John 6:55

(vii. de Trin. c. 14) Of the truth then of the body and blood of Christ, no room for doubting remains: for, by the declaration of our Lord Himself, and by the teaching of our own faith, the flesh is really flesh, and the blood really blood. This then is our principle of life. While we are in the flesh, Christ dwelleth in us by His flesh. (c.14:19) And we shall live by Him, according as He liveth. If then we live naturally by partaking of Him according to the flesh, He also liveth naturally by the indwelling of the Father according to the Spirit. His birth did not give Him an alien or different nature from the Father.

"For My flesh is true meat, and My blood is true drink." What is that He saith? He either desireth to declare that this is the true meat which saveth the soul, or to assure them concerning what had been said, that they might not suppose the words to be a mere enigma or parable, but might know that it is by all means needful to eat the Body.

"Wherefore also I have given you milk to drink," he says; meaning, I have instilled into you the knowledge which, from instruction, nourishes up to life eternal. But the expression, "I have given you to drink," is the symbol of perfect appropriation. For those who are full-grown are said to drink, babes to suck. "For my blood," says the Lord, "is true drink." In saying, therefore, "I have given you milk to drink," has he not indicated the knowledge of the truth, the perfect gladness in the Word, who is the milk?

For we do not eat God simply, God being impalpable and incorporeal; nor again, the flesh of man simply, which would not profit us. But God having taken flesh into union with Himself, that flesh is quickening. Not that it has changed its own for the Divine nature; but, just as heated iron remains iron, with the action of the heat in it; so our Lord's flesh is quickening, as being the flesh of the Word of God.

It is truly food, inasmuch as it satisfies not for a short time, nor does it spoil like perishable food, but contributes to eternal life. In like manner, the drinking of the Lord's Blood is truly drink, because it quenches thirst not for a time, …

Here the truth of the refreshment is touched upon. For the flesh of Christ truly refreshes, because it is true food, and therefore gives life. For this reason he says: "For my flesh is truly food": so truly have I said that he who eats …

He had said above, Whoso eateth My flesh and drinketh My blood, hath eternal life: and now to show the great difference between bodily meat and drink, and the spiritual mystery of His body and blood, He adds, For My flesh is meat indeed, and My blood is drink indeed.

We see its truth when he says, For my flesh truly is food. I some might think that what he was saying about his flesh and blood was just an enigma and a parable. So our Lord rejects this, and says, my flesh truly is …

For my flesh is meat indeed,....

My flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed - Or, rather, My flesh is the true meat, etc. In both clauses of this verse, instead of αληθως, the adverb, I read αληθης, the adjective, agreeing with βρωσις. This reading is supported by BCKLT, and twenty-one others; both the Arabic, Coptic, Sahidic, Armenian, two copies of the Itala, Clement, Origen, Cyril, Chrysostom, and Damascenus. Our Lord terms his flesh, the true meat, and his blood the true drink, because those who received the grace merited by his death would be really nourished and supported thereby unto eternal life.

Few passages of Scripture have been so painfully twisted and perverted as that which we have now read. The Jews are not the only people who have striven about its meaning. A sense has been put upon it, which it was never intended to bear. Fallen man, in interpreting the Bible, has an unhappy aptitude for turning food into poison. The things that were written for his benefit, he often makes an occasion for falling. Let us first consider carefully, what these verses do NOT mean.

OUR Lord Jesus did not, in this passage, allude to the Lord's Supper, as some, desiring to maintain their sacramental superstitions, have dared to affirm! I will not dwell upon the argument that there was no Lord's Supper at the time to allude to, though there is certainly some force in it, but I will rather remind you that with such an interpretation this passage would not be true.

IT was our Lord Jesus Christ who uttered these words and some of those who heard Him misunderstood His meaning, for they asked, "How can this Man give us His flesh to eat?" This is not altogether surprising, for there are still millions of persons upon the earth who will persist in understanding literally what our Lord intended to be understood spiritually. To us who know the meaning of Christ's words, it seems monstrous that anyone could have supposed that Jesus meant men to eat His real, literal flesh and to drink His actual blood!

