[Uucf-bible] Transmogrification?

[Erika Noll Webb]

John 6:51-58

6:51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats of this
bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give for the life of the
world is my flesh."

6:52 The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, "How can this man give
us his flesh to eat?"

6:53 So Jesus said to them, "Very truly, I tell you, unless you eat the
flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.

6:54 Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood have eternal life, and I will
raise them up on the last day;

6:55 for my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink.

6:56 Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood abide in me, and I in them.

6:57 Just as the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so
whoever eats me will live because of me.

6:58 This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like that which your
ancestors ate, and they died. But the one who eats this bread will live
forever."

Commentary from: http://wwwstaff.murdoch.edu.au/~loader/MkPentecost11.htm

The drama continues, as John unfolds the meaning of Jesus as the bread of
life. 6:51 concluded last week's reading and commences this week's. In this
verse the focus shifts from what Jesus offers as a person, in himself, to
what he offers through his death. There is fundamentally no difference. It
is not as though John would have believed that a relationship with God
through Jesus during his ministry would have been in any way deficient, as
though real salvation was achieved only through his death. Rather, for John,
Jesus' death is the climax and fulfilment of his life. The whole event is a
self giving. The Word became flesh. That is the good news. But, reflecting
another aspect of early Christian tradition, John also has Jesus declare
that this 'flesh and blood Jesus' is our nourishment in a special way. 

"The Jews" (i.e.. those Jews who opposed the Jew, Jesus, and did not joint
with the Jews who were his disciples) argue among themselves about how it
could be possible that Jesus gives us his flesh to eat (6:52). For the
audience, who are hearing the drama of John's gospel unfold, the answer is
obvious and the irony enjoyed. They eat Christ's flesh and drink his blood
in their holy meal of bread and wine. This meal will have had a special
place in the community as a means of communing with Christ. For those in the
drama who think at the level of Nicodemus such an idea is preposterously
cannibalistic. 

In developing this link with the eucharist, John is expanding a single
motif: Jesus is the bread of life. Some have suggested that John 6 has been
composed over a period of time and that the attention to the eucharist came
at a secondary stage. This may be so, whether at the hands of the same
author or from someone else. As the text stands which has been passed on to
us, we see that the eucharist is clearly being understood as a means of
opening oneself to this life. It would be a mistake, however, to isolate it
as though it were the only means and especially to isolate its elements as
having a power which exists independently of the Son and are somehow at our
disposal, like medicine. On the contrary, the richness of John 6 is in its
variety. 

The image of bread has been developed in different ways, but all belong
together. Whether it is the "work" of faith in 6:27-29 or the receiving of
the eucharist in 6:53,56, the focus is still the person of Jesus and
ultimately the relation with God and the result: eternal life. The language
of remaining or abiding in another, used in 6:56, is the language of
intimacy and shared life. As 6:57 illustrates at every level, from the
Father, through the Son, to the believer, the focus is life and the goal is
that it be shared.

6:55 asserts that this is the true bread. That is both a strong positive
statement and, by implication, a negative one: other bread is not really
bread. So 6:58 returns to the image of the manna (see earlier 6:31-32,49).
It symbolised the Law and despite being of heavenly origin was not the true
bread. It merely foreshadowed it. The development of the theme of bread
continues to serve a double purpose: to expound the gift of the gospel and
to disqualify all the alternatives.

Preaching from John entails working with John's constant repetition of
primary themes. This is certainly the case over the five Sundays which deal
with John 6. It offers the opportunity to develop that one motif in
different ways in much the same way as doubtless has happened behind John 6.
As John did so using the biblical and early Christian tradition, so we can
make similar connections. There is also a sense in which if we cannot
connect the motif of Jesus, the bread of life, to contemporary issues of
poverty and hunger, something is missing. And, from the other end, perhaps
we shall never understand its meaning if we have not experienced or at least
sensed what it means to be really hungry. 

Ultimately all hunger cries out for satisfaction and the oldest Jesus
traditions report the promise and agenda of the kingdom: "Blessed are you
who hunger; for you shall be satisfied" (Luke 6:21); so will those "who
hunger and thirst for justice" (Matt 5:6). The two must not be divorced,
because in the bread of life we are being nourished by the one whose being
is love and compassion.