Commentary for (John X, 1-9; Hebrews XIII, 7-16; John X, 9-16; Acts VIII, 40

Oleksandr Zhabenko 🇬🇧
Christ Is Risen!
🌞

Since in the work published at the link:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/02082025.html
and even earlier in others, published at the links:
https://churchandsociety.org.ua/pdf/projects/zbirnyk.pdf
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/17082024.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/12112025.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/27112024.html
it is written that the use of prepositions has important significance for the correct understanding of important and topical questions, particularly the question of power, I am writing comments regarding the use of precisely these prepositions. As advice regarding reading what is written — one can read the verse in translation or/and original (whoever has such possibility), and then the corresponding comment regarding prepositions here. Then it is necessary to understand which part of the verse the comment concerns, and also to consider what essential for understanding it affirms — or more rarely — denies. Such thoughtful reading helps to deepen understanding and protects from the mentioned mistakes.

I prepared an improved version of my research, the presentation of which is available at the link:
https://www.facebook.com/Oleksandr.S.Zhabenko/posts/
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/uk/commentaries/vystup-2025-hypo-genitive-Romans-XIII_1.pdf

The research material is currently being prepared for publication. I hope, God willing, to present fuller results later after the publication comes out.

I will update the list of references regarding prepositions at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/02082025.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/uk/commentaries/Pryjmennyky.html
the latter — once or twice a month (in Ukrainian), to keep the text version current and up to date.

Translated from Ukrainian by Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Anthropic AI), with subsequent editing by me.

Strong's references (note: according to Strong) in the translation of the original text mean that the word is taken from Strong's dictionary, and the specific meaning was chosen following the translation and commentary by Google Gemini.

Matins:
(John X, 1-9)
More concerning the readings from the Gospel see at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/09052025.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/28072023.html
https://www.facebook.com/Oleksandr.S.Zhabenko/posts/

Liturgy:
Of the Hieromartyr Macarius, Metropolitan of Kyiv and all Rus':
(Hebrews XIII, 7-16)
Concerning the readings from the Epistle see at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/06122024.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/14052023.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/22052023.html

(John X, 9-16)
More concerning the readings from the Gospel see at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/25012025.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/14052023.html
https://www.facebook.com/Oleksandr.S.Zhabenko/posts/

(Acts VIII, 40–IX, 19)
Acts VIII, 40 — 'Φίλιππος δὲ εὑρέθη εἰς Ἄζωτον' — 'Philippos de eurethe eis Azoton' - but Philip was found into (at) Azotus. The preposition 'eis' is used here unusually. In the ordinary sense found where would require 'en' rather than 'eis'. Here what is spoken of is a divine relocation, movement — something similar to quantum physics with its tunnel transitions: Philip was invisible to people until he was found at Azotus. Similar properties belong to quantum objects — they can have mixed states, and there is also the principle of superposition of states, which in the case of discrete spectra means that a particle can be in a superposition of possible states, but upon observation and measurement only a discrete set of values — a discrete spectrum — can be obtained. Philip was found (fixed, observed) at Azotus, and before that was invisible to observers (including the Ethiopian). One may also understand this as meaning that Philip appeared to the people at Azotus, having been carried by the Holy Spirit — that is, he appeared in order to be found there, in order to preach the good news there — that is, the preposition 'eis' indicates here that the meeting of people and he found a point of contact at the moment of the miraculous transference and appearance. He was transported in order to be found and to preach the good news and act there further. 'εἰς Καισάριαν' - 'eis Kaisarian' - into Caesarea. Whither. Here Philip already travels in the ordinary manner. Here I consulted Google Gemini Pro about the soundness of the thought concerning 'eis' here. Google Gemini Pro provided additional important details, which I cite:

The use of the preposition of direction with a verb of state in this text is not accidental.
1. The grammatical dimension: Constructio Praegnans
From the standpoint of ancient Greek grammar, what you have noticed has a special name — constructio praegnans (the pregnant, or compressed construction). This is a grammatical device whereby a verb of rest (in this case εὑρέθη — 'was found') is combined with a preposition of movement (εἰς — 'in', 'to', indicating direction).
Such a construction compresses two actions into a single phase. Literally this means: Philip was suddenly transported to Azotus and came to be (was found) there. Therefore the understanding that the preposition εἰς emphasises the very process of miraculous transference, which concluded with the 'finding', is linguistically accurate.