They asked how it was possible to eat His flesh. He answers, with great solemnity, "It is indispensable." Yet even here a thoughtful hearer might find something to temper the harshness. He says they must not only "eat His flesh" but "drink His blood," which could not but suggest the idea of His death--implied in the separation of one's flesh from his blood.

Few passages of Scripture have been so painfully twisted and perverted as that which we have now read. The Jews are not the only people who have striven about its meaning. A sense has been put upon it, which it was never intended to bear. Fallen man, in interpreting the Bible, has an unhappy aptitude for turning food into poison. The things that were written for his benefit, he often makes an occasion for falling. Let us first consider carefully, what these verses do NOT mean. The "eating and drinking" of which Christ speaks do not mean any literal eating and drinking. Above all, the words were not spoken with any reference to the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper. We may eat the Lord's Supper, and yet not eat and drink Christ's body and blood. We may eat and drink Christ's body and blood, and yet not eat the Lord's Supper. Let this never be forgotten. The opinion here expressed may startle some who have not looked closely into the subject. But it is an opinion which is supported by three weighty reasons. For one thing, a literal "eating and drinking" of Christ's body and blood would have been an idea utterly revolting to all Jews, and flatly contradictory to an often-repeated precept of their law. For another thing, to take a literal view of "eating and drinking," is to interpose a bodily act between the soul of man and salvation. This is a thing for which there is no precedent in Scripture. The only things without which we cannot be saved are repentance and faith. Last, but not least, to take a literal view of "eating and drinking," would involve most blasphemous and profane consequences. It would shut out of heaven the penitent thief. He died long after these words were spoken, without any literal eating and drinking. Will any dare to say he had "no life" in Him? It would admit to heaven thousands of ignorant, godless communicants in the present day.

OUR Lord Jesus did not, in this passage, allude to the Lord's Supper, as some, desiring to maintain their sacramental superstitions, have dared to affirm! I will not dwell upon the argument that there was no Lord's Supper at the time to allude to, though there is certainly some force in it, but I will rather remind you that with such an interpretation this passage would not be true. It must be confessed, even by the most ardent advocate of the sacramental meaning, that the expressions used by our Lord are not universally and, without exception, true if used in that sense, for it is not true that those who have never eaten the Lord's Supper have no life in them, since it is confessed on all hands that hundreds and thousands of children dying in childhood are, undoubtedly saved, and yet they have never eaten the flesh of Christ nor drank His blood, if the Lord's Supper is here meant. There have also been many others in bygone times who, by their conduct, proved that the life of God was in their souls, and yet they were not able to eat bread at the sacramental table, because of sickness, banishment, imprisonment and other causes. Surely there are some others, though I would not excuse them, who have neglected to come to that blessed commemorative ordinance, and yet, nevertheless, for all that, they are truly children of God. Would the highest of high churchmen send every Quaker, however holy and devout, down to the bottomless pit? If this should refer to the Lord's Supper, then it is certain that the dying thief could not have entered Heaven, for he never sat down at the communion table, but was converted on the Cross—and without either Baptism or the Lord's Supper—went straight away with his Master into Paradise! It can never be proved, indeed, is utterly false that no one has eternal life if he has not received the bread and wine of the communion table.

WE know that the Savior spoke of spiritual, not carnal things, and He spoke of Himself not as being in any sense meat for our bodies—that could not be—but as being food for our souls. This statement is very plain to us, but those who heard it at the first, found it very difficult to understand. Nor need we wonder, for men of the schools who play with letters, words and phrases, frequently meet with difficulties where none exist.

WE know that the Savior spoke of spiritual, not carnal things, and He spoke of Himself not as being in any sense meat for our bodies—that could not be—but as being food for our souls. This statement is very plain to us, but those who heard it at the first, found it very difficult to understand. Nor need we wonder, for men of the schools who play with letters, words and phrases, frequently meet with difficulties where none exist. The Jews of our Lord's day had fallen into the foolish habit of taking words to pieces and dwelling upon the syllables and letters until they seemed to have lost all power of getting at the plain meaning which ordinary language was intended to convey. They blinded their own eyes with the pretense of superior wisdom; made puzzles and riddles out of plain words; raised a lot of dust and sat down in it blinded to the end. Our God has taught us more and given us to understand more clearly, for His Holy Spirit has given us back the childlike spirit so that we are willing to see the natural sense which words were meant to reveal. Now we see great force and clear expressiveness in that very language which seemed, before, to conceal the Savior's meaning. It was a veil to the Jews and they saw not—it is an instructive parable to us, which, instead of hiding the Truth of God, shadows it out to us and softens the light for our weak eyes. We see, I fear, even now but dimly, for our spiritual sight is scarcely clear as yet, but we see, blessed be God for that, and we see Jesus and something of His loving meaning. We do more than see—we enjoy and, therefore, know to the life what it is to feed upon His flesh, which is meat, indeed, and to drink His blood, which is drink, indeed.

