his disciples, that, from this time, they ceased to attend on or hear him. So that he now began to purge his floor: the proud and careless were driven away, and those only remained who were meet for the Master’s use. Then said Jesus unto the twelve — Jesus, perceiving this defection to be very general, asked the twelve if they were going to leave him with the rest. Then Peter — With his usual zeal; answered, Lord — If we were really disposed to quit thee; to whom shall we go? — Or, what advantage could we expect by it? Thou hast the words of eternal life — Thou, and thou alone, speakest the words which show the way to life everlasting; and hast even now been directing us therein; and God forbid that any other hopes and views should ever be preferred by us to these! And — However others may be governed by their carnal prejudices, and a deluded multitude may treat thee with contempt; we firmly believe, and assuredly know, on the most convincing evidence, that thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God — On which persuasion we are determined to cleave to thee, to continue to learn of thee as thy disciples, to confide in thee for salvation, present and eternal, and to hazard all in thy service. So that Peter’s implicit faith in our Lord’s doctrine was founded, as it was right it should be, on his faith in him as the Messiah, the Son of God.

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

EXPLANATORY AND CRITICAL NOTES

Joh_6:69. And we believe and are sure that Thou art the Holy One of God.—This is the reading of all the great MSS. א, B, C, D, L, and is adopted by Tischendorf, Tregelles, etc. If this reading is to be received, we are probably to understand Peter’s confession as referring to Jesus as sent into the world to do the Father’s will, and as having His authority sealed by His mighty works and holy life.

Joh_6:70. Hath a devil.—διάβολός ἐστιν, i.e. one having the qualities of him who is called ὁ διαβολος.

Joh_6:71. Judas Iscariot, etc., rather Judas the son of Simon Iscariotes.—Iscariot is no doubt אישׁ קריות (Ish-Kerioth), a man of Kerioth, a town or village belonging to Judah (Jos_15:25). But Westcott suggests that, as the true reading in Joshua is Kerioth-Hezron, this Kerioth might be identified with the Kerioth (Κεριώθ) of Moab (Jer_48:24).

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Joh_6:66-71

The relation of different classes of men to the Saviour.—A time of testing had come for the followers of the Saviour. In His discourse in the synagogue of Capernaum, He had advanced into regions of thought not only far above, but alien to the desires of many among them. And they were not, we may think, of the number of the Jews who murmured (Joh_6:41-42), nor men who were inimical to the Redeemer. They were those who would willingly have continued to be His disciples; but His late teaching proved a stumbling-block, the prospects He held out were not such as they anticipated, His yoke to some of them was not easy, it may be, and thus we read that many went back. They were—

I. Those who separated themselves from Jesus.—

1. Many of those who had never really come to Christ, and remained spiritually unchanged, were more and more offended at His teaching; indifference, lukewarmness, faintheartedness, doubtless characterised them. His demands were too great for their little souls. The spiritual life and kingdom to which He pointed had no charms for them.

2. Thus they go without one word more from Him. Not by such followers would the world be won for Him. Rather will He choose a small handful of faithful, self-sacrificing men; for only such, guided by His Spirit, would turn the world upside down (Act_17:6).

3. As Gideon’s army at the spring of Harod was purged from all the fainthearted and unfit (Jdg_7:3-7), so that by the three hundred left God saved Israel from the Midianites, thus the ranks of Jesus’ disciples were freed from unfit and encumbering elements. They had put their hands to the plough and turned back, etc. (Luk_9:62). Such Jesus does not retain in His service—or rather they go back willingly, freely, from Him into the old life and the old ways.

II. Those who willingly and joyfully remained with Him.—

1. It is to the twelve our Lord addresses Himself in the memorable question, “Will ye also go away?” Did no others remain? That is an idea hardly to be entertained. But those five disciples already chosen, and the others who had associated themselves more closely with Him, stood nearest. And, as He saw the departing many, seeking some solace for His grieved human heart, He asked the others this question.

2. And the answer was, without doubt, cheering and grateful to the Son of man, “despised and rejected,” etc. Simon Peter, here as ever the spokesman, if not the representative of them all, confessed their loyal adhesion to their Master. He and they did not probably understand much that had been spoken in the synagogue. But they knew what Christ was—what peace He had brought to their souls; they had seen His wondrous works, and heard His heavenly teaching which those works explained and illumined. To whom else could they go? from whom else hear the words of eternal life? Nay, all they knew and had seen led them to believe and know that Jesus was the Christ—as He claimed to be—and the Son of the living God.

3. Our Lord desires a willing service. He had chosen these disciples; but those who were really His consecrated themselves freely to Him, under the blessed free constraint of His love and His Father’s drawing.

III. The traitor in the ranks of the disciples.—

1. The gleam of joy which fell on the Saviour’s path at the manifestation of His disciples’ faith and love was again clouded by the thought that even in this inner circle lurked a traitor.

2. “One of you is a devil,” our Lord had to say sadly. Judas remained, although he should have departed; for his adherence to Peter’s confession was evidently hypocritical. He remained, cherishing in his heart those carnal and earthly ideas of Messiah’s kingdom, probably resolving that he would watch the Saviour’s movements, and force Him to declare Himself Messiah in a temporal sense (all Judas would have cared for), or——

3. That Judas was wholly unmoved by the Saviour’s holy life and loving works and heavenly teaching can hardly be held in view of his bitter remorse (Mat_27:3-5).

4. The patience with which our Lord endured the presence of this spying traitor (who was, moreover, a thief—Joh_12:6) was wonderful. But His Father willed that it should be so—for some purpose it was necessary that it should be so (see on Joh_6:64)—and His will rose, even in this, into loving acquiescence with His Father’s will.

IV. 1. Consider Him who endured such contradiction, etc. (Heb_12:3).

2. Consider the necessity for earnestness in religion. The religion of Christ will not admit of half-hearted adhesion, of lukewarmness, etc. Christ does not desire such disciples (Rev_3:16). And in the ears of many in all the Churches His words of blame to Laodicea still apply, “I would thou wert cold or hot.”

3. The continuance of a hypocritical profession may lead in the end to awful results. Nothing more surely hardens the heart, and freezes the springs of faith and feeling, than a false and hypocritical profession of religion (Jas_1:22; 2Ti_3:13; Isa_29:13-14, etc.).

(See Illustrations, Chap. Joh_13:18 seq.)

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.

III

Apostacy Of Many Disciples. Incipient Treason In The Circle Of The Twelve. Confession Of Peter

Joh_6:66-71

66From that time [upon this]85 many of His disciples went back, and walked no 67more with him. Then [Therefore] said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also [do ye 68also wish to] go away? Then [omit Then]86 Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go [go away, ὰπελευσόμεθα]? thou hast the [omit the] words of eternal life. 69And we believe and are sure [we have believed and have known] that thou art that Christ [the Christ],87 the Son of the living God [the Holy One of God].88 70Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, [Did I not choose 71you the twelve?] and one of you is a devil? [!] He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon [Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot]John 89: for he it was [it was he] that should [was about to] betray him, being90 one of the twelve.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Joh_6:66. Upon this many of his disciples.—Ἐκ τούτου. (1) From this moment (Lücke, De Wette). (2) Meyer, more correctly, according to c. Joh_19:12 : On account of this discourse, “which disappointed their carnal messianic hopes.” And in addition had become the strongest positive offence.

Went back; εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω.—Comp. c. Joh_18:6; Joh_20:14.

Joh_6:67. Will ye also, etc.—So Luther, Baumgarten-Crusius [and the English version], not accurately. Rather, “But ye will not go away, will ye?”91 Expressing confidence mingled with suspicion in reference to the traitor. Giving occasion for a volutary decision. [The Lord asked the question in order to test their faithfulness, to elicit their confession, and to attach them more closely to Himself, but not, as Alford suggests, for His own comfort and encouragement; for as He knew the future treason of Judas (Joh_6:64; Joh_6:71), so He foresaw also the faithfulness of the eleven. In this place, John first mentions the Twelve, without a word about their previous calling.—a clear proof that he took for granted a general knowledge of the gospel history.—P. S.]

Joh_6:68. To whom shall we go.—So also Luther’s version. More accurately: To whom shall we go over, go away from Thee? Meyer: ἀπελευσόμεθα, future, ever go away. [Denying the future possibility.—P. S.] No second Messiah will appear. [Augustin: Da nobis alterum Te]. Prelude to the confession of Peter in Mat_16:16. [Peter quickly, resolutely and emphatically speaks and acts here as elsewhere in the name of the Twelve. He is the mouth-piece of the apostolic college. This gives him a certain primacy and priority down to the day of Pentecost and the calling of Paul, who was the independent head of Gentile Christianity by Christ’s own appointment. The Romish Church turns the temporary and personal primacy of Peter into a permanent and official supremacy of the Bishop of Rome. This, and the identifying of the church of Rome with the Kingdom of Christ, is the πρῶτον ψεῦδος, the fundamental error and the fundamental sin of the papacy.—P. S.]

Words of eternal life. And we.—The objective and subjective grounds of cleaving to Him. Words which come forth from, possess, and lead to, eternal life. See Joh_6:63.—And we: [καὶ ἡμεῖς] the answer of faith to the object of faith. Not excluding, of course, the other “antithesis to the deserters.” (Meyer.)

[Joh_6:69. And we have believed and have known.—The perfect: πεπιστεύκαμεν καὶ ἐγνώκαμεν, expresses the completed action and permanent result: assured faith and firm knowledge. Fides præcedit intellectum, “faith precedes knowledge.” This Augustinian and Anselmic maxim (which Schleiermacher also adopted; see the motto of his Dogmatics) may be derived from the order of πίστις and γνῶσις in this verse.92 But the reverse maxim: Intellectus præcedit fidem (Abelard), is also true, though not in a rationalistic sense, and is supported by the order, Joh_10:38 (that ye may know and believe) and 1Jn_5:13. We must first be made acquainted with Christ before we can believe in Him (“faith comes by hearing,” Rom_10:17), but we must believe in Christ in order to attain an experimental and saving knowledge of Him. Faith itself is an intellectual as well as a moral and spiritual act.—P. S.]