Here I asked about other examples of constructio praegnans in Scripture. Here are Google Gemini Pro's examples:

In the texts of the New Testament there are a whole series of vivid examples of constructio praegnans. The authors of Scripture, who thought in biblical categories of dynamism (where a word, event, or person is always in motion), frequently used this grammatical device to compress two phases of action — movement towards a goal and remaining in it — into a single syntactic construction.
This most often occurs through the combination of a verb of state/rest with the preposition of movement εἰς (in, to, in the direction of). Here are several expressive examples:
1. Spatial compression (Journey + Settlement)
The most common type of this construction concerns physical movement, where the author omits the very fact of the journey, focusing on its final result.
Matthew 2:23: καὶ ἐλθὼν κατῴκησεν εἰς πόλιν λεγομένην Ναζαρέτ
Literally: '…settled in [the direction of] a city called Nazareth'.
Compressed action: Mary and Joseph made a journey to Nazareth and remained to live there. The verb κατοικέω (to settle, to permanently dwell) describes permanence and does not imply movement, but the preposition εἰς preserves the memory of the preceding purposeful journey.
Luke 21:37: ἐξερχόμενος δὲ ηὐλίζετο εἰς τὸ ὄρος τὸ καλούμενον Ἐλαιῶν
Literally: '…going out, he lodged on [the direction of] the mountain called the Mount of Olives'.
Compressed action: Jesus every evening would leave Jerusalem, go to the Mount of Olives, and there settle for the night (αὐλίζομαι).
2. The dynamic of salvation (Flight + Safety)
A very profound theological example is found in texts that describe salvation not simply as a static fact but as a process of movement into a safe space.
1 Peter 3:20: …κατασκευαζομένης κιβωτοῦ εἰς ἣν ὀλίγοι, τοῦτ' ἔστιν ὀκτὼ ψυχαί, διεσώθησαν δι' ὕδατος
Literally: '…an ark was being built, into which [εἰς ἣν] a few... were saved through water'.
Compressed action: The verb διασῴζω means 'to save', 'to preserve whole' (a state of safety). However, the construction indicates that Noah and his family, in the act of saving themselves, first entered into the ark, and it was precisely through this spatial displacement that they preserved their lives inside it.
3. Abstract and conceptual compression (Transmission + Establishment)
Constructio praegnans is used not only for physical bodies but also for the spreading of ideas, abstract concepts, or testimonies.
Hebrews 2:3: …ἥτις ἀρχὴν λαβοῦσα λαλεῖσθαι διὰ τοῦ Κυρίου, ὑπὸ τῶν ἀκουσάντων εἰς ἡμᾶς ἐβεβαιώθη
Literally: '…which [salvation], having begun to be preached by the Lord, was confirmed to us [εἰς ἡμᾶς] by those who heard'.
Compressed action: The verb βεβαιόω (to make firm, to guarantee, to establish) describes an unshakeable state. The author of the epistle shows a multidimensional process: the Gospel was brought to the next generation (direction) and firmly took root in them, becoming their foundation (state).
Acts 23:11: …ὡς γὰρ διεμαρτύρω τὰ περὶ ἐμοῦ εἰς Ἰερουσαλήμ, οὕτω σε δεῖ καὶ εἰς Ῥώμην μαρτυρῆσαι
Literally: '…for as you testified concerning me in [to] Jerusalem, so it is necessary for you to testify also in [to] Rome'.
Compressed action: The act of testifying (μαρτυρέω) is treated as a kind of expansion. Paul came to Jerusalem to testify there, and now must make the same journey to Rome, so that his message may 'enter' the capital of the empire and establish itself there as a fact.
In all these cases the Koine grammar allows the authors to avoid verbosity (of the kind 'he went there and then remained there'), creating a very dynamic text where movement and its result merge into one.

