I Am the Bread of Life

The scripture referred to is John 6: 48-59, 66-69.

Why do we give up things at Lent? Are we, as one Internet meme suggests, getting a second chance at keeping all those New Year's resolutions we've already failed at? Are we trying to exercise and strengthen our willpower? Are we trying to be holier than we usually are? Whatever the merits of those ideas, the ultimate purpose of Lent is to get closer to Jesus. Giving up stuff that gets in the way helps. So does taking up or fortifying spiritual disciplines that give us time to focus on Jesus and meditate on his words. As an aid to this, during these Wednesdays in Lent and on Maundy Thursday, I would like us to consider the 7 "I Am" statements made by Jesus and recorded in John.

John's gospel is usually acknowledged by scholars to be the last of the canonical 4 to be written. And even a non-scholar can tell that John's gospel is different from the other 3. I'm not going to go into all the differences, just the three that are primary. First, John doesn't cover things the other 3 gospels do but instead gives us a lot of supplementary material. For instance the other 3 gospels, which scholars call the synoptic gospels from the Greek word meaning "with one eye," all narrate Jesus' baptism by John. They tell us a bit of John's message, then tell us how Jesus came to John, was baptized by him and how, upon emerging from the water, he heard God's voice and saw the Spirit alight on him in the form of a dove. John the gospel writer, after finishing his theological prologue, goes right to the John the Baptist and what he said about Jesus and about the dove descending on him but nowhere actually says John baptized Jesus! It's like he assumes you know this. The same thing goes with the last supper. Only John tells us about the foot washing and he devotes many chapters to what Jesus said during and after the meal but John never gives us Jesus saying, "This is my body" or "This is my blood." Again, it's as if he assumes you know that part.

In the same way, only John gives us the aftermath of the feeding of the 5000, namely, that the crowd tried to make Jesus king. Only John tells us of the raising of Lazarus and how that was the tipping point when it came to Caiaphas and the religious leaders deciding to kill Jesus. If it weren't for John telling us about the 3 Passovers that took place during Jesus' ministry, we might have deduced from the synoptics alone that it lasted only 6 months.

So it looks like John took it upon himself to fill in the background and other important information about Jesus that the other earlier gospels hadn't covered. And this includes a number of long theological monologues. That's the second difference I want to point out. In the synoptics Jesus speaks in public mostly in aphorisms and parables. In John he uses extended metaphors and explicates them at length. The synoptics tell us Jesus explained things fully in private to his disciples. In John it looks like we have some of those longer teachings.

The third thing you need to know about John is his repeated use of the number seven. He structures his gospel around 7 signs or key miracles, 7 "I am" statements and 7 discourses. (Revelation is another book which is structured around the number 7.) In the Bible seven symbolizes totality or completeness. This begins with Genesis 1 in which God creates the world in 6 days and ceases on the seventh. The Sabbath is therefore made holy, that is, set apart for God's purpose. In John, too, we see Sabbath and creation imagery, especially around the resurrection.

John doesn't, however, lead you to believe that Jesus only did these 7 miracles or said these 7 discourses. In the epilogue he writes that Jesus did many more things, which, if catalogued, would be more than the world could hold. But he selected 7 things Jesus said and did that, to him, summed up who Jesus was and what he said.

So let's start with the first of the "I am" statements to occur in John. And I want to remind you that "I am," which is one word in either Hebrew or Greek, is a version of God's covenant name. When he revealed himself to Moses at the burning bush, God identified himself using a form of the Hebrew verb "to be." It is usually translated "I am that I am." Some scholars point out it could be translated "I will be who I will be" or even "I will be there" with the implication that he will be there for his people, for us. But traditionally, and especially in the popular Greek translation of Jesus' day, the Septuagint, it is translated "I am." And John is so sensitive to symbolism it is hard to imagine that he does not see these as statements of Jesus' divinity. We know Jesus' opponents certainly got the implication when he said, "Before Abraham was, I am."

The first "I am" statement we come across in John is the one that comes after the feeding of the 5000. In chapter 6, we learn that after being fed, the crowd searched for Jesus the next day in order to make him king. And at first when Jesus tells them of the bread of life, they desperately want it. Until he reveals that he is the bread of life and they must eat his flesh and drink his blood. John's readers would recognize this as a reference to the Eucharist. But the original hearers are just confused and grossed out.

This is before the last supper, so why would Jesus say this at this time?

Part of the reason could be the effect is does have. People turn away from Jesus. They don't get it and they aren't interested in sticking around to delve more deeply into this odd teaching. Now mind you, these folks knew Jesus had fed them miraculously. But when he offered them what they didn't want, some deep spiritual truths expressed as a difficult metaphor, they turned away. Jesus had diagnosed their problem correctly. They just wanted physical food and a political king. They weren't interested in being fed or ruled in a spiritual sense.

Another part of the reason is that Jesus is planting the idea of his body and blood as food and drink early so it doesn't come off as totally unprecedented when he uses it at the last supper. It is mentioned in this chapter that Passover was near. So a year before his death, Jesus introduces the idea of communion. John likes to underline how Jesus had everything under control and planned for.

So what was Jesus saying by calling himself the bread of life? He starts off by contrasting himself to the manna given in the wilderness during the Exodus. Moses didn't do that, he points out; it was God who gave and now gives bread from heaven. The people want this bread and ask what do they have to do to get it. Jesus says all they have to do is believe in him. Trusting in him means eternal life and resurrection at the last day. Because Jesus is himself the true bread from heaven.

The way Jesus and his opponents are arguing sounds odd to us but it's common in rabbinic discussions of the interpretation of scripture. And Jesus says that getting this point is decisive in following him. People who only see things from an earthly perspective aren't going to get any benefit from Jesus.

A lot of humor can be had at the expense of those who take everything literally. You see it in Plato, in Shakespeare, even in modern sitcoms. It is a key ingredient in most jokes about kids. I like the one where the family comes home from Ash Wednesday and the little boy goes up to his room. Then he comes out again and goes to his mom and says, "Is what the preacher said true? That we come from dust and return to dust?" His mother says, "Yes, that's true." "Well," the boy says, "you better look under my bed. Someone's either coming or going."

But in this instance in John, the effects of not being able to grasp any other meaning than the literal one is tragic. Rather than saying to themselves, "What Jesus is proposing is cannibalism. There must be another meaning to what he is saying," his listeners give up. Nobody, including the Pharisees, thinks of the upcoming Passover, where the matzo is so central that an alternate name for Passover in scripture is the Feast of Unleavened Bread. 4 cups of wine are drunk during the Passover meal and yet no one, including the religious scribes, thinks of Isaiah calling wine as the "blood of the grape." And then there's the lamb whose flesh is consumed and its blood smeared on the door to save God's people.

Even outside the context of Passover, bread and wine were the most basic food and drink there were. Bread was an early product of agriculture. It was nutritious, filling and portable if you were on a journey and had no time to stop and prepare a full meal. Wine was often drunk because you didn't always have clean drinkable water, preferably from a spring.

The poorest person there would depend on these staples for life. Jesus is saying that he is just as vital for eternal life. And merely looking at food and drink is not enough to nourish you; you must get them into you. In the same way, Jesus needs to be in you to nourish your spiritually. We see a lot of people who drape themselves with the trappings of religion but it's only skin deep. We see rappers accepting awards for songs demeaning women and glorifying violence who have huge gold crosses around their necks, and thank Christ for their win, but don't seem to have Jesus in their hearts. We hear politicians who always have the name of Jesus on their lips but exhibit scant evidence of him in their lives. We see motorists with Jesus fish on their cars but who still drive like hell. If we took these people at face value, we'd say they were Christians. But it's all surface. They don't seem to have let Jesus inside.

This weekend our ceiling fan and only light fixture in our living room shorted out. So I picked up another and was putting it together and wiring and hanging it when suddenly I could feel my energy just drain out of me as if someone tapped me like a keg and opened the spigot. And I realized I hadn't eaten for several hours. I stopped what I was doing, asked my wife if she was hungry and ran out to get food for us.

How often do we find ourselves running on empty spiritually and yet resist stopping and feeding on Jesus? I don't necessarily mean taking the Eucharist but praying, reading God's word, meditating on his love and faithfulness. Food is energy and so is Jesus. One of the most basic instincts we have, seen in a newborn who has never taken anything by mouth, is to ingest nutrition. Most of us never feel real hunger pangs but how often do we neglect to fill our hearts with the power we know is in Jesus?

So this Lent, if you wish to fast from physical food as a spiritual discipline, that's fine. But don't skip feeding on Jesus. Don't go a day without reading his words, listening to him, talking to him, asking his forgiveness and help, praising and thanking him. By all means, give up the junk food but don't skimp on the bread of life. And don't be like a spiritual infant and end up with more of Jesus on your outside than on your inside. Only with Jesus inside you will you get any real good out of him.