John 6:60

DISCOURSE: 1642
THE GOSPEL A GROUND OF OFFENCE

John 6:60. Many therefore of his Disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?

THE Gospel, to those who have obtained just views of it, is simplicity itself: but to those who are not taught of God, it is utter foolishness. When the prophets taught the people, their hearers, instead of “believing their report [Note: Isaiah 53:1.],” were ready to exclaim, “Ah! Lord God, doth he not speak parables [Note: Ezekiel 20:49.]?” In like manner, when our blessed Lord, “who spake as never man spake [Note: John 7:46.],” addressed to his followers as rich and instructive a discourse as any that is contained in the sacred volume, they said among themselves, “This is an hard saying; who can hear it?”

We shall find it not unprofitable to consider,

I. What was the saying at which they were so greatly offended—

In substance it was, that his people must live by faith in him—
[This he had spoken plainly: “I am the bread of life. He that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth in me shall never thirst.” But he had also represented it under a figure which they did not understand. He had been challenged by his hearers to give any proof of his divine mission, equal to that which Moses had given to the Jewish people, in the wilderness, by supplying them with manna from heaven for forty years: and, in answer to that challenge, our Lord drew a parallel between the manna and himself, whom that manna typified [Note: Here the parallel may be drawn from the context. See Discourse on ver. 53–55.] — — — and required that all should live by faith in him for the salvation of their souls, as their forefather did on the manna for the sustenance of their bodies.]

This filled them with extreme astonishment and disgust—
[That he should speak of himself as “coming down from heaven,” was unaccountable; since they knew, as they supposed, his earthly parentage, as well as they did that of any other man [Note: ver. 41, 42.] — — — That he should speak of “giving them his flesh to eat,” was equally incomprehensible; since they could annex no idea to it but that which was too horrible to think of [Note: ver. 52.] — — — Then, as to the consequences that he spake of, as infallibly arising to them from their eating, or declining to eat, his flesh, they could not endure to hear such assertions from his lips.

Hence they “murmured” among themselves; and declared it all to be utterly unintelligible, and unworthy to be received by any rational being. Their confidence, in relation to this view of it, is strongly expressed in that pointed interrogation, “Who can hear it?” And so strong was their disgust at it, that “from that time many of his Disciples went back, and walked no more with him [Note: ver. 66.].” So general, too, was this feeling, that it seemed as if the Apostles themselves would follow the example of his other Disciples [Note: ver. 67.]

But that to which I would more especially call your attention is, to inquire,

II.

Whence it was that it proved so particularly offensive to them?

It should seem that they were offended because of,

1. The strangeness of the image—

[Never had they heard any thing like it before. Had he spoken of himself as a sacrifice, they might have more readily received the idea of “eating his flesh;” because, under their own law, the offenders in many cases partook of their own sacrifices. But even then, as they knew nothing of human sacrifices, it would have proved sufficiently dark and unintelligible to them. But when he spake of “drinking his blood,” it was disgusting to them in the extreme: for not even the prohibitions relative to idolatry were stronger than those which related to the tasting of blood. If they viewed it literally, they could regard it in no other light than as a savage ordinance, too horrible to think of: and of a spiritual or mystical import their minds could form no conception; since nothing that they had ever heard of could at all lead them to such a thought. Hence it is not surprising that they should be stumbled at what they were so utterly unable to comprehend. If so learned and excellent a man as Nicodemus was confounded at the mention of a new birth, we cannot wonder that Disciples of a more uneducated class should be offended at an image so gross, and remote from common apprehension, as that of eating human flesh, and drinking human blood.]

2. The sublimity of the sentiments contained in it—

[They saw that some deep mystery was contained in this image, though they were unable to unravel it. The food of which Jesus spake was not to nourish life, but to give it; and not to the body, but to the soul; and not of one people only, but of the whole world; and not for a few years, but for ever and ever. What could all this mean? The manna had never restored so much as one dead man to life; nor had it kept even Moses himself from dying: yet the flesh and blood of Christ were to do this, and infinitely more, for all who would partake of it, even to the very end of time. “What shall we say to such assertions as these? How can they be credited? How can any man listen to them for a moment?” Yes: such, I say, might well be the murmurings of those who understood not his sayings.]