Here I added information known to me from my research concerning the spreading of rumours and information — where 'eis' is also frequently used where 'en' might seem more natural. Google Gemini Pro provided several examples with commentary:

This is indeed so, and it opens yet another fascinating dimension of ancient and biblical thinking, where information is perceived not as passive data but as a dynamic entity.
Where in modern languages it seems more natural to us to say that a rumour spreads in some medium (as if pouring into a closed vessel, which would require the preposition of state ἐν), the Greek of the New Testament uses the preposition of direction and penetration εἰς (in, into, to).
Here is why this occurs and how it appears in the texts:
1. Information as a wave and penetration
In the worldview of that time (especially under the influence of the Semitic concept of the word — the Hebrew davar, meaning simultaneously both 'word' and 'deed/event'), the spoken word is not static. It is an active agent possessing its own energy.
When news or a rumour spreads, it acts as a wave penetrating a new medium. The preposition εἰς emphasises precisely this vectorial process of information penetrating into the consciousness of people or into a geographical space.
Several vivid examples:
Matthew 9:26: καὶ ἐξῆλθεν ἡ φήμη αὕτη εἰς ὅλην τὴν γῆν ἐκείνην
Literally: 'And this fame went out into [the direction of / inside] all that land'.
Meaning: The fame (φήμη) did not simply exist in (ἐν) the land — it carried out an expansion, 'broke through' into that territory and captured it.
John 21:23: Ἐξῆλθεν οὖν οὗτος ὁ λόγος εἰς τοὺς ἀδελφούς…
Literally: 'This saying went out therefore to / into [εἰς] the brothers…' (what is spoken of is the rumour that the beloved disciple would not die).
Meaning: The information here is depicted almost as an independent guest who entered the community of brothers and spread among them.
Mark 1:28: καὶ ἐξῆλθεν ἡ ἀκοὴ αὐτοῦ εὐθὺς πανταχοῦ εἰς ὅλην τὴν περίχωρον τῆς Γαλιλαίας
Literally: 'And news about him went out immediately everywhere into [εἰς] all the surrounding region of Galilee'.
2. Resonance and expansion (Romans 10:18)
This is especially well seen when the apostle Paul cites Psalm 18, speaking of the spreading of the Gospel as a sound wave:
Εἰς πᾶσαν τὴν γῆν ἐξῆλθεν ὁ φθόγγος αὐτῶν, καὶ εἰς τὰ πέρατα τῆς οἰκουμένης τὰ ῥήματα αὐτῶν.
'Into all the earth went their sound, and to the ends of the inhabited world their words'.
Here the sound (φθόγγος) and words (ῥήματα) have a clear trajectory. They are not stationary; they penetrate space, reaching its farthest bounds.
3. Philosophical-philological summary
Your sense of the text is entirely accurate. For us today information is often the contents of a database (where the preposition of location ἐν would be appropriate). For the ancient person, news is an unfolding action, an event moving from source to hearer.
The use of εἰς with verbs such as ἐξέρχομαι (to go out) regarding rumours is yet another variant of the merging of action and result. A word goes out from someone's lips and immediately penetrates (εἰς) another space. This is a very cinematic and — returning to your earlier metaphor — purely 'wave-like' way of describing reality.

Acts IX, 1 — 'εἰς τοὺς μαθητὰς τοῦ κυρίου' — 'eis tous mathetas tou kyriou' - against the disciples of the Lord. The preposition 'eis' indicates here the directedness of Saul's disposition — towards whom it was directed, with respect to whom, against whom.