The Holy One of God [see Textual Notes.] The One consecrated by and for God. Comp. Joh_10:36; Mar_1:24; Luk_4:34; Act_4:27; Rev_3:7. [The coincidence of the original text with the testimony of the demoniacs (Mar_1:26), who with ghostlike intuition perceived the higher character of Jesus, is remarkable.—P. S.] More indefinite designation of the Messiah. The full, matured confession, born of the Spirit, we find first in Matthew 16;—a fact mistaken by Weisse, when he makes this passage a variation of that in the Synoptical account.93 Peter’s answering here in this complete way for all the twelve could not be entirely of the Spirit, [as the later confession Matthew 16 was]. It unconsciously served to sustain Judas in his false and cold self-command, and to cover the aversion which was in him at the very time; and thus it gave occasion for the severe words of Jesus.

Joh_6:70. Did I not choose you the twelve?—A more definite exposition of the words of Joh_6:67. Meyer: “Not the language of reflection, but of sudden pain over the tragic result, in contrast with that joyful confession which Peter was convinced he could give in the name of all.” It probably refers not to the “tragic result,” but to the moral alienation, the germ of apostasy, which from this time forth developed itself in Judas. The distribution of the emphasis is very significant. “I” is first; then “you;” then “the twelve.” I, as the Holy One of God; have chosen you, to the highest honors.

And now the fearful contrast: One of you is a devil!94—Interpretations: An informer (Theophylact, [DeWette]); an adversary or betrayer (Kuinöl, Lücke, et al.); devil, devilish, of a diabolical nature (Meyer).95 In New Testament designations, however, an ideal meaning is always lodged; the word is not a mere nomen; as Mat_13:39; Rev_12:10 prove. And this is the more sure to be the case in this figurative designation. In Mat_16:23 the term “Satan” is chosen, because Jesus intends to describe a tempter instigated by the devil; so here also “devil” denotes an actual traducer instigated by the devil. We must by all means abide by the term. The expression: “sons, or children of the devil,” (Joh_8:44; 1Jn_3:10), is not so strong. The mention of the number twelve shows that the brothers of the Lord also were by this time in the circle. [? See below, p. 241.—P. S.]

Joh_6:71. He spoke of Judas.—That is, He meant him. See the Textual Notes. On Judas Iscariot see the Com. on Matthew, John 10 [p. 182.] Not to be confounded with the other Judas (son of James), Joh_14:22.

For it was he that was about to betray him.—Ἤμελλεν is hard to translate. Traditurus erat.96 The betrayal germinated in him from this time forth. Meyer, groundlessly: “Not that he was already meditating the betrayal, (see, on the contrary, Joh_13:2), but that the betrayal was the divinely appointed result.” Joh_13:2 speaks of the final resolution; this passage of the first swerving of the temper and inclination. One of the twelve.—Showing up the monstrous, diabolical character of this incipient infidelity. The silence of Judas is in keeping with his character. It now firmly lodges the seed. On the Lord’s choosing of Judas see Meyer [p. 285, 5th ed. See also the Literature quoted below in Doctr. and Ethical No. 3.—P.S.]

[The call of Judas is only one of the innumerable mysteries in God’s moral government, which no system of philosophy can solve at all, and which even Christianity solves but in part, reserving the final answer for a higher expansion of our faculties in another world. It involves the whole problem of the relation of God to the origin of sin, and the relation of His foreknowledge and foreordination to the free agency of man. The question why Christ called and received Judas into the circle of His chosen twelve, is more dogmatical than exegetical, yet cannot be passed by unnoticed. It admits of three answers, none of which, however, is entirely satisfactory:

1. Christ elected Judas an apostle, not indeed for the very purpose that he might become a traitor (which no sensible divine ever asserted, at least not directly); but that, through his treason, as an incidental condition or a necessary means, the Scriptures might be fulfilled (comp. Joh_13:18; Joh_17:12), and the redemption of the world be accomplished. So Augustine (electi undecim ad opus probationis, electus unus ad opus tentationis), supralapsarian Calvinists, also Daub who (in his speculative treatise: Judas Iscariot) represents the traitor as an incarnate devil, predestinated to exhibit wickedness in its worst form in contrast with the highest manifestation of goodness in Christ. This view, although it contains an element of truth, seems after all to involve our blessed Lord in some kind of responsibility for the darkest crime ever committed.

2. Jesus foresaw the financial and administrative abilities of Judas (comp. Joh_12:6; Joh_13:29), which might have become of great use to the apostolic church, but not his thievish and treacherous tendencies, which developed themselves afterwards, and He elected him solely for the former. This explanation is rather rationalistic and incompatible with the prophetic foresight of Christ, as well as the express remark of John ἤδει ἐξ ἀρξῆς, Joh_6:64, and Joh_6:70-71.

3. Jesus knew the whole original character of Judas from the beginning, before it was properly developed, and elected him in the hope that the good qualities and tendencies would, under the influence of His teaching, ultimately acquire the mastery over the bad. So Meyer, Park and many others. This implies that Jesus was mistaken, if not in His judgment at the time, at least in His expectation, and is likewise at war with His perfect knowledge of the human heart.

Alford despairs of solving the difficulty. Wordsworth and other English commentators pass it by in modest or prudent silence.

I must add that the fall of Judas does not necessarily interfere with the doctrine of the perseverance of saints. For by his election is evidently meant the external historical call to the apostleship which was confined to the twelve, (ὑμᾶς τοὺς δώδεκα ἐξελεξάμην, Joh_6:70), not the eternal election of the Father and the drawing of the Father to the Son, which applies to all true disciples who persevere to the end (Rom_8:28 ff.; Joh_10:28-29; Joh_13:18). With this important distinction we may endorse Bengel’s remark: “There is therefore a certain kind of election from which man may fall away (Est igitur aliqua electio ex qua aliquis potest excidere),” but we must add: there is another kind of election which is as certain and unchangeable as God.—P. S.]

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. The turning-point in the life of Jesus which John here brings to view is of the highest importance in the history. It accounts for the falling away of the majority of the Galilean followers of Jesus, and that in a way perfectly agreeable to the Galilean character, which was inclined to boisterous insurrectionary projects. Because Jesus refused Himself to the fanatical proposal of these people to make Him a king, and demanded in stringent terms an inward, submissive faith in His person, instead of an outward hoping for the things of an earthly kingdom, many began to fall back.

2. Undoubtedly also the first disaffection now formed itself in the mind of Judas; since after the explanation of Jesus, he must have felt that he had been deceived in his glowing expectations. How little the disciples in general noticed this, appears from the protestation of Peter. Yet, besides the all-seeing eye of Christ, the feeling of John seems also to have caught an impression of this alienation. (See Leben Jesu, II p. 609.)

3. On the calling [and character] of Judas, comp. Matthew, p. 183; Meyer in loco [5th ed. p. 285]; Lücke II p. 182. [Also Schaff’s treatise on the Sin against the Holy Ghost (Halle, 1841), pp. 35 ff., the article Judas in Winer and in Smith, especially the analysis by Prof. Park of Andover in Hackett’s edition of Smith, Vol. II pp. 1495–1503.—P. S.]

4. The protestation of Peter forms a beautiful contrast to the sullen silence of Judas, in whose apostasy three periods are to be marked: 1. The beginning of alienation from this time forth; 2. The thought of betrayal and the dalliance with it after the anointing in Bethany; 3. The full purpose and the execution of it after the pass-over. And yet the beautiful contrast is not perfect, because Peter indiscreetly and without misgiving answered for the whole company, including Judas himself. Even the grand sentence: “Thou hast the words of eternal life,”—does not fully reach the deep meaning of Jesus in His discourse, if it refers to it. The word of the disciple falls something short of the self-presentation of the Master. The confession in Mat_16:16 is an expression of purer and riper faith. Hence Jesus answers here with the stern word: “One of you is a devil,” while after that other confession he blesses him. Even in the latter case it is true, that the sharp rebuke, “Get thee behind me, Satan,”—follows the benediction; for in that case also the divine enthusiasm of faith had not yet matured in Peter into a firm spirit of faith; Peter was not yet free from all sympathy with Judas in chiliastic ambition.

5. It is not to be supposed that the disciples in general received any definite idea as to whom the Lord meant. Least of all do they seem to have fixed on Judas, who, on the contrary, appears from the account of the anointing at Bethany in Matthew and Mark to have enjoyed high consideration among them. That Judas felt himself in some way hit, is very probable; and also that John was led to suspect who the forbidding fellow disciple was (see John’s account of the anointing). The stern word of Christ must therefore have burdened the minds of the disciples as a heavy riddle, giving them continuous warning, even amidst the great successes of His subsequent ministry.

The turn we here mark in the history of Jesus now comes fully to view in His subsequent conduct as depicted in the next chapter.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The first apostasy from Christ in its solemn and typical import: 1. Its motives; 2. Its extent; 3. Its consequences.—The majestic calmness of the Lord in the apostasy of false disciples, as revealed in His stern dealing with those who remain.—The deep grief of the Lord visible even through His free and tranquil conduct, 1. His calmness: He begs not, flatters not, makes no terms; He remains sure of Himself and of His word. 2. His grief: He sees a danger to all His disciples; seems even to miss hearing the fair words of Peter; declares with a shudder that one of the chosen twelve is a devil.—The first apostasy, the first sifting of the hosts of Christ’s disciples, 1Jn_2:19.—However great the apostasy may be, it never can be universal.—The stages of apostasy: 1. Retention of the earthly mind in discipleship, Mat_13:5. 2. Development of unbelief, of rupture with Christ. 3. The actual apostasy itself.—Apostasy: a total view of the mournful thing: 1. Its main features in the gospel history. 2. Its preludes in the Old Testament history. 3. Its development in the history of the Christian church. 4. Its final form as depicted in the prophecies of the Bible. The affinity of the apostasy in Galilee with the hostility in Judea.—The apostasy of the Jews a prelude to the traitorous apostasy of Judas.—The malignant silence of Judas a bad sign.—Falsehood of the diabolical nature.

“Nothing more grimly holds thee back

Than falsehood of thy being.”

