expressions, rather than employ so unusual and so harsh a phrase. "And Jesus said to them, I am the bread of life; he that cometh to me (not he that eateth me) shall not hunger, and he that believeth in me (not he that drinketh of me) shall never thirst.” (v. 31.) This care in avoiding, even at the expense of rhetorical propriety, any mention of eating him throughout this portion of our Lord's discourse, is an important circumstance, and will form a strong point of contrast when we examine the phraseology of the second; and it demonstrates how completely our Redeemer kept within the bounds of the usual metaphor, which I have illustrated from the Old Testament and other sources.

Nay, I must notice a still more remarkable reserve in our Saviour's phraseology. Not once, through this section of the discourse, does he use the expression to eat even the bread of life, or the spiritual food which came down from heaven. He simply says that the Father gave them the true bread from heaven (v. 32,) and that the bread of God giveth life to the world. (v. 33.)

But even if the expressions, hitherto used by our Saviour, had not been so consonant with customary language, the pains which he takes to explain his words must have removed any possible obscurity. In the verse which I have just quoted (v. 31,) this explanation is given in terms so clear, as to preclude all danger of misunderstanding. The expression, coming to Christ, being determined by the parallelism in that verse to be the same as the

believing in him of its second member, almost every verse from that to the forty-eighth, now speaks of this doctrine under one or the other of these phrases. (See vv. 36, 37, 40, 44, 45, 47.) The last of these verses contains, as I last evening observed, a complete and striking compendium and epilogue of the whole passage. And it must be remarked, that from the moment he begins to explain his words by literal phrases at v. 35, until he has made that summary at v. 47, after which I have before proved that a new section of his discourse commences, he does not once return to the figure of bread, nor make use of any other such metaphorical expression, but always speaks clearly and simply of belief.

We are therefore authorised to conclude, that whether we consider the customary meaning of the phrases as in use among the Jews of our Saviour's time, or the clear and decisive explanation which he himself gave to them, those who heard him could not possibly misunderstand this portion of his discourse, nor give any other interpretation to the figure there used, than that of being spiritually nourished by the doctrines which he brought down from heaven.

Let us now proceed to examine the phraseology which occurs in the remaining portion of the discourse, that is, from verse 48 to the conclusion of the chapter, in order to discover whether the expressions therein used are such as could possibly continue, in the minds of the hearers, the same

ideas as were excited by the first, or must not rather have been calculated necessarily to suggest one totally distinct. I assert, therefore, that if we accurately consider the phraseology of this portion of the chapter, according to the only manner in which it could possibly be understood by the Jews whom Christ addressed, we must conclude that they would necessarily infer a change of topic in it, and be convinced that the doctrine now delivered was of a real eating of the flesh and drinking of the blood of him who addressed them.

For our Saviour does now, in fact, say to them, "and the bread which I will give is my flesh, for the life of the world." (v. 52.) After this verse, he again and again repeats this extraordinary phraseology, in even more marked terms. "Amen, amen, I say unto you, unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye shall not have life in you. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed; he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, abideth in me and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father, so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your Fathers did eat manna in the desert, and are dead; he that eateth this bread shall live for ever." (vv. 54-60.)

There are various peculiarities in this phrase

ology which oblige us to consider the topic which it treats, as totally distinct from that which occupies the former portion of the chapter.

1. We have seen above, that after our Saviour, in consequence of difficulties found by the Jews, had commenced, at verse 35, to explain his sentiments literally, he never returns again to the figurative expression, until after he closes that section at verse 47. If we suppose him to continue the same topic after this verse, we must believe him, after having spent thirteen verses in doing away with the obscurity of his parabolic expressions, and in giving the explanation of its figures, to return again to his obscure phrases, and to take up once more the use of the same parable, which he had so long abandoned for its literal explanation.

2. We have seen likewise how carefully our Lord avoids, throughout the first part, the harsh expression to eat him, even where the turn of his phrase seemed to invite him to use it; on the contrary, in the latter section, he employs it without scruple, and even repeats it again and again. This is a remarkable difference of phraseology between the two sections.

3. So long as Christ speaks of himself as the object of faith, under the image of a spiritual food, he represents this food as given by the Father, (vv. 32, 33, 39, 40, 44); but after verse 47, he speaks of the food, which he now describes, as to be given by himself. "The bread which I will give, is my flesh for the life of the world." (v. 52.)

"How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” (v. 53.) This marked difference in the giver of the two communications, proposed in the two divisions of the discourse, points out that a different gift is likewise promised. If faith is the gift in both, there is no ground for the distinction made in them; if there is a transition to a real eating, the whole is clear. While we consider Jesus Christ and his doctrine as the object of our faith, he is justly described as sent and presented to us by the Father; when we view him as giving his flesh to eat, it is by the precious bounty of his own love towards us.

4. The difference here discernible between the givers, is no less marked regarding the effects of the gift. To both are attributed the having everlasting life, and being raised up at the last day. (vv. 40, 44, 47, 52, 55, 59). But beyond this, there is a marked distinction. In the first part of the discourse, our B. Saviour always speaks of our coming to him, through the attraction or drawing of the Father. (vv. 35, 36, 44, 45.) Now, this expression is ever used when speaking of faith, to which we apply that part of his discourse. For example: Come unto me all you that labour,” (Mat. xi. 28, cf. 27);-"Every one that cometh to me, and heareth my words, and doth them, I will show you to whom he is like," (Lu. vi. 47);-" Search the Scriptures, for you think in them to have everlasting life; and the same are they that give testimony of me; and ye will not come to me, that ye may have life," (Jo. v. 40); "If any man thirst,