Acts IX, 2 — 'ᾐτήσατο παρ' αὐτοῦ ἐπιστολὰς εἰς Δαμασκὸν πρὸς τὰς συναγωγάς' — 'etesato par autou epistolas eis Damaskon pros tas synagogas' - he [Saul] also asked from beside him [high priest] letters to Damascus to the synagogues. The preposition 'para' in its form before the following vowel here with the genitive case. This construction is used concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and also concerning the human nature of Jesus Christ. See more at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/uk/commentaries/Pryjmennyky.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/02082025.html
Here this indicates that this circumstance served the conversion of Saul by Christ and his reception of the Holy Spirit. Yes, the very scheme of Saul was against Christ and His disciples, contrary to God's will — but let us recall, for example, the temptation of Christ in the desert after His Baptism. The Holy Spirit led Him there, in particular so that He might there overcome the temptations of the devil — that is, this situation was desired (though for entirely different reasons) by both God and the devil. See more at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/10012026.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/11012025.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/21022026.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/09042026.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/17042025.html
Had Saul not set out with the letters to Damascus, he would not have arrived there after the appearance of Christ. To remain in Jerusalem for him would have meant that everyone would have avoided him, for they knew that he had previously been a persecutor — in particular an ardent witness of the martyrdom of the first-deacon Stephen. Therefore these letters and the journey were also part of God's design for Saul, for it was precisely in this way that the Lord converted him and sent Ananias to join him in reception by the Church as one of the faithful. Therefore the preposition 'para' here points to God's Providence through the Incarnation of the Son of God and the action of the Holy Spirit. 'εἰς Ἱερουσαλήμ' — 'eis Hierousalem' — into Jerusalem. Whither.

Acts IX, 3 — 'ἐν δὲ τῷ πορεύεσθαι' — 'en de to poreuesthai' - but in the going; but as he was going. When. 'περιήστραψεν φῶς ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ' - 'periestrapsen phos ek tou ouranou' - a light shone around (with a sudden flash, like lightning) from the heaven. Whence.

Acts IX, 6 — 'εἰς τὴν πόλιν' — 'eis ten polin' - into the city. Whither. The city with the definite article — Damascus is meant, whither Saul was heading.

Acts IX, 8 — 'ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς' — 'apo tes ges' - from the ground. The preposition 'apo' indicates here that Saul was no longer lying on the ground. 'εἰς Δαμασκόν' - 'eis Damaskon' - into Damascus. Whither.

Acts IX, 10, 19 — 'ἐν Δαμασκῷ' — 'en Damasko' - in Damascus. Where.

Acts IX, 12 — 'ἐν οἰκίᾳ Ἰούδα' — 'en oikia Iouda' - in the house of Judas. Where.

Acts IX, 13 — 'ἀπὸ πολλῶν' — 'apo pollon' - from many. The preposition 'apo' indicates here that these testimonies were impartial, objective, and true. 'ἐν Ἱερουσαλήμ' - 'en Hierousalem' - in Jerusalem. Where.

Acts IX, 14 — 'ἐξουσίαν παρὰ τῶν ἀρχιερέων' — 'exousian para ton arkhiereon' - authority from beside the chief priests. The preposition 'para' here with the genitive case. This construction is used concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and also concerning the human nature of Jesus Christ. See more above concerning verse Acts IX, 2 and at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/uk/commentaries/Pryjmennyky.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/02082025.html
Here the thought is evidently analogous to verse Acts IX, 2, as examined above in detail. This obtained authority, although Saul wished to use it against the faithful and against Christ in them, nonetheless helped him to begin the ministry of the apostle Paul. Thus again — desired by God, because it leads to Saul's salvation and to his becoming the apostle Paul.

Acts IX, 17 — 'εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν' — 'eis ten oikian' - into the house. The same house of Judas mentioned earlier. Whither. 'Ἰησοῦς ὁ ὀφθείς σοι ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ ᾗ ἤρχου' - 'Iesous ho ophtheis soi en te hodo he erkhou' - Jesus, Who was seen by you on the road (along the road) by which you were coming. What is spoken of is Saul's experience — now as a participant in the appearance of Christ.

Acts IX, 18 — 'ἀπὸ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν' — 'apo ton ophthalmon' - from the eyes. The preposition 'apo' indicates here that the blindness departed completely, wholly, and immediately.

A very rich passage concerning the conversion of Saul and how he became the apostle Paul.

Due to limited space I shall dwell only on a few important moments.

Acts IX, 1 — 'εμπνεων' — 'empneon' — from 'εν' (in) + 'πνεω' (to breathe) — was breathing; was breathing in. This may have two different meanings in terms of content, both of which are possible and tell us much about Saul (the future apostle Paul):

1) Was breathing in — that is, he was under the influence of and absorbing from his immediate surroundings. Saul was raised as a zealot of Jewish traditions and understanding (a fanatical zealot).
2) Was breathing — that is, was living by this; this was the meaning of his life and activity; this inspired him to active deeds. In the parallel passages where he himself speaks about these events (XXII, 3-21 and XXVI, 4-23), Paul emphasises that he acted tenaciously in his error and with great zeal.

In the verse Acts XXVI, 11 the word 'εμμαινομενος' — 'emmainomenos' is used — derived from 'εν' + 'μαινομαι' — was beside himself with fury, was raging in anger; and in both parallel accounts in the first person Paul testifies of himself that he acted in order to punish for dishonour, from considerations of ambitious honour (possibly he considered that believing in the Resurrection of the crucified Messiah was a dishonour for Jews).

The Lord however, through His appearance and subsequently through healing by the apostle Ananias, transformed Saul so that he became the apostle Paul.

Subsequently he always recalled with repentance his ignorance and himself suffered greatly for Christ in constant labour and endurance, ultimately receiving also the martyr's crown in Rome.

Comparison of the parallel passages shows that the companions of Saul on the way to Damascus were partial witnesses of the appearance, though it is unclear what they observed and what they did not notice.

Through this partiality Jesus shows Saul the human limitation — and in particular within himself.

Also important is the dialogue of Ananias with Jesus in the vision. Ananias expresses his thoughts but does not argue with Christ. Christ receives the human considerations as appropriate (as anticipated) and does not reproach Ananias. By this He reveals also the purpose of the revelation — not to reproach Ananias for his human considerations, but to send him on a special task and mission.

In the encounter of Ananias and Saul I shall also note the latter's trust in God: Behold, I have gone astray… I have become blind... (O) Lead me, Lord!.

See also the work by the link:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/renewal-of-Peter.html

More concerning the reading see at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/09052025.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/24052024.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/05052023.html

(John VI, 48-54)
John VI, 49 — 'ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ' — 'en te eremo' - in the desert. Where.

John VI, 50 — 'οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἄρτος ὁ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καταβαίνων, ἵνα τις ἐξ αὐτοῦ φάγῃ καὶ μὴ ἀποθάνῃ' — 'houtos estin ho artos ho ek tou ouranou katabainon, hina tis ex autou phage kai me apothane' - this is the bread (Bread) that descends from the heaven, so that anyone who eats from it may not die. The first preposition 'ek' indicates here whence that bread (Bread) descends and whence it originates; the second, in its form before the following vowel, indicates that the faithful partake of the Holy Gifts from the common bread and from the common cup — that is, they become participants and communicants of the Last Supper, and through this are united with Christ Himself, becoming the Church — His mystical Body. This same preposition also indicates that the faithful are thereby united with Christ, with one another, with the Church, forming a community. We are called, therefore, to preserve this unity as actual, living, effective, ever-present, and constant for ever. See in particular at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/09042026.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/10042026.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/17042025.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/18042025.html
The words of Christ also have here the meaning of a comparison and lead towards the subsequent truths further in the text of the Gospel. Even the miraculous manna from the heaven does not bestow eternal life, but the true Bread of life bestows such eternal life — it transmits life to the faithful.

John VI, 51 — 'ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ἄρτος ὁ ζῶν ὁ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καταβάς· ἐάν τις φάγῃ ἐκ τοῦ ἐμοῦ (other manuscripts give 'ek toutou tou', that is from this) ἄρτου, ζήσει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα' — 'ego eimi ho artos ho zon ho ek tou ouranou katabas, hean tis phage ek tou emou (other manuscripts give 'ek toutou tou', see just above) artou, zesei eis ton aiona' - I am the Bread that lives, that descended (descends) from the heaven — if anyone eats from Me (other manuscripts give 'from this', see above) the bread, they will live for ever (for eternity). Here what is important is that Christ transmits life to people through their partaking of Him as the Bread of life. He lives — and as the living Bread from the heaven transmits life to people. Manna, and still more ordinary food, does not in fact transmit eternal life, for it is not living and does not have eternal life, and therefore cannot even transmit eternal life. See also concerning the words of the apostle Paul at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/15022026.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/19022023.html

John VI, 53 — 'οὐκ ἔχετε ζωὴν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς' — 'ouk ekhete zoen en heautois' - you do not have life in yourselves. That is, there is nothing in the person's nature that can bestow or secure for them blessed eternal life — this is truly a gift of God's grace and of communion with God. See in particular concerning perichoresis and communion with God at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/10042026.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/18042025.html
in particular concerning John XIV, 20, XVI, 23, and others there. There is also nothing outside of Christ that can bestow blessed eternal life. The tree of life mentioned in the book of Genesis did not bestow blessed eternal life, but only bodily immortality. The Lord providentially did not grant people bodily immortality, so that they might later through Christ inherit blessed eternal life rather than one of suffering.

The words I am… cannot be understood entirely literally. That is, this is not a definition of Jesus. One cannot place an equals sign (=) between Jesus and the Bread of life. Similarly one cannot place an equals sign between Jesus and the good shepherd, the door of the sheep, the light of the world, and the like. One cannot do so if for no other reason than that the Son of God Himself, our Lord Jesus Christ, contains within Himself and signifies more than any such image — He is greater than all of them.

But if a person wishes to understand what this means, one may offer the following comparison (imperfect and incomplete, but important): Jesus as a kind of super-lens focuses in Himself all that the Lord wishes to bestow upon people and what He actually gives them. The gifts of God to people are extraordinarily rich and diverse, and therefore one can see them from various sides, or portions of the spectrum, or not all the radiation — but see a substantial part. Depending on what is being spoken of, the corresponding images are used accordingly. If it is the Mystery of Communion, then this is the bread of life. If it is the leading of people after Himself — then the good shepherd. If it is about importance and knowledge — then the light of the world, and so on. But one cannot say that these images are entirely devoid of literal meaning — for example, the bread of life is closely connected with the bread in the Mystery of Communion; the good shepherd — with the manner in which Christ leads people after Himself; and the like.

John VI, 52 — 'Εμαχοντο' — from 'μαχομαι' — they were drawn into battle, fought, disputed, quarrelled. Of the possible meanings here, one of the two last in the list just given seems most fitting, but the first two are also possible. I shall note that the dispute arose not because of the words of Jesus themselves, but because of various human Jewish approaches to making sense of them — people had different visions of what these words might mean, and therefore disputed among themselves, since the question was an important one. If people had understood nothing at all — they would not have disputed; equally, if they had understood everything correctly — they would also not have disputed. The dispute arose from a partial (and generally incorrect) understanding of the words of Jesus.

The conclusion of the reading directly concerns the Mystery of Communion of the Holy Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. A person who does not receive Communion does not hold within themselves eternal life — put more simply, cannot be holy in the full measure. This does not yet mean that they will perish in eternity. If a living part of a plant has no nourishment it declines (for example, withers and fades) — so too a person without Communion does not live a complete spiritual life.

Therefore the Mystery of Communion is of very great importance.

More concerning the readings from the Gospel see at the links:
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/09052025.html
https://oleksandr-zhabenko.github.io/en/commentaries/05052023.html

Glory be to Thee, our God, glory be to Thee!