—The silence of Judas and the out-speaking of Peter.—The striking contrast in the circle of the twelve: Peter and Judas: 1. Honest loyalty and false adherence. 2. Fresh, clear openness and dark obduracy. 3. Happy confession and unhappy reserve.—Peter, Judas and John.—The declaration of Peter in its light and shade.—“Lord, to whom shall we go?”—We must continue with Jesus our Lord, because (1) no other Christ will come; (2) no one will bring a better word; (3) there remains no other faith; (4) there remains no brighter knowledge.—The solemnity and dread with which Jesus answered the declarations of Peter.—The fearful contrast: To be chosen to a higher service than angels, and to prove a devil.—The terrible omen, that from among the twelve arose a traitor to the Lord, and a betrayer of the Lord Himself.—The depravity germinates slowly, but ripens rapidly to judgment.—The second turn in the life of Jesus (in Galilee), compared with the first (in Judea).—Because Christ presented Himself to His disciples as the bread of eternal life, many feared they should starve, and fell away.—They wish only things, things, things (worldly things, spiritual things, ecclesiastical things), and so come not to personal life in the beholding and partaking of the glorious personality of Christ.—As a man’s ideal is, so is he: he who wishes only idols and stocks, is like idols and stocks; he who wishes only creatures and things, is himself but creature and thing; and this leads to apostasy. [comp. Psa_115:8.—Tr.]—Hence apostasy is from Christianity to Judaism, from gospel to law.—It needs courage to trust oneself to Christ, the focus of life, and let the world go; but a believing courage which the Lord gives to him who asks.

Starke: Quesnel: A preacher may lose his hearers through no fault of his own.—Majus: As Jesus unkindly thrust no one away, so He will forcibly retain none. Let those go who wish not to stay. He who forsakes Christ, the Life, follows Satan to death.—Canstein: Christ needed none, but no one can do without Him.—It often fares with faithful teachers as with Christ (in the history here before us).—There is hardly a company, but the devil finds one or another in it.—Preachers may certainly rebuke the sins of their hearers, yet with care that they call no one by name; for this embitters without edifying.—In unbelievers Satan so nestles, that they themselves are as it were the devil. Eph_2:2.—Trouble thyself not and doubt not for the truth of the gospel, when one of the most distinguished ministers becomes a Mameluke and proves faithless to Christ.—Osiander: Even those who are adorned with excellent gifts, may still forfeit the grace of God.—Beware of presumptuous security! False brethren give more pain to the faithful servants of God, than open enemies.—Bengel: Christ is concerned not for the number, but for the purity of His disciples.—Gossner, on Joh_6:67 : By this He would show that He forces no one, but would have all voluntary disciples.—Heubner: There is a gross apostasy from Jesus; this is rare; but there is also a subtle apostasy, which is the more frequent.—The voluntary departure of spurious disciples is no loss, but a gain.

Joh_6:67 : Jesus pours out His whole heart in this question, His sorrow and His love.—He still puts this question continually to all believers (i.e. in every solemn test) for the trial of their fidelity.—Upon the least likelihood that Jesus might doubt their fidelity, Peter breaks out the louder; so the Christian will attach himself the more fervently to Jesus at the faintest trace of apostasy.—Have believed and known. A hint that the believing, child-like posture of mind must precede the attainment of knowledge.—Jesus still knows all the faithful and the faithless (“The Lord knoweth them that are His”).—Christ bore with Judas; the hardest test of His love. Bear cheerfully with men, in whom thou canst not find thyself.—Not to be upright towards the most upright One, betrays a wicked heart. The richest grace of intercourse with the most holy One can turn to perdition with a wicked heart. Judas wont out of the school of Jesus far worse than he went in.—Besser: Unbelief towards this single article (the eating and drinking of His flesh and blood) brought on a complete renunciation of Christ. [More accurately: Offence at being required to find all salvation in His whole self-sacrifice and self-imparting person itself, led them to separate from His person. Offence also at the last utterance of Jesus, Joh_6:65, which runs as a companion thought through the whole discourse, must in some way come into the account. As the doctrine of the divine person of Christ and its impartation of perfect life through a sacrificial death which made it a sacrificial meal was an offence to them, so was the doctrine of a distinction made by a gracious spiritual drawing of God between the small election of the spiritual Israel and the mass of the theocratic Israelitish church.]—Judas represents what is befallen to the Jewish people as a whole. How immeasurably deep must be the grief of love, that what was intended for Israel’s salvation became its hardening! He chose Judas. He turned upon him the full earnestness of His saving love, and He endured that one of the twelve should do the service of the devil to Him, that the Scripture might be fulfilled, Joh_17:12; Psalms 109—Schenkel: Why we are resolved not to go away from Jesus Christ. We answer, with Peter, to the question of the Lord: 1. Whither would we go? 2. The Lord has the words of eternal life. 3. We have believed and known that He is Christ, the Son of the living God.

[Themes for discourses: The sifting power of truth. The sin of backsliding (Joh_6:66).—Peter the Confessor.—The first and fundamental Christian confession.—Christ, the best of teachers, the truest friend, the only refuge of the sinner. —Words of everlasting life.—Christ and Peter,—Christ and Judas.—It is better, with Peter in regard to Judas, to err on the side of charity than severity of judgment.—Christ, the purest of the pure, and the holiest of the holy, bore the traitor in His company to the close of His public ministry! What self-denial, what condescending mercy, what a rebuke to our intolerance and pride,—The mercy and severity of Christ in dealing with Judas.—The unknown sufferings of Christ in foreseeing the betrayal of one, and the treason of another disciple.—Peter called “Satan” for his human weakness (Mat_16:23), Judas, a “devil” for his lurking treason.—Christ’s wisdom and mercy in withholding the name of Judas, while giving him a clear hint of his danger.—A hypocrite may for a long while deceive all men, but he cannot deceive Christ.—Judas an involuntary instrument for the greatest good.—The overruling power and wisdom of God.—Christ, the true prophet of human nature who knows and reveals the secrets of the heart.—P. S.]

Footnotes:

[49][For a somewhat similar division see Godet, II. 97.]

[50][Strauss unnecessarily creates this difficulty.—P. S.]

[51][So Bengel “Jesus singularem numerum opponit plurali Judæorum, qui dixerant, opera Dei, Joh_6:28.” Alford: “Because there is but this one work, properly speaking, and all the rest are wrapt up in it,”—P. S.]

[52][Josephus called it θεῖον καὶ παράδοξον βρῶμα.]

[53][Others regard the Scripture manna as wholly miraculous, and not in any respect a product of nature. So the writer of the article Manna in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible, who thus sets forth the difference between the natural and this supernatural manna: “The natural products of the Arabian deserts and other oriental regions, which bear the name of manna, have not the qualities or uses ascribed to the manna of Scripture. They are all condiments or medicines rather than food, stimulating or purgative rather than nutritious; they are produced only three or four months in the year, from May to August, and not all the year round; they come only in small quantities, never affording any thing like 15,000,000 of pounds a week, which must have been requisite for the subsistence of the whole Israelitish camp, since each man had an omer (or three English quarts) a day, and that for forty years; they can be kept for a long time, and do not become useless in a day or two; they are just as liable to deteriorate on the Sabbath as on any other day: nor does a double quantity fall on the day preceding the Sabbath; nor would natural products cease at once and for ever, as the manna is represented as ceasing in the book of Joshua.”—P. S.]

[54][Alford: “The words ὁ καταβ … are the predicate of ὁ ἄρτος, and do not apply, in the construction of this verse, to Christ personally, however truly they apply to Him in fact, The E. V. is here wrong: it should be, The bread of God is that (not He) which Cometh, etc. Not till Joh_6:35 does Jesus first say, ‘I am the bread of life,’ The manna is still kept in view, and the present participle, here used in reference to the manna, is dropped when the Lord Himself is spoken of.” The note of Wordsworth on Joh_6:33 is a curious specimen of the wild allegorizing of this learned and devout patristic and Anglican antiquarian. He sees here everywhere allusions to the sacrament. Even the meaning of the word Manna, “what is it,” is made to indicate the wonderful double nature of Christ and the mystery of His presence in the eucharist.—P.S.]

[55][So also Godet: “Les deux termes, venir et croire, expriment, avec et sans figure, une seule et meme idée: le joyeux et confiant empressement avec lequel le cœur affamé et pressé de besoins spirituels s’empare de l’aliment céleste qui lui est présenté en Jesus Christ.” Coming to Christ is faith indeed, yet not in repose as mere trust and confidence, or as a state of mind, but in active exercise and motion from the service of sin to the service of Christ; comp. 37, 44, 45, 65; Joh_7:37-38.—P. S.]

[56][In classical usage (see Kühner, II. § 443, 1, and Hermann Ad Viger., p. 746) but not in New Testament unless it be the εἶπον in Joh_11:42.—P. S.]

[57][Yet the absence of a connecting particle seems to indicate a pause of reflection intervening between the preceding reproof (οὐ πιστεύετε), and the following description of the true children of God.—P. S.]

[58][Bengel’s observation on πᾶν is longer than is usual with this epigrammatic commentator, but well worth quoting: “A most weighty word, and, in comparing with it those things which follow, most worthy of consideration; for, in the discourses of Jesus Christ, what the Father hath given to the Son Himself, that is termed, both in the singular number and neuter gender, all (omne): those who come to the Son Himself, are described in the masculine gender, or even the plural number, every one (omnis), or they (illi). The Father hath given to the Son, as it were, the whole mass, in order that all whom He hath given, may be a unit (unum): that whole (universum) the Son evolves individually (one by one), in the execution of the Divine plan. Hence that expression, Joh_17:2, that all which (πᾶν ὅ, omne quod) thou hast gives Him, he should give them (αὐτοῖς, eis) eternal life. In the Greek style of the New Testament, especially of John, wheresoever fastidious minds would say the construction was a solecism, an elegance truly divine, which to the Hebrews never seemed harsh, is usually found to lie beneath. That remark especially holds good of this passage.”—P. S.]

[59][Against this false interpretation of Reuss (Hist, de la théol. Chrétienne, II p. 462), comp. Godet 2 p. 114.—P. S.]

[60][In Joh_6:37 Christ had declared that the totality (πᾶν which is to be taken collectively as of one integral whole) of those whom the Father giveth Him, shall come to Him; in Joh_6:44 He declares that no one can come in any other way except by the drawing of the Father. The effect follows in every case from a certain cause, but this effect will follow from no other cause.—P. S.]

[61][Calvin, however, says before (ad loc.) that the efficient motion of the Holy Spirit first makes unwilling men willing (“homines ex nolentibus et invitis reddit voluntaries”). So also Augustine who expressly says that faith is inseparable from will (credere non potest nisi volens), and: “Non ut homines, quod fieri non potest, nolentes credant, sed ut volentes ex nolentibus fiant.” He quotes from Virgil: trahit sua quemque voluptas, to show that the drawing is that of choice not of compulsion. Calvin expressly guards in this connection against the abuse of his doctrine. “They are madmen,” he says ad. Joh_6:40, “who seek their own salvation or that of others in the labyrinth of predestination, not keeping the way of faith which is proposed to them.… Since God has elected us to this very end that we believe, we destroy the election if we set aside faith (tolle fidem, et mutila erit electio) … If God calls us effectually to faith in Christ, it is of the same force to us, as if by an engraved seal He confirmed His decree concerning our salvation. For the testimony of the Spirit is nothing else but the sealing of our adoption. To every man, therefore, his faith is a sufficient attestation of God’s eternal predestination, so that it is impious and an insult to the testimony of the Holy Spirit to search beyond it.”—P. S.]

[62][Tholuck says: καί—δέ designates a more detailed statement, as in Joh_1:3, or a correction, as in Joh_15:27. Zwingli (as quoted by Tholuck), “Dixi diu me panem esse vitæ, sed nondum quo facto id fiat, hoc jam aperiam.” Δέ introduces here something of special importance. Comp. Meyer in loc.—P. S.]

[63][On Augustine’s interpretation see note in the Excursus below, p. 228.—P. S.]

[64][M*ver (p. 270) adds to the above names, as favoring this view, Tholuck, Neander, Jul. Müller, Lange, Ebrard, Keim, Weiss, Ewald, Kahnis, Godet. But Lange, Ewald, Kahnis, Hengstenberg and Godet should be classed with No. 6 below.—P. S.]

[65][In his work on the Lord’s Supper, p. 104 ff., but later, in his Dogmatics, Vol. I. p. 624, Kahnis denies that John 6 refers directly to the Lord’s Supper, and explains the eating and drinking to be identical with believing for the reason that the same effect is made dependent on both, viz., eternal life. He should be classed with No. 6.—P. S.]

[66][Latin dissertations on the difference between Luther’s and Calvin’s views on the Lord’s Supper, 1853, now reproduced in German by Dr. Jul. Müller, of Halle, in his Dogmatische Abhandlungen, just published, Bremen, 1870, pp. 404–467.—P. S.]

[67][In the second Excursus to the second edition of his Commentary on John (which is omitted in the third edition), and in the third edition, Vol. II. pp. 149–159.—P. S.]

[68][Alford likewise makes this distinction, which is not sustained by the context. He says: “What is eating and drinking? Clearly not merely faith; for faith answers to the hand reached forth for the food,—but is not the act of eating. Faith is a necessary condition of the act: so that we can hardly say with Augustine, ‘crede, et manducasti;’ but crede et manducabis. Inasmuch as faith will necessarily in its energizing lead to this partaking, we sometimes incorrectly say that it is faith: but for strict accuracy this is not enough. To eat the flesh of Christ, is to realize, in our inward life, the mystery of His Body now in heaven,—to digest and assimilate our own portion in that Body. To drink His Blood is to realize, in our inward life, the mystery of His satisfaction for sin,—to digest and assimilate our own portion in that satisfaction, the outpouring of that Blood. And both these definitions may be gathered into one, which is: The eating of His Flesh and drinking of His Blood import the making to ourselves and using as objectively real, those two great Truths of our Redemption in Him, of which our faith subjectively convinces us. And of this realizing of faith He has been pleased to appoint certain symbols in the Holy Communion, which He has commanded to be received; to signify to us the spiritual process, and to assist us towards it.”—P. S.]

[69][Meyer thinks that the change implies no intention of a stronger expression, since τρώγειν καὶ πίειν is used Mat_24:38 (τρώγοντες καὶ πίνοντες), by Demosthenes, Plutarch and Polybius without perceptible difference from φαγεῖν or ἐσθίειν. Τρώγων expresses the present of φαγών, which must be either τρώγων or ἐσθίων. So also Alford: The real sense is that by the very act of inward realization the possession of eternal life is certified. Wordsworth on the other hand presses the difference and, in fanciful sacramentarian exaggeration, says that τρώγειν presents the climax of the difficulty, and shows the need of coming to Christ in the holy communion with devout cravings and earnest longings of a famished soul for heavenly food.—P. S.]

[70][Meyer: ἀληθής expresses in opposition to mere appearance the actual reality (1Jn_2:27; Act_12:9), which the Jews could not comprehend, Joh_6:52. Alford: “ἀληθής is here not=ἡ ἀληθινή, nor is the sense, ‘My flesh is the true meat,’ etc., but ‘My flesh is true meat,’ i.e., really to be eaten, which they doubted. Thus ἀληθῶς is a gloss, which falls short of the depth of the adjective. This verse is decisive against all explaining away or metaphorizing the passage. Food and drink are not here mere metaphors;—rather are our common material food and drink mere shadows and imperfect types of this only real reception of refreshment and nourishment into being.” Godet: ““L’adverbe (ἀληθῶς) ou l’adjectif (ἀληθής) exprime la pleine réalité de la communication vitale opéré par ces éléments.”—P. S.]

[71][Per Patrem, as the fountain of life. So Beza, De Wette, Alford, etc.—P. S.]

[72][As Meyer takes it: wegen des Vaters, d. i. weil Mein Vater der lebendige ist. He quotes Plat. Conv., p. 203, E.: ἀναβιώσκεται διὰ τὴν τοῦ πατρὸς φύσιν.—P. S.]

[73][Comp. also the ὑψωθῆναι ἐκ τῆς γῆς, Joh_12:32. To make this interpretation at all plausible, the ἀναβαίνειν ὅπου ἦν τὸ πρότερον must be understood from the standpoint of Jesus whose death was a return to the heaven whence He descended, and to the glory which He had before the foundation of the world, comp. Joh_17:5. But the hearers could not have understood ἀναβαίνειν in this sense.—P. S.]

[74][Aug.: Certe vel tunc videbitis, quia, non eo modo, quo putatis, erogat corpus suum; certe vel tunc intelligetis, quia gratia ejus non consumitur morsibus. Harless and Stier: Then you will understand that, and how my glorified heavenly humanity and corporeity can be food and drink. But this would make Christ speak of a future act. Meyer remarks against Harless: The glorified body of Christ is, as flesh and blood, inconceivable (1Co_15:49 f.)—P. S.]

[75][Comp. against this assertion of Meyer Joh_3:13; Joh_20:17, where the ascension is clearly alluded to. Usually Jesus speaks of His death in John as a going to the Father or to Him that sent Me, Joh_7:33; Joh_13:3; Joh_14:12; Joh_14:28; Joh_16:5; Joh_16:28; Joh_17:11; Joh_17:13.—P. S.]

[76][Mar_16:19; Luk_24:51; Act_1:9.—P. S.]

[77][But Christ may have addressed here some of the apostles. Hengstenberg says, the witnesses of the resurrection were the representatives of all the disciples.—P. S.]

[78][Aug. Tract, in Joh. 27, § 13 (Opera III. 503):’ Caro non prodest quidquam quomodo illi intellexerunt… quomodo in cadavere dilaniatur, aut in macello venditur, non quomodo spiritu vegetatur…Accedat spiritus ad carnem, quomodo accedit caritas ad scientiam, et prodest plurimum. Nam si caro nihil prodesset, Verbum caro non fieret, ut inhabitaret in nobis. Similarly Bengel: Caro mera nil prodest: qualem scil. Judæi putabant esse carnem illam, de qua loquebatur Jesus. Loquitur sub conditione eaque impossibili, si sola caro esset…Caro est vehiculum virtutis divinæ omnis vivificantis, in Chris to et in credentibus: et Christus, carne mortificatus, spiritu vivificatus, virtutem suam maxime exseruit, 1Pe_3:18; Joh_12:24; Joh_16:7.—P. S.]

[79][He and (Œcolampadius regarded Joh_6:63 as a ferreus murus of their doctrine of the Lord’s Supper; yet Zwingli, like the other reformers, did not directly understand the passage, Joh_6:51-58, of the sacrament.—P. S.]

[80][John uses here τρώγειν four times, φαγεῖν once; Matthew, Mark and Luke, in the words of institution, use φαγεῖν only, (which is employed as the second aorist of ἐσθίειν from an obsolete φάγω). On the peculiar meaning of τρώγειν, manducare, see note on Joh_6:54. It cannot be essentially different here from φαγεῖν, since John uses the latter, Joh_6:53, in the same sense.]

[81][I say perhaps, for Augustine is not clear and is sometimes (e. g., by Meyer) quoted in favor of the first, more frequently in favor of the second interpretation. In his Tract. 26 in Joh. Evang. § 15 (ed. Bened. III. 500) he says, in expounding this passage, that the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ is received by some ad vitam, by others ad exitium (1Co_11:29), but he adds: res vero ipsa cujus sacramentum est, omni homini ad vitam, nulli ad exitium, quicunque ejus particeps fuerit. Comp. § 18 in the same homily (III. 501): Qui non manet in Christo et in quo non manet Christus, procul dubio nee manducat (some MSS. insert here spiritualiter,—evidently a Romish correction) carnem ejus, nec bibit ejus sanguinem, licet carnaliter et visibiliter premat dentibus sacramentum corporis et sanguinis Christi. In commenting on Joh_6:29 (Tract. 25, § 12, Tom. III. 489) he identifies the eating with believing: Crede et manducasti. At all events, Augustine cannot be quoted in favor of either transubstantiation or consubstantiation. Comp. on his doctrine on the eucharist my Church History, Vol. II pp. 498 f.—P.S.]

[82][This third view which I have defended myself in the text, was first clearly brought out by that profound, acute and devout commentator, Bengel, in his Gnomon on Joh_6:51, where he says: “Jesus purposely framed His words so skilfully that immediately at that time, and at all times subsequently they would indeed apply in their strict literal sense to the spiritual enjoyment of Himself (de spirituali fruitione sui); and yet that afterwards the same words should, by consequence, be appropriate to express the most august mystery of the Holy Supper when that should be instituted. For He applied to the Holy Supper the thing itself which is set forth in this discourse; and of so great moment is this sacrament, that it may be readily thought possible, that Jesus, as He foretold the treachery of Judas at Joh_6:71, and His own death in this verse, so also foretold, one year before the institution of the Holy Supper, concerning which He most surely thought Within Himself whilst speaking these words: and with this object in order that the disciples might afterwards remember His prediction. The whole of these words concerning His flesh and blood have in view the passion of Jesus Christ, and along with it the Holy Supper. Hence arises the separate mention of one flesh and of the blood so invariably; for in His passion the blood was drawn out of His body, and the Lamb was thus slain.” The same view is substantially held by Olshausen, who says: “The Saviour could indeed not with propriety speak of a rite before it was instituted, so that nobody could understand Him; but He might touch the idea, out of which the rite subsequently grew. This idea is that Jesus is the principle of life and nutriment to the new, regenerate man, not only for his soul and spirit, but also for his glorified body” (which, according to Olshausen is prepared here in germ to appear in full bloom at the final resurrection). Kahnis (Luth. Dogmatik, Vol. I., p. 625): “The discourse of Christ, John 6, does not treat directly of the Lord’s Supper, but of faith which unites us in living union with Christ. But He purposely veiled this faith in the image of eating and drinking His flesh and blood in order to express the mysterious idea embodied in the Holy Supper, just as Joh_3:5 expresses the idea of baptism.” Alford says: “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.” Webster and Wilkinson: “What our Lord said at this time He afterwards expressed in a permanent form by the sacrament of His Body and Blood. He is not here alluding to that sacrament; but what He here teaches, and what He afterwards taught by it, are the same.” Godet (II. p. 135): “This mystery of our perfect union with the person of Christ (Eph_5:30-32) which in this discourse is expressed in words (en paroles), is precisely the same which Jesus desired to express by an act (par un acte) in the rite of the holy Supper. It is not necessary to say that in this discourse He alluded to the holy Supper; but we must say that the holy Supper and this discourse refer to one and the same idea, expressed here by a metaphor, there by an emblem. Hence in the institution of the Supper, holding and breaking one piece of bread, He used the term σῶμα, body, which as an organism corresponds to the broken bread; in the discourse at Capernaum where He treats only of nourishment in adaptation to the miraculous multiplication of loaves of bread, He represents His body more as substance (σάρξ) than as an organism. This perfect propriety of terms proves the originality and authenticity of the two forms.”]

[83][Luther, Melancthon and the orthodox Lutherans of the 17th century felt this, and for this reason (not, as Tholuck thinks, from fear of transubstantiation) they repudiated the sacramental interpretation altogether. Luther says: “Eating in this passage means believing: he who believeth, eateth, and drinketh Christ.” Melanchthon: “I do not understand this discourse as referring to the Lord’s Supper or the ceremonial manducation, but as the words of Christ which preceded above were about faith, whereby we believe that God’s wrath was propitiated by the death of His Son, who offered His body and shed His blood for us,—so I understand all the rest of the same faith.” This interpretation was sanctioned by the Form of Concord, p. 743. When Calixtus came out in favor of the sacramental interpretation, he was charged with heresy by Calovius of Wittenberg.]

[84][Verknöcherte Handwerksseelen.]

[85]Joh_6:66.—[Ἐκ τούτου is causal, and expresses, according to Lange and Meyer, the reason, not the time. Alford and Godet combine the temporal and causal meaning. Alford translates: Upon this. Noyes and Conant: From this time.—P. S.]

[86]Joh_6:68.—[The οὖν of the text. rec. is omitted by the best authorities.—P. S.]

[87]Joh_6:69.—[The text. rec. inserts from Mat_16:16 ὁ Χριστός, which is wanting in the oldest sources, and is omitted by critical editors.—The original text is simply, ὅτι σὺ εἶ ὁ ἅγιος τοῦ θεοῦ, that thou art the Holy one of God. This, however, is equivalent to Christ or the promised Messiah.—P. S.]

[88]Joh_6:69.—Codd. B. C.* D. L., etc., Griesbach, Lachmann, and Tischendorf, read ὁ ἅγιος τοῦ θεοῦ. The Recepta conforms to Mat_16:16. [Cod. Sin. supports the ὁ ἅγ.τ.θ., which also appears to have been a characteristic phrase with Peter; comp. Act_2:27; Act_2:31; Act_3:14; Act_4:27; Act_4:30.—E. D. Y.]

[89]Joh_6:71.—The reading Ἰσκαριώτου is here supported by B. C. G. L. (Lachmann, Tischendorf), against Ἰσκαριώτην. Also at c. Joh_13:26, by decisive authorities. On the other hand at c. Joh_14:22, after the treasonable decision, Judas himself is distinguished as Ἰσκαριώτης. This evinces a historical delicacy, which Meyer misses when he proposes to read Ἰσκαριώτης in all the places on the strength of c. Joh_14:22. [Stier and Theile adopt Ἰσκαριώτην in this place and in Joh_13:26; while the Cod. Sin. has in the latter case Ἰσκαριώτου, belonging to Σίμωνος, and in our passage ἀπὸ καρυώτου, also referring to Σ.—E. D. Y.]

[90]Joh_6:71.—[The ὤν of the text. rec. after εἶς is wanting in the best authorities and probably inserted from Mar_14:43.—P. S.]

[91][Μὴ καὶ ὑμεῖς θέλετε ὑπάγειν. The interrogative μή looks to a negative answer (doch nicht?) comp. Joh_7:31; Joh_21:5; Rom_3:5, etc. and Winer’s Gr. p. 476. Godet, discarding this rule, wrongly explains: Si vous le voulez, vous pouvez aller.—P. S.]

[92][So Bengel: Fidem sequitur cognitio, 2Pe_1:5. Perversi sunt qui cognitionem prius postulant.—P. S.]

[93][Meyer justly remarks against Weisse that in the nature of the case a confession that filled the hearts of the apostles, must have been repeated on similar occasions.—P. S.]

[94][The interrogation stops with τοὺς δώδεκα, and what follows is an exclamation of holy sadness. So Meyer and Lange. Alford follows the wrong punctuation of the A. V.—P. S.]

[95][So also Alford, and rightly, for Christ had in view the treason of Judas which was inspired by the Evil One. The strong term corresponds to the profound indignation at the hypocrisy of the traitor who covered himself under the confession of Peter.—P. S.]

[96][It is more than the mere future (Alford), and yet not quite as strong as intended; it represents the future as an accomplished fact, the germ of which was already in existence at the time, and was detected by the penetrating eye of Christ.—P. S.]

Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh 6:66. Πολλοί, many) By this means their number was cleared of the unworthy, and made the more select [and this, in the very place (Capernaum we may suppose) in which He had sojourned previously for the longest time.—Harm., p. 337]. A promiscuous multitude is not of so much consequence as is sincerity. [This was a most severe purification.—V. g.]

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

Joh_6:66-67. Ἐκ τούτου] not: from this time forwards (so usually even Lücke, De Wette, Hengstenberg), for a going away by degrees is not described; but (so Nonnus, Luthardt): on this account, because of these words of Jesus, Joh_6:61 ff., which so thoroughly undeceived them as regarded their earthly Messianic hopes. So also Joh_19:12; Xen. Anab. ii. 6. 4, iii. 3. 5, vii. 6. 13. Comp. ἐξ οὗ, quapropter, and see generally, concerning the ἐκ of cause or occasion, Matthiae, II. 1334; Ellendt, Lex. Soph. i. 551, who justly remarks: His etiam subest fontis, unde aliquid exoriatur, notio.

εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω] they went away, and went back, so that they no longer accompanied Him, but returned to the place whence they had come to Him. Comp. Joh_18:6, Joh_20:14; 1Ma_9:47; Pro_25:9; Gen_19:17; Luk_17:31; Plato, Phaedr. p. 254 B; Menex. p. 246 B; Polyb. i. 51. 8.

τοῖς δώδεκα] who and what they were, John takes for granted as well known.

μὴ καὶ ὑμεῖς, κ.τ.λ.] but ye too do not wish to go away? Jesus knows His twelve too well (comp. Joh_13:18) to put the question to them otherwise than with the presupposition of a negative, answer (at the same time He knew that He must except one). But He wishes for their avowal, and therein lay His comfort. This rendering of the question with μὴ is no pedanterie grammaticale (Godet, who wrongly renders vous ne voulez pas?), but is alone linguistically correct (Baeumlein, Partik. p. 302 f.). According to Godet, the thought underlying the question is, If you wish, you can, which is a pure invention.

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 6:66 . ἐκ τούτου , “on this”; neither exclusively “from this time” ἔκτοτε (Euthymius), “from this moment onwards” (Lücke), nor exclusively “on this account,” but a combination of both. Cf. Joh 19:12 . Here the time is in the foreground, as is shown by the οὐκ ἔτι following. Lampe has: “Qui ab illo tempore Iesum deserebant, clare indicabant, quod propter hunc sermonem istud fecerint”. πολλοὶ ἀπῆλθον εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω … περιεπάτουν . Many of those who had up to this time been following Him and listening to His teaching, returned now to their former ways and no longer accompanied Jesus. [ ὀπίσω δὲ νόει μοι , καὶ τὸν πρότερον βίον αὐτῶν , εἰς ὃν πάλιν ὑπέστρεψαν , Euthymius.] εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω occurs Joh 18:6 , Joh 20:14 ; also Mar 13:16 . But the most instructive occurrence is in Psa 44:18 , οὐκ ἀπέστη εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω ἡ καρδία ἡμῶν , where the literal sense passes into the spiritual meaning, apostasy, abandonment of God.

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

ADDITIONAL NOTES BY THE AMERICAN EDITOR.

Vv. 66-71.

1. The design of the discourse of this sixth chapter, so far as the apostles were concerned, was undoubtedly to strengthen their faith by calling their thoughts to the mystery of the union of the soul with Christ. We have in this chapter the two kinds of evidence, that of the works and that of the words. The dependence of the latter on the former, and the higher character of the latter, are strikingly exhibited here. In this regard the chapter is a central one of this Gospel.

2. The evangelist gives in Joh 6:68-69 a new declaration of the apostles’ faith. Peter and his associates did not fully understand the words of Jesus, but, in connection with the growth of their love and faith in the progress of their life with Him until now, they found in them no “hard saying,” as the others did, but only a new utterance of truth which was to be received and studied in the time to come. They believed that He was the Holy One of God, and that He had the words of eternal life, and so, in the presence of these profound thoughts and sayings, they were ready to listen and wait for greater light. It cannot be supposed that, at the time of the first miracle at Cana, their minds could have opened at all to such sayings. There had been a steady and continuous development since then.

3. As related to the evidence for the truth that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God (Joh 20:31), this chapter carries the reader’s thought into the region of His life-giving power— the inward union of His life with that of the believer as essential to the eternal life of the soul—more fully than the chapters which precede. There is no mere repetition of what goes before, but a suggestion of a new thought, and of a thought which belongs here in the natural order of the growth of the apostles’ own inner life and of the proof of the truth for other minds. The Holy One of God as the source of eternal life—the words of Peter’s confession—contain the thought of the discourse and the belief of the Twelve as it was now moving forward.

4. The explanation of the difficulties connected with the choice of Judas is to be found in the fact that Jesus acted in accordance with the providential plan of the world’s life. We carry back the difficulty thus to the region of the Divine counsels, and there it is only to be placed with the mysteries of other human lives. The case of Judas was a remarkable one, because of the conspicuous position which his betrayal of Jesus gave him. But the wonder of all living, as related to moral discipline, losses and victories, is beyond the limit of our earthly vision.

Ver. 66. “From that moment many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.”

In the picture which the Synoptics have drawn for us of the Galilean ministry,—particularly in that of St. Luke,—Jesus shows Himself often preoccupied with the necessity of making a selection among those crowds who followed Him without comprehending the serious character of the step. Comp. Luk 8:9 ff; Luk 9:23 ff; Luk 14:25 ff. Jesus preferred by far a little nucleus of men established in faith and resolved to accept the self-denials which it imposed, to those multitudes whose bond of union with His person was only an apparent one. But there was more than this: all His work would have been in danger if the spirit which was manifested on the preceding day had gained the ascendant among His adherents already so numerous. It was necessary to remove everything which, in this mass, was not decided to go with Him on the pathway of the crucifixion and towards a wholly spiritual kingdom. We can, from this point of view, explain the method pursued by Him in the foregoing scene. The words by which He had characterized the nature and privileges of faith were adapted to attach the true believers to Him more closely, but also to repel all those whom the instincts of a carnal Messianic hope brought to Him. The danger which His work had just incurred had revealed to Him the necessity of purifying His infant Church. Joh 6:66 shows us this end attained, so far as concerned the group of disciples who most nearly surrounded the apostolic company. ᾿Εκ τούτου may be taken in a temporal sense:from this moment (de Wette), or in the logical sense: for this reason (Meyer, Weiss, etc.).

For this second sense classical examples may be cited. The passage Joh 19:12 determines nothing. I would understand: since this fact, which includes both the time (from this day) and its contents (that which had just occurred). The words ἀπῆλθον εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω, went back, include more than simple defection; they denote the return of these people to their ordinary occupations, which they had abandoned in order continuously to follow the Lord. The imperfect περιεπάτουνindicates a fact of a certain continuance; they no longer took part in His wandering kind of life (Joh 7:1). It was in consequence of this prolonged rupture that the following conversation took place. Jesus, far from being discouraged by this result, sees in it a salutary sifting process which He wished even to introduce into the midst of the circle of the Twelve; for here also He discerns the presence of impure elements.

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.

Such is the malice of men, that they take occasion of their own destruction, even of the very doctrine of salvation (unless it be a few, which believe through the singular gift of God.)

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

From that time, &c.--or, in consequence of this. Those last words of our Lord seemed to have given them the finishing stroke--they could not stand it any longer.

walked no more--Many a journey, it may be, they had taken with Him, but now they gave Him up finally!

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 66. Many of his disciples went back] They no longer associated with him, nor professed to acknowledge him as the Messiah. None of these were of the twelve. Christ had many others who generally attended his ministry, and acknowledged him for the Messiah.

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

66. From that time many of his disciples went back. The Evangelist now relates what trouble was the consequence of that sermon. It is a dreadful and monstrous thing, that so kind and gracious an invitation of Christ could have alienated the minds of many, and especially of those who had formerly professed to belong to him, and were even his ordinary disciples. But this example is held out to us for a mirror, as it were, in which we may perceive how great is the wickedness and ingratitude of men, who turn a plain road into an occasion of stumbling to them, that they may not come to Christ. Many would say that it would have been better that a sermon of this kind should never have been preached, which occasioned the apostacy of many. But we ought to entertain a widely different view; for it was then necessary, and now is daily necessary, that what had been foretold concerning Christ should be perceived in his doctrine, namely, that

he is the stone of stumbling, (Isaiah 8:14.)

We ought, indeed, to regulate our doctrine in such a manner that none may be offended through our fault; as far as possible, we ought to retain all; and, in short, we ought to take care that we do not, by talking inconsiderately or at random, disturb ignorant or weak minds. But it will never be possible for us to exercise such caution that the doctrine of Christ shall not be the occasion of offense to many; because the reprobate, who are devoted to destruction, suck venom from the most wholesome food, and gall from honey. The Son of God undoubtedly knew well what was useful, and yet we see that he cannot avoid offending many of his disciples. Whatever then may be the dislike entertained by many persons for pure doctrine, still we are not at liberty to suppress it. Only let the teachers of the Church remember the advice given by Paul, that the word of God ought to be properly divided, (2 Timothy 2:15;) and next let them advance boldly amidst all offenses. And if it happen that many apostatize, let us not be disgusted at the word of God, because it is not relished by the reprobate; for they who are so much shaken by the revolt of some that, when those persons fall away, they are immediately discouraged, are too delicate and tender.

And walked no more with him. When the Evangelist adds these words, he means that it was not a complete apostacy, but only that they withdrew from familiar intercourse with Christ; and yet he condemns them as apostates. Hence we ought to learn that we cannot go back a foot breadth, without being immediately in danger of falling into treacherous denial of our Master.

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.

(66) From that time.—The addition of the word “time” has given a definite and questionable meaning to the Greek, which is indefinite. “From that” probably means on that account, because of the words He had spoken. The actual departure was the result of the teaching, which tested their faith and found it wanting, and was at that time, not gradually from that time onwards. (Comp. Note on Joh_19:12.)

Many of his disciples.—Co-extensive with the same term in Joh_6:60.

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

66. From that time] This may be the meaning, but more probably it means in consequence of that. Hereupon has somewhat of the ambiguity of the Greek, combining the notions of time and result. The Greek phrase occurs here and Joh_19:12 only in N.T.

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.

Then Simon Peter answered him,.... Who was strong in the faith of Christ, and full of zeal for him, and love to him; and who was the mouth of the apostles, and always forward to speak out of the abundance and sincerity of his heart, in their name; believing, that they all of them, for he had now no suspicion of Judas, no more than of the rest, had the same faith in Christ, love to him, and esteem of him, as he himself had; wherefore out of a good opinion of them, and love to Christ, he thus addressed him:

Lord; or "my Lord"; as the Syriac version renders it; which was either a title of respect, and the same with "Sir" with us; or else, as acknowledging the dominion and authority of Christ, as Lord of all, and especially of the saints, and as claiming his interest in him; and which carries in it a reason, why he should abide by him:

to whom shall we go? as a teacher, whose ministry we can attend upon, to greater profit and advantage? not to the Scribes and Pharisees, whose leaven, or doctrine, Christ had bid them beware of; who taught for doctrines the commandments of men, and were blind leaders of the blind; nor to John the Baptist, who had declared he was not the Messiah; but had pointed him out to them in his person, as the son of God; and in his office as the Lamb of God, that takes away the sins of men; and perhaps, he might not be now living; and if he was, he would have encouraged them not to follow him, but abide with their master; so that there was no other, that was "better", as Nonnus expresses it, that they could go unto; and therefore it would be folly and madness in them to leave him: and as it was with Peter and the rest of the disciples, so it is with all sensible sinners, and true believers, who see there is no other to go to for life and salvation, but Christ; not to the law of Moses, which accuses, curses, and condemns, and by which there is neither life nor righteousness; nor to any creature, or creature performance, for there is a curse on him that trusts in man, and makes flesh his arm; nor to their own righteousness, which is impure and imperfect, and cannot justify before God, nor answer for them in a time to come; nor to their tears of repentance, which will not satisfy the law, atone for sins, or wash them away; nor to carnal descent, birth privileges, a religious education, sobriety, and civility, to trust to which, is to have confidence in the flesh, which will be of no avail; nor to ceremonial services, or moral duties, or even evangelical ordinances, neither of which can take away sin. There is no other Saviour, but Christ, to look to; no other Mediator between God and man, to make use of; no other physician of value, for diseased and sin sick souls to apply unto; no other fountain but his blood, for polluted souls to wash in, and be cleansed; no other city of refuge, or strong hold, for souls sensible of danger, to flee unto and be safe; no other to come to as the bread of life, where hungry souls may be fed; no other place of rest, for those that are weary and heavy laden; nor is there any other, where there is plenty of all grace, and security from every enemy, as in him: and therefore, to whom can they have recourse, but unto him? and that for the following reason,

thou hast the words of eternal life: meaning, either the promises of eternal life, which were made before the world began, and were put into Christ's hands, for his people, and are yea and amen in him; or the doctrines of eternal life; for so the Gospel, and the truths of it, are called, Act 5:20; and that because the Gospel brings life and immortality to light, gives an account of eternal life; of the nature of it, that it is a glorious life, a life free from all the sorrows of the present one; a life of pleasure, and of perfect knowledge and holiness, and which will last for ever: and because it points out the way to it, that it is not by the works of the law, but by the grace of God; that it is his free gift, through Christ; and that Christ is the way, the truth, and the life, or the true way to eternal life: and because it is a means of quickening dead sinners, and of reviving true believers, and of nourishing them up unto everlasting life: or this phrase may design the power and authority which Christ has, to dispose of, and dispense eternal life; for he has the firing itself in his hands, and a power to give it to as many as the father has given him; and to them he does give it: and each of these senses carry in them a reason why souls should go to Christ, and to him only, for life and salvation.

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

66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

Ver. 66. Many of his disciples] They stumbled at the word and fell backward. This is reckoned by St Peter a note of a reprobate, 1Pe 2:8. And indeed few sins are more dangerous than that of picking quarrels at God’s word, taking up weapons against it, and snuffing at it, Mal 1:13; replying against it, Rom 9:19-20; casting reproaches upon it, Jer 20:8-9; enviously swelling at it, Act 13:45; gathering odious consequences from it, Rom 3:8: such are in the ready road to apostasy, and so to perdition, Heb 10:39.

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.

Many of his disciples - Many who had followed him professedly as his disciples and as desirous of learning of him. See the notes at Joh 6:60.

Went back - Turned away from him and left him. From this we may learn,

Not to wonder at the apostasy of many who profess to be followers of Christ. Many are induced to become his professed followers by the prospect of some temporal benefit, or under some public excitement, as these were; and when that temporal benefit is not obtained, or that excitement is over, they fall away. Many may be expected to be offended by the doctrines of the gospel. Having no spirituality of mind, and really understanding nothing of the gospel, they may be expected to take offence and turn back. The best way to understand the doctrines of the Bible is to be a sincere Christian, and aim to do the will of God, Joh 7:17. We should examine ourselves. We should honestly inquire whether we have been led to make a profession of religion by the hope of any temporal advantage, by any selfish principle, or by mere excited animal feeling. If we have it will profit us nothing, and we shall either fall away of ourselves, or be cast away in the great day of judgment.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

His disciples at large, so called because they followed him, partly to hear what he would say, partly to see his miracles, followed him no more. Many professors and seeming disciples of Christ may draw back and fall from their profession, though none that truly receive Christ shall fall away, but be by the power of God preserved through faith unto salvation.

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

66. Disciples—Not apostles. See note on Joh_6:60.

Many—Doubtless a large minority.

Walked no more with him—Indicating that they avoided the odium suggested in note on Joh_6:60.

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

Upon this (ek toutou ; cf. ex ou , equivalent to qua propter). Not "from that time forwards," not a gradual thinning down or departure of some disciples, one today and another tomorrow, but a kind of rush and stampede took place. Those who a few hours before were ready to call him their Messianic King, were entirely disenchanted. The claims of Christ were so profoundly different from what they anticipated that upon this many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him. The fascination those felt who had seen some of the excellences of Jesus led them to put themselves at his disposal, to wait upon him, to desert their ordinary occupations. Hence part of the phraseology of redemption was derived from the method of Christ. Men "came" to him; they "followed" him; they "walked" with him; they could "go back," desert, forsake their Lord. These actions of his first disciples have created the vocabulary of the kingdom of God. Christ"s teaching tested as well as attracted men. There was a repellent force as well as an infinite fascination. He sifted as well as saved. The very deeds and words that broke some hearts into penitence roused impatient and angry remonstrance in others. There is seen in this Gospel a continual departure and a deepening faith.

Vers. 66-71. The crisis reached at last.

The Galilaean disciples, in many cases, revolted against Christ"s teaching.

I THE DEFECTION IN GALILEE. "From that time many of his disciples went back and walked no more with him.

1. These disciples returned once more to the world, with its old occupations, and to the religious guidance of the scribes and Pharisees.

2. They ceased to attend upon our Lord"s ministry, or to follow him from place to place in his errands of truth and mercy.

3. The cause of their defection was their unbelief. "There are some of you which believe not.

(1) There are many persons who profess to be Christ"s disciples for a time, and afterwards fall away from their profession.

(2) Though Jesus foresaw this defection, it must have been a bitter disappointment.

II OUR LORD"S TOUCHING APPEAL TO THE TWELVE. "Will ye also go away?

1. Though he has suffered from the sudden thinning of the ranks of his disciples, he yet holds open the door for the chosen twelve to follow them if they are so inclined.

2. Yet such an additional defection would have added immensely to his trial, as the apostles were nearer to him than the Galilaean disciples.

3. Our Lord seeks to find a small company of true disciples, as the last support of his word, who would be impregnable against apostasy.

III PETER"S PROMPT AND FERVENT ANSWER. "Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.

1. The answer is characteristic of the apostle"s impulsive nature; for he does not take the trouble to inquire whether it represents the convictions or feelings of all his colleagues.

2. The answer recognized the impossibility of the return of the apostles:

(1) Either to the guidance of the scribes and Pharisees, who taught for doctrines the commandments of men, and were blind leaders of the blind;

(2) or to the Law of Moses, by which there was neither life nor righteousness.

3. It recognized the essential fitness of Christ to be the Teacher of the apostles.

(1) He had words of eternal life.

(a) Either promises of eternal life made before the world began, and put into Christ"s hands;

(b) or the doctrines of eternal life, which exhibit the way of salvation through a crucified Saviour.

(2) The ground of this conviction. "We believe and know that thou art Christ, the Holy One of God.

(a) The belief is first, as it is the foundation of a right understanding, while the right understanding distinguishes the belief from mere opinion.

(b) The confession, strangely recalling that of the demoniacs, (Luk_4:34) was the recognition of Christ as God"s Son, sealed unto the work of giving his life for the world.

IV OUR LORD"S DISCLOSURE OF THE SECRET CHARACTER OF ONE OF HIS APOSTLES. "Have I not chosen you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?

1. The choice is to apostleship, not to salvation. (Luk_6:13)

2. Our Lord sees the truly devilish character of one apostle through all disguises. Judas was

a. a deceiver,

b. a liar,

c. a murderer.

3. It is a significant fact that Judas was, unlike the eleven disciples, who were all Galilaeans, a native of Judaea. "He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon." He belonged to the village of Kerioth, in Judaea. (Jos_15:25) The betrayer of our Lord belonged to that Judaea where the hostilities of the Jews reached its highest point.

4. Our Lord makes the apostles aware of the character of Judas, partly that he may prepare them for the coming betrayal he it was that should betray him partly to convince them that they could only stand steadfast in their faith and allegiance by reliance on his grace.

Vers. 66-69. Desertion and adhesion.

It is instructive to observe that, in the course of Christ"s ministry, there were those among his professed friends who forsook him. And it is also instructive to observe that such cases of desertion led Christ"s real and attached friends to ask themselves what it was that held them to their Lord, and to form upon this matter a definite and decided conviction. Thus the desertion of merely nominal adherents became the occasion of a mental process which was singularly advantageous; for faith and love were thus called out and strenghtened. Our daily observation shows us, that as it was during our Lord"s ministry, so now and always there are those who cleave to Christ, and those who quit him.

I HOW IS IT TO BE EXPLAINED THAT SOME PROFESSED CHRISTIANS FORSAKE THE LORD?

1. Fickle and frivolous natures, when the novelty of discipleship wears off, revert to the careless and irreligious life of the past. Their heart is in the world, and, like Lot"s wife, they look back. Some transient excitement, some personal influence, induces impressible natures to acknowledge in words that Jesus is their Saviour and Lord. But only the surface of the soul is reached, and the world has possession of the inmost depths.

2. Christ"s claims to Divine authority are rejected as too lofty to be accepted by those accustomed to merely human standards. And his moral requirements are too stringent for a low ethical standard to submit to. Many would hold to Christ did he make a lower claim, or impose a laxer rule.

3. The doctrines which Christ reveals are too profound and spiritual for the carnal mind. The disciples of Jesus find that if they would know the Master"s thoughts they must brace themselves to an arduous effort of spirit. From this they shrink, and consequently turn to a creed more commonplace and less exacting. One thing may certainly be said of all the various classes who are chargeable with the guilt and folly of forsaking Jesus. It is this: those who leave Christ have never really known him. If they had found eternal life in him, they would never have forsaken him for causes such as those described.

II WHY CHRISTIANS SHOULD CLEAVE TO CHRIST.

1. Because there is no one else to whom to go. The invitations and allurements which conflict with the attractions of the Saviour, however specious, are altogether vain. In the time of his earthly ministry, to whom could men go, if not to Jesus? They could find no satisfaction in the teaching and society of Sadducees, Pharisees, Essenes, etc. So is it now.

2. Because Christ is the supremely excellent. As the Messiah, the Son of God, able to secure forgiveness and acceptance, able to procure us all spiritual help and blessing. He is beyond all comparison the most precious. To desert him is to turn the back upon all moral perfection and Divine grace.

3. Because Christ has the highest of all gifts to bestow; i.e. eternal life. With this what can the promises of others for a moment compare?

4. Because Christ"s own remonstrance begs us to stay with him. "Will ye also go away?" is his gracious appeal. As much as to say For your own sake, and for my sake, remain! Since Christ has not forsaken his people, his people are bound not to forsake him. Wonderful as is the fact, it is certain that Jesus is pained and grieved by the desertion of those for whom he has done and suffered so much; it is certain that Jesus is gladdened when his people cleave closely to him in the season of temptation or discouragement. T.

The sad departure from Christ.

Notice

I THAT THE MINISTRY OF JESUS REPELLED MANY. "From this time many of his disciples," etc. And why?

1. Because his ministry revealed their true character to themselves and others.

a. As unreal. They were miserably wanting in sincerity, honesty, and earnestness.

b. As worldly, secular, and carnal wanting in spirituality and true concern for the soul

c. As selfish. They were self-seeking and self-righteous.

d. As wicked.

e. As unbelieving.

2. Because his ministry was diametrically opposed to their real character. He preached repentance inward reform, heavenly birth, and honesty, which were opposed to their hollowness of principle. He preached the superior claims of the soul and spiritual things, which were opposed to their carnality and worldliness. He preached self-sacrifice and love and exemplified them in his life, and these were opposed to their selfishness. He inculcated holiness, which was opposed to their wickedness and vice. He demanded practical and genuine faith, which was opposed to their infidelity and indifference. He denounced their conduct, and enforced opposite principles with such force and honesty that at last his ministry not merely became unattractive to them, but obnoxious and painful.

3. Because his ministry was uncompromising and unchangeable. He would not pander to their likings in any way. He was the true and faithful Witness. There was no discord in the music of his ministry. So that his followers had either to change, exercise faith in him, or follow him under a cloak of profession, or leave him entirely. These chose the latter; they "went back, and walked no more," etc.

II THAT IT IS POSSIBLE TO GO A LONG WAY WITH JESUS AND THEN LEAVE HIM. It was so in this case. We have here:

1. A sad separation. "They walked no more," etc.

(1) They left Jesus, and not Jesus them. He did not send them away. All moral separations from Christ are commenced by man. Judas shall remain in the society of Jesus till he goes out himself. An illustration of what our Lord had just said, "Him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

(2) They separated from him after being with him for some time. "They walked no more with him." They had walked a good deal with him. They were his disciples. They had attended his ministry, heard his gracious words and saw his mighty deeds, but separated at last.

(3) They separated from him although they had received much kindness from him. Their sick were healed, their miseries alleviated, and their hunger satiated. They had only just been feeding on his bounties in the desert; but now they leave their old Benefactor, who was willing, able, and anxious to bless them spiritually and eternally. What ingratitude and perversity!

(4) They separated from him forever. This was certainly the case with regard to his society in this world. There are sad partings often on earth, and painful social separations by distance and death; but of all sad separations, the saddest is the separation of the soul from Christ of an old disciple from his Master.

2. A sad loss to them, not to Jesus.

(1) They lost what they had gained. We can scarcely think that they could have been with Jesus without being somewhat benefited. Some of them, we may conjecture, were almost Christians, but in leaving Christ they lost all, even what they had; much of their best energies were wasted.

(2) They lost what they might have gained. What they had from Jesus was nothing to what they might have. What he had done for them was only introductory to what he would do. They left him on the threshold of the temple of truth and salvation, and thus lost the best society, the divinest ministry, their only Deliverer, and the inestimable blessings arising from union with him. What a sad loss!

3. A sad retrogression. They went back.

(1) To go back from Christ is to go back from all good. For he is the incarnation of goodness, the exhaustless Treasury of all spiritual blessings, and the only Saviour of the soul. To go back from him is to recede from the standard of moral excellency, and the centre of redemptive help and grace.

(2) To go back from him is to go on towards all evil and its consequences. Man cannot be spiritually stationary; and in the opposite direction of Christ there is only evil the cold breath of infidelity, the darkness of spiritual death, and the terrible whirlwinds of despair and misery.

(3) To go back from Christ is one of the worst symptoms of the soul. While man clings to Christ there is some hope of him; but when he tears away from him, he manifests a sinful force which breaks through the mightiest moral power which can be brought to bear on him, and his character seems fixed and his destiny decided. We speak of going back in the world, but this is the saddest going back of all to go back from Christ. "Many of his disciples went back;" but Christ went on in his eternal course of benevolence, redemption, and glory.

LESSONS.

1. What ought to attract people to Christ often drives them away from him. It was so here.

2. There are crises in the Christian ministry and in the lives of disciples which severely test their Christian character and attachment to Christ. "From that hour," etc.

3. There are many who will follow Jesus while everything runs smoothly, but leave him at the least offence or difficulty. They will not stand the test.

4. Those who leave Jesus early rather than follow him under a false profession are better off than those who follow on thus to the last. These disciples who left him now were better than Judas, who continued to the bitter end.

5. It is better not to follow Jesus at all than, after following awhile, turn back again. They are worse at the end than the beginning more difficult of recovery. And the recollection of their time with Jesus will only be the painful memory of better days, brighter hopes, nobler possibilities, which must enhance their misery. B.T.

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

From this time many of his disciples went back - So our Lord now began to purge his floor: the proud and careless were driven away, and those remained who were meet for the Master's use.

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

The loyalty of the Twelve:

v. 66. From that time many of His disciples went back, and walked no more with Him.

v. 67. Then said Jesus unto the Twelve, Will ye also go away?

v. 68. Then Simon Peter answered Him, Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life.

v. 69. And we believe and are sure that Thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.

v. 70. Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you Twelve, and one of you is a devil?

v. 71. He spake of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon; for he it was that should betray Him, being one of the Twelve.

In spite of the warning of Jesus, a great many of those that had followed Him for some time deliberately turned from Jesus and no longer accompanied Him on His preaching-trips. They gave up their adherence to Christ, they withdrew openly from His presence. They had not stood the test of faith. It is ever thus. In the midst of the true believers there are always some whose faith is not sound, because it is not based upon the words and works of Jesus only. Jesus now turned to the Twelve, to the apostles whom He had chosen with such great care. They were here weathering a crisis, and He put the question to them, as well that they might be confirmed in their faith, as that He might be gladdened by their confession of it. His words are partly a question, partly an affirmation: Surely you do not want to go away also! And impetuous Peter, deeply moved by the defection of the great number, answers in the name of the Twelve: Lord, to whom shall we go away? The words of eternal life Thou hast; and we have believed and are certain in our knowledge that Thou art the Christ, the Holy One, the living Son of God, the Messiah of the world. The apostles had not taken offense at the words of Christ. In the midst of apostasy and hostility the faith of the true believers is approved. It is at such times that they cling all the more closely to the Rock of their salvation, not in sentimental emotion, but in Bound trust in His Word, the Gospel of eternal life. Everyone that has truly learned and gotten the firm conviction that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, the promised Redeemer of the world, has no intention, no desire to go away from Him. The truth and power of the word has fully taken possession of his heart and mind. Note: Confession in Christ, the Savior, is confession in Christ, the Son of God, true God with the Father and the Holy Ghost. The answer of Jesus upon the glorious confession of Peter was charged with deep feeling and carried a warning, especially to one of the Twelve. For although Jesus had chosen them all in the same way and with the same seriousness, yet one of them was a devil at heart, and was merely hiding his denial and hostility under the hypocritical mask of loyalty. That was Judas Iscariot. In him the devil lived and had free play, he was Satan’s willing victim and tool. That is a truly devilish crime, if a disciple, a believer, such as Judas was, that actually acknowledges Jesus as the Christ and has had many an experience in his Christian life, finally gives up his belief in the Savior and becomes an apostate. The example of Judas serves as an earnest warning to watch and to pray, lest faith be taken away and we commit the sin of Judas, betray our Lord and Savior.

Summary.Jesus feeds five thousand men, walks on the Sea of Galilee, proclaims Himself as the Bread of Life in the school of Capernaum, corrects the false offense of many of His followers, and hears the confession of loyalty from Peter.

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

66. Many of his disciples went back. They stumbled over the remarkable declarations of this chapter. They had no genuine faith.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

no longer walked with him

Jesus went from one place to another by walking, so it is literally true that they did not walk where and when he walked, but the reader should also be able to understand that this metaphor indicates that they no longer wanted to hear what he had to say.

Lord, to whom shall we go?

Simon Peter gives this remark in the form of a question to emphasize that he desires to follow only Jesus. AT: "Lord, we could never follow anyone but you!" (See: Rhetorical Question)

his disciples

Here "his disciples" refers to the general group of people who followed Jesus.

the twelve

This is an ellipsis for "the twelve disciples," a specific group of twelve men who followed Jesus for his entire ministry. AT: "the twelve disciples" (See: Ellipsis)

translationWords

disciple

walk

the twelve

Peter

lord

eternity

Holy One

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

66. ἐκ τούτου. Combines the notions of ‘from that time’ and ‘in consequence of that;’ Upon this: we are to understand a continual drifting away. The phrase occurs in N.T. here and Joh 19:12 only.

ἀπῆλθον εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω. Not only deserted Him, but went back to their old life. This is the κρίσις, the separation of bad from good, which Christ’s coming necessarily involved; Joh 3:18-19.

οὐκέτι. No longer. ‘No more’ may mean ‘never again,’ which οὐκέτι does not mean; some may have returned again. Περιεπάτουν graphically expresses Christ’s wandering life; comp. Joh 7:1, Joh 11:54, Luk 8:1; Luk 9:58.

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.

66-71.] Many of the disciples leave Him. The confession of the Twelve through Peter: and the Lord’s warning to them.

66. ἐκ τούτου] upon this. The temporal meaning prevails, but does not exclude the causal.

πολλοί, viz. of the μὴ πιστεύοντες: but not all.

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

66. ἐκ τούτου, “thereupon.” The great defection began at this point, and its immediate cause was the nature of the teaching which had been given. Cf. 19:12. ἐκ τούτου in a causal sense is common in the papyri.2

οὖν is added after ἐκ τούτου by אDΘ and fam. 13, but is unnecessary and is om. by BCLTNW. τογτογπολλοι might easily become τογτογπολλοι, and thus οὖν would get into the text (see Tischendorf, in loc.).

πολλοὶ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ. BT insert ἐκ before τῶν μαθ., but om. אCDLWΘ. Cf. v. 60; and see on 1:40, 6:71, 12:4.

τῶν μαθητῶν refers to the outer circle of disciples (see on 2:2), which would include the Twelve, although none of the Twelve failed Jesus at this point. A tradition ascribed to Hippolytus says that Mark and Luke were among the “seventy disciples who were scattered by the offence of the words of Christ,” Joh 6:53 being quoted loosely.3

ἀπῆλθον εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω, a phrase used again 18:6. They withdrew or retreated from association with Jesus. For εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω in a figurative sense, cf. Psa 44:18.

οὐκέτι μετʼ αὐτοῦ περιεπάτουν, “they walked no more with Him,” a phrase which vividly suggests the itinerant character of His ministry. Cf. 7:1, 11:54; and for the larger sense of περιπάτειν, see on 8:12.

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

From that time [εκ τουτου] . Render, as Rev., upon this. As a result proceeding out of [εκ] this. Compare Joh 19:12.

Went back [απηλθον εις τα οπισω] . The Greek expresses more than the English. They went away [απο] from Christ, Literally, to the things behind, to what they had left in order to follow the Lord.

Walked [περιεπατουν] . Literally, walked about, with Jesus in His wanderings here and there.

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