Eucharistic Reflections 4

One of the most important themes in the last supper is Bread. Brant Pitre, in his new book, Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist: Unlocking the Secrets of the Last Supper, examines “I am the bread” through the filter of the manna miracle and manna expectation in Judaism.

The Bread of the last supper is not Passover bread, but Manna bread. This makes all the difference in the world for Pitre.

He studies Exodus 16, the manna story, and finds four themes:

1. It was a miracle.
2. It was a double miracle: bread and quail, bread and flesh.
3. It was placed in the Tabernacle.
4. It had a distinctive flavor – the flavor of the Land (honey) because it anticipated life in the Land.

In the Jewish world the manna had three themes:

1. Protological: the manna was there before creation.
2. Heavenly: it was kept in heaven.
3. Messianic: when the Messiah came, manna would be provided.

What then about Jesus and the New Manna? The move here is critical. For Pitre to establish his case he examines the Lord’s Prayer (supersubstantial bread) and John 6, which he takes as Eucharistic. [At no place does he show that the Lord's supper narrative itself is manna-shaped.]

Pitre’s move, whatever low church Protestants think, is common among scholars. That is, John 6 is eucharistic and not simply symbolic. John 6 is about the hope of the coming new Moses and the return of the manna from heaven. In John 6 they are told to eat his flesh and drink his blood, and Jesus makes connection to the new manna. That manna is supernatural, and it is established by the ascending-to-heaven Son of Man, the one who is divine. And the mystery of the resurrection — he gave them his resurrected body.

What happens to the Lord’s Supper when John 6 is seen as eucharistic. It becomes more real and more christologically-shaped.

About Scot McKnight

Scot McKnight is a recognized authority on the New Testament, early Christianity, and the historical Jesus. McKnight, author of more than forty books, is the Professor of New Testament at Northern Seminary in Lombard, IL.

  • Travis Greene

    What does he make of the fact that there is no explicit institution of Eucharist in John?

  • Scot McKnight

    Travis,

    Brant sees it in John 6. That language, in his view, is not figurative but sacramental.

  • Travis Greene

    I mean in terms of the last supper. I agree that John 6 is Eucharistic, but still, it seems pretty significant and mysterious to me why John leaves it out of his last supper account. Or rather, replaces it with the footwashing.

  • paul johnston

    Travis @ 3. I don’t think John 6: 53-56, can be any more explicit. So explicit in fact we are told Jesus lost many disciples at that time. In the synoptic gospels the Eucharistic theology so explicit in John is given specific reference in all three accounts of the last supper. I would say that Eucharist transubstantiation is one of the more compelling and consistent propositions offered by all four Gospels.

  • http://www.resaliens.com Lyn

    Interesting to note (as everyone does, lol), that Jesus’ teaching is preceded by the enacted parable (“sign” vs 14) of having his disciples pick up twelve basketfuls of “manna” (one for each tribe) that came from the 5 barley loaves. This Eucharistic feeding of the Exodus masses is such a powerful image.

  • EricW

    Joel Willitts at Euangelion is joining your chorus:

    http://euangelizomai.blogspot.com/2011/03/jesus-and-eucharist-1.html


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X