3. The meanness of him who promulgated these sentiments—

[Had he been a mighty monarch, who, like the kings of the earth, had the command of life and death, his hearers might have annexed some idea to his words. But they were uttered by a poor man, who “had not for himself so much as a place where to lay his head,” and was attended only by a few poor fishermen. What could such a person mean, by asserting things which would appear extravagant beyond all endurance, if uttered by the greatest monarch upon earth? Doubtless the unsuitableness of his pretensions to his present appearance must have tended exceedingly to increase the difficulty of apprehending the just import of his words.]

4. The contrariety of the sentiments to all the notions they had ever imbibed—

[In addition to all the difficulties arising from the figures that were used, an insurmountable objection to the reception of them arose from the sentiments which they seemed intended to convey. If they had any meaning at all, it must be, that, in some way or other, the souls of men were to live by him, and by him alone. But how could this be? What must become of all the ordinances of the Ceremonial Law, and all the precepts of the Moral Law? Must all these, without exception, be put aside; and nothing be of any avail, but the eating of this man’s flesh, and the drinking of his blood?
That this was a particular stumbling-block in their way, is highly probable, from the very question which was put to our Lord, and from which the whole discourse originated. “They said unto him, What shall we do, that we may work the works of God? Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent [Note: ver. 28, 29.].” What! Is this the great work that we have to do? Is faith in him the great duty, by means of which we are to find acceptance with God? What then becomes of Moses, and of all the precepts, whether ceremonial or moral, that he has enjoined?

Let us put ourselves into the place of the people whom our Lord addressed, and take into consideration these various difficulties which they had to contend with; and, though we cannot but severely blame, we shall be inclined, I think, to pity also, the fatal resolution which they adopted on this occasion.]

Address—
1.

Those who have an insight into this mystery—

[“Blessed are the eyes that see the things that ye see.” We have very little conception what privileges we enjoy, even above those who attended the ministry of our Lord himself. We are enabled to compare one part of Scripture with another, and to see both the character of our Lord as God and man, and the accomplishment of the whole Mosaic economy in him. The things, therefore, that were stumbling-blocks to his hearers, are not so to us: and the things which were veiled in impenetrable darkness to them, are as resplendent as the day to us. Nor do we merely comprehend the Gospel as one harmonious whole, revealed at successive periods from the fall of man; but we are enabled to enjoy in our own souls, and to attest, from personal experience, that Christ’s “flesh is meat indeed, and his blood is drink indeed [Note: ver. 55.].” Be thankful then, beloved, for this inestimable benefit; and, as the Israelites in the wilderness subsisted altogether on the bread from heaven, so live ye on “the true bread from heaven,” even “on the Son of God, who hath loved you, and given himself for you.”]

2. Those who are not yet able to receive it—

[Do not imagine, that because many things in the Gospel appear absurd to you, they are therefore of necessity absurd in themselves: for you cannot but know, that, in human sciences, there are many things which, if they were stated to you with the greatest clearness, you would not be able to comprehend: and therefore you may well expect the same in that deepest of all mysteries, the redemption of the world by the blood and righteousness of our incarnate God. The truth is, that this mystery cannot be understood, unless our eyes be opened by the Son of God, and a spiritual understanding be given to us, whereby to discern the things of the Spirit [Note: 1 John 5:20.]. Let me, then, guard you against precipitancy in judging of the things which you are not able to comprehend: but lift up your hearts to God in prayer, that his Spirit may be given you, and that by that Spirit you may be guided into all truth. Perhaps the images of Scripture may offend you; or the declarations of it may appear too harsh. But remember, “It is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I speak unto you, says our Lord, are spirit and life.” Though therefore, if taken in a carnal sense, they may be, as doubtless in many cases they are, foolishness itself [Note: 1 Corinthians 2:14.], yet, viewed according to their true import, they are “the power of God unto salvation, to every one that believeth [Note: Romans 1:16.].”]