One In Jesus

The meaning of “blood”

Jesus said,

(John 6:53-56 ESV)  ⁵³ So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.  ⁵⁴ Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.  ⁵⁵ For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.  ⁵⁶ Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.

(John 6:63 ESV) ⁶³ “It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.”

(John 6:68-69 ESV)  ⁶⁸ Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life,  ⁶⁹ and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.”

Add to this list the following from the Torah, too well known to require John to mention it —

(Lev 17:14a ESV)  For the life of every creature is its blood: its blood is its life.

(among many other occurrences in the Torah). Continue reading →

[This may be a little redundant, but nothing I’ve said on chapter 6 to this point requires that we drink blood. I just have this nagging feeling that I’ve been missing something.]

The Law of Moses anticipated that, in the peace or fellowship offering, the flesh of the sacrificed animal would be eaten by the worshiper. And, of course, the sacrificed lamb was eaten by the worshiper in the Passover meal. John prominently quotes John the Baptist: “Behold, the Lamb of God!” (John 1:29).

And so, Jesus’ teaching that his followers must eat his “flesh” would seem to point plainly enough to Jesus as the Lamb of God, sacrificed for the sins of God’s children.

However, the idea that Jesus’ followers should drink his blood was a much harder teaching. After all, there were no scriptural rituals or sacrifices in which the Jews would drink the blood of the sacrificed animal. In fact, the Law states that to do so was a capital crime! Continue reading →

Please forgive the following rant. But I’m just so tired of shallow commentaries that don’t listen to what Jesus is saying.

Jesus’ difficult statements in John 6 about eating his flesh and drinking his blood have normally been interpreted as though Jesus were speaking of communion, that is, the Lord’s Supper or Eucharist. Most commentaries take this approach.

However, it’s impossible that his audience in the synagogue at Capernaum could have understood that message. Is it fair to imagine that Jesus was speaking to his disciples in terms that would be impossible for them to understand? He actually lost disciples because of what he said (John 6:66). Continue reading →

(John 6:66 ESV)  ⁶⁶ After this many of his disciples turned back and no longer walked with him.

The traditional interpretation is that the disciples left Jesus because they thought he was teaching cannibalism or some such thing. And to English-hearing ears, it surely sounds like that.

But that fails to credit the audience in Capernaum with knowing how to think in symbolic terms, and it fails to credit Jesus with being able to know his audience well enough to be understood.

Remember that Jews often ask questions in response to questions. In the culture of the day, the way to get a speaker to go deeper or explain himself is to ask a question, even an obtuse-sounding question. We’ve seen this very behavior with Nicodemus, the Samaritan woman, and the audience in Capernaum. (What? You didn’t think you’d enjoy this link? “A rabbi once said: ‘We are closer to God when we are asking questions than when we think we have the answers.'”)

Of course, they asked how Jesus could say that they must eat his flesh. But not necessarily because they were thinking in terms of cannibalism. If they got the image, then they’d have to wonder about the fact that Jesus is very much alive and this is the language of sacrifice. You eat the flesh of lamb given at the Temple —

(Lev 7:15 ESV) ¹⁵ And the flesh of the sacrifice of his peace offerings for thanksgiving shall be eaten on the day of his offering. He shall not leave any of it until the morning.

(Lev 8:31 ESV)  ³¹ And Moses said to Aaron and his sons, “Boil the flesh at the entrance of the tent of meeting, and there eat it and the bread that is in the basket of ordination offerings, as I commanded, saying, ‘Aaron and his sons shall eat it.’

Jesus is using the language of Leviticus to speak of eating a sacrifice, and yet he is plainly alive and well. The missing piece is Jesus’ death. And so Jesus is implying his death (and he very much was), then to eat his sacrificed flesh would be to share in his sacrifice — and that implies martyrdom — which is hard.

Doesn’t that make better sense than imagining the Jews in the synagogue at Capernaum debating cannibalism?

(John 6:67-69 ESV)  ⁶⁷ So Jesus said to the Twelve, “Do you want to go away as well?”  ⁶⁸ Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life,  ⁶⁹ and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.”

It’s a poignant moment. Jesus was concerned that many were leaving him. But Jesus does not avoid the hard question. He goes straight to the point and asks his disciples if they’ll stick with him.

Peter (of course, it was Peter) expresses the faith of the group. “You have the words of eternal life.” Peter understood that Jesus was speaking of eternal life, and therefore about the resurrection.

“Holy One” refers to such passages as —

(Psa 16:10 ESV) ¹⁰ For you will not abandon my soul to Sheol, or let your holy one see corruption.

But the term is normally used in the Old Testament to refer to God. This is quite a declaration of faith!

(John 6:70-71 ESV)  ⁷⁰ Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you, the Twelve? And yet one of you is a devil.”  ⁷¹ He spoke of Judas the son of Simon Iscariot, for he, one of the Twelve, was going to betray him.

This portends Jesus’ betrayal, and lets us know that Jesus well knew the hearts of his followers. And yet it seems an odd time and place for Jesus to say such a thing.

Perhaps the point Jesus is making is that even when he chooses someone (the same verb as in Eph 1:4), they remain who they are and make the choices they wish to make.

Just as Jesus could not keep many of his disciples from leaving him — and you can surely hear the disappointment in his words — he cannot keep Judas from being Judas. He sees the limits of his ability to persuade, and he is saddened that many will not come to belief despite miracles and sermons and all the lovingkindness of God Almighty.