Can somebody help me understand this?

His basic defense of the Lord’s Supper being a symbolic memorial is this: John1:1"…the Word was God!" John 1:14-“And the Word was made flesh…!” The eucharist is NOT Jesus! Jesus is THE LIVING WORD WHO BECAME FLESH…A HUMAN! If u want to eat Jesus flesh, then spiritually EAT God’s Word by reading and meditating on God Holy Word!

He says that Jesus said in John 6:63 that Jesus saying that eating His literal Flesh will profit us nothing…

But what about drinking the Blood?

I certainly wouldn’t use this argument, haha.

There is not a problem if we admit that an expression can have multiple senses that do not contradict each other. We can eat Christ’s flesh in a less perfect sense by ingesting his teachings (such as when Ezekiel ate the scroll), but this is not the only sense nor the best sense unless we say that Christ is the Bible. However, we eat him more perfectly in the Sacrament because we believe that what we eat is truly him, although in a spiritual (not allegorical) manner that is beyond human understanding.

I, and probably most on the forum, with agree about the need to read scripture. I’ve read the Bible, cover to cover, and read it daily. So, we’re on the same page there.

I didn’t have the patience for the video, but I read your message.

John 6:48-58…Jesus says FOUR TIMES that we MUST eat his flesh and drink his blood to have eternal life.

Matthew 26-28…Jesus consecrates the bead and wine into his body and blood and says, “This is my body, and this is my blood”, and says these will be given for the forgivenness of sins.

It’s interesting that a lot of other faiths take literally, what we may take symbolically. The one passage that IS literal, many take symbolically!

Further, the early Christians had the Eucharist.

Jesus told us to do this “…in memory of me” (the Eucharist). We Catholics have been faithful to this command to this very day.

Further, it says that if you eat the body of Christ and drink his blood, unworthily, you drink a cup of condemnation. If it’s all “symbolic”, at most, how would that even be possible?

I’m convinced Christ meant for us to do, as the early Christians, and reenact the Last Supper.

If you do not eat his body or drink his blood, you will have no life within you.

Which argument would you use then? :popcorn:

In John 6:63, Jesus tells us that OUR flesh profits nothing. Even if somebody rejects the teaching about the Eucharist, he cannot interpret John 6:63 as applying to Jesus’ flesh, unless he is willing to deny the efficacy of Calvary (which was the sacrifice of Jesus’ flesh on the Cross).

John 6 is ripe with symbolism “I am the bread of life, whoever comes to me shall not hunger.” How do Catholics interpret John 6:35?

Also, when did Jesus sacrifice Himself? Was it on the cross?

Jesus did not disturb Himself to stop the jews from leaving when they understood His words literally about eating His flesh and drinking His blood.So many disciples left Jesus that day because of that statement(John 6:66).
Instead, Jesus turned to the apostles and asked them if they will leave too:shrug:

What do you make of that Dronald?

I’ll answer yours, but you must answer mine as well.

The same when Jesus said “destroy this temple and I will rebuild it in three days.” They took Him literally to His face and even while He was on the cross. “Why hasn’t He destroyed the temple and rebuilt it like He said? He must not be the Messiah.”

Jesus never corrected Nicodemus’s understanding of being “born again.”

How about John 8? One of the more amusing ones…

21 So he said to them again, "I am going away, and you will seek me, and you will die in your sin. Where I am going, you cannot come. "

22 So the Jews said, "Will he kill himself, since he says, ‘Where I am going, you cannot come’? "

Why doