Jesus in John 6 said the bread he would give to give life to the world was his flesh and his flesh was real food and his blood real drink.  Whoever eats and drinks has eternal life.  Roman Catholicism thinks this refers to its Mass where Jesus supposedly through the priest turns bread and wine into his body and blood without anything seeming to have physically changed. 

The Mass re-enacts Jesus saying bread was his body and wine his blood at his last supper with his disciples before his arrest and crucifixion.  John does not mention that though he does talk about the last supper.

John 13:1, King James Version

Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end.

This hints that an act of love was about to take place.  It had not taken place already.  The Church imagines that Jesus had already given his body and blood in the form of bread and wine proving his love.  Other versions say how his love was perfect and now he showed them how perfect it was.  It is obvious that it is referring NOT to bread and wine being turned into Jesus as communion but to the footwashing.  Footwashing is the nearest John has to communion.

And supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him;

Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he was come from God, and went to God;

He riseth from supper, and laid aside his garments; and took a towel, and girded himself.

After that he poureth water into a bason, and began to wash the disciples' feet, and to wipe them with the towel wherewith he was girded.

Then cometh he to Simon Peter: and Peter saith unto him, Lord, dost thou wash my feet?

Jesus answered and said unto him, What I do thou knowest not now; but thou shalt know hereafter.

Peter saith unto him, Thou shalt never wash my feet. Jesus answered him, If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me.

This washing of feet is Jesus' act of love.  Had Peter really received Jesus in the form of bread and wine Jesus could not tell him he would have no part with him.  The footwashing would happen before communion not after.  Jesus would not tell a man who was united to him by communion that he needed to be in union with him as if he were not.

Simon Peter saith unto him, Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head.

Peter wants to get close to Jesus indicating that nothing happened at the supper to make that happen.  Jesus did not give him his body and blood.

10 Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all.

11 For he knew who should betray him; therefore said he, Ye are not all clean.

12 So after he had washed their feet, and had taken his garments, and was set down again, he said unto them, Know ye what I have done to you?

13 Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am.

14 If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another's feet.

15 For I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you.

16 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him.

17 If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them.

18 I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: but that the scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me.

19 Now I tell you before it come, that, when it is come to pass, ye may believe that I am he.

Faith is necessary to benefit from communion.  He hints that they had no faith.  There either was no communion or faith does not matter if you are receiving.

20 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth me; and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.

21 When Jesus had thus said, he was troubled in spirit, and testified, and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.

22 Then the disciples looked one on another, doubting of whom he spake.

23 Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.

24 Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him, that he should ask who it should be of whom he spake.

25 He then lying on Jesus' breast saith unto him, Lord, who is it?

26 Jesus answered, He it is, to whom I shall give a sop, when I have dipped it. And when he had dipped the sop, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon.

27 And after the sop Satan entered into him. Then said Jesus unto him, That thou doest, do quickly.

It is reasonable to suppose that the bread was left over and if Jesus turned it into his body earlier Judas was now getting communion.  The Jews dipped into bitter herbs but did Jesus dip into the wine that Catholics believe was turned into his blood?

Satan entering in with the sop implies that there was no power in it from God.  It was not the body of Christ.  Was it the Eucharist?  If so the Eucharist is only a symbol and has no power.  Satan should have been in scheming Judas before that.  So why does the gospel say he got Satan with the sop?  The notion is that even if Satan influenced Judas before, now he personally chose to dwell in him.  The idea could be that Jesus gave Satan to Judas with the sop. 

It is the only interpretation that is possible.

It is usually assumed that Judas was not possessed but merely listening to Satan.  John speaks of Satan tempting him earlier.  Now he speaks of Satan getting right into his heart.  This does not refer to Satan controlling Judas but Satan dwelling in him like Jesus supposedly dwells in his people.  It is like the presence of Jesus the Catholics seek in the Mass.

John uses poetry and hints.  The bread could have been that the other gospels said Jesus called his body.  Even if Jesus did not use those words and John knew it he could have been referring to the same bread.  The hidden meaning is that trying to find Jesus in real food only lets Satan in.  The Catholic Mass then in that case would be demonic.

28 Now no man at the table knew for what intent he spake this unto him.

29 For some of them thought, because Judas had the bag, that Jesus had said unto him, Buy those things that we have need of against the feast; or, that he should give something to the poor.

30 He then having received the sop went immediately out: and it was night.

31 Therefore, when he was gone out, Jesus said, Now is the Son of man glorified, and God is glorified in him.

32 If God be glorified in him, God shall also glorify him in himself, and shall straightway glorify him.

33 Little children, yet a little while I am with you. Ye shall seek me: and as I said unto the Jews, Whither I go, ye cannot come; so now I say to you.

In the context of godly spiritual matters, Jesus says he will leave them and they will see him.  But if they find him in the Eucharist then there won't be a problem.  Jesus talks as if there is no Eucharist.

34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

35 By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

As communion is supposed to unite us in Jesus to one another, it is strange that Jesus says this when supper is over.  The only explanation is that the supper was not about bread and wine turning into Jesus.

36 Simon Peter said unto him, Lord, whither goest thou? Jesus answered him, Whither I go, thou canst not follow me now; but thou shalt follow me afterwards.

37 Peter said unto him, Lord, why cannot I follow thee now? I will lay down my life for thy sake.

38 Jesus answered him, Wilt thou lay down thy life for my sake? Verily, verily, I say unto thee, The cock shall not crow, till thou hast denied me thrice.


Is this chapter written in such a way as to deny the claims made about the last supper by some Christians - Catholics in particular?  To argue that the bread can put the Devil in you may indicate that if you want to receive anybody in the bread and wine it will be him.  Jesus speaks of being intimately united with his disciples.  If you need communion to forge and maintain a union, that is a sign you don't really have Jesus in the first place.  Using communion as a sacrament is satanic and only admits one person, not Jesus but Satan.

Christians assume that the gospel of John just mentions that Jesus had a supper with his friends meaning the Passover supper where he established the Eucharist.  As you can read in the book, Blaming Jesus for Jehovah by Robert Price, there is no evidence that the supper mentioned in John is a passover at all.  They were eating a meal and then Judas is sent away and they think it is to prepare for the Passover meal (John 13:29).  That only makes sense if the next day was the Passover day.  And the Jews still have to eat their passover according to John.  It contradicts the gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke that the last supper where Jesus took bread and a cup saying they were his body and blood was a passover meal. 

This information is key to understanding that John 6 which is imagined by Catholics to refer to bread and wine turning into Jesus is on about Jesus being spiritual food and drink and nothing more.  They read too much into the text.  John is careful to keep it disconnected to the last supper stories of bread and wine being called the body and blood of Jesus.

No Copyright