IT was our Lord Jesus Christ who uttered these words and some of those who heard Him misunderstood His meaning, for they asked, "How can this Man give us His flesh to eat?" This is not altogether surprising, for there are still millions of persons upon the earth who will persist in understanding literally what our Lord intended to be understood spiritually. To us who know the meaning of Christ's words, it seems monstrous that anyone could have supposed that Jesus meant men to eat His real, literal flesh and to drink His actual blood! I must confess that, to me, it seems an instance both of the utter depravity of human nature and of the absolute insanity to which sin has driven mankind—that there are still so many persons existing in what we call this enlightened age who actually believe that we can eat the flesh of Christ and drink His blood! This is a cannibal notion which only needs to be mentioned to be denounced. Instead of having anything sacred about it, such teaching is utterly detestable—it is inconceivably idiotic and blasphemous! Idiocy and blasphemy seem to be blended together in it in about equal proportions. It is strange that such blessed words from such blessed lips should have been so shamefully misunderstood and misrepresented. Beloved Friends, as many of you as have been taught of God, know the spiritual meaning of these words. You know that the Doctrine of the Incarnation of Christ is food to your soul and you know that the great Truth of the substitutionary Sacrifice of Christ which is expressed by His blood, is the most nourishing cordial to your heart. You know that, in this sense, Christ's words are full of deep spiritual teaching—"My flesh is food, indeed, and My blood is drink, indeed." That word, "indeed," seems to contrast this spiritual nourishment with all ordinary food and drink.

THE crowd had followed Jesus for the loaves and fishes. He gently upbraids them for being guided by so carnal an appetite and impelled by so coarse a motive to follow Him. Then He tells them that there is a spiritual meat which is far better—a spiritual drink far richer than those things which nourish the body and gratify the animal tastes. After which, speaking of Himself spiritually, He says, "My flesh is meat indeed"—real meat, such as supports the soul, and, "My blood is drink indeed"—real drink, the best, the truest beverage, such as invigorates the spirit for immortality! Why, you may ask, on the outset, does our Lord speak of His flesh and blood as separated? I tried to explain that some time ago when we gathered around this Table. There must be, in the Lord's Supper, bread and wine—but bread separated from the wine—as our Lord speaks of His flesh as separate from His blood, and this was to indicate that it is as a dying Savior that He is most precious to us. The blood separated from the flesh indicates death. It is to the death of Jesus that the Believer first turns His eyes and it is when considering the living, reigning Christ as having once been slain that our richest comfort comes to us. So it is not an unnecessary multiplication of words, or a vain repetition of the same idea, when our Lord says to us, "My flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed." He thereby denotes Himself as the dyingChrist. Taking the words as they stand, our first point will be that— I. THE FLESH OF CHRIST IS MEAT INDEED—SPIRITUAL MEAT. The likeness is emphatic—it is "meat indeed." I t is like meat because meat, or food, sustains the body. The body could not be kept in vigor ordinarily or without a miracle, except by the use of food.

THE crowd had followed Jesus for the loaves and fishes. He gently upbraids them for being guided by so carnal an appetite and impelled by so coarse a motive to follow Him. Then He tells them that there is a spiritual meat which is far better—a spiritual drink far richer than those things which nourish the body and gratify the animal tastes. After which, speaking of Himself spiritually, He says, "My flesh is meat indeed"—real meat, such as supports the soul, and, "My blood is drink indeed"—real drink, the best, the truest beverage, such as invigorates the spirit for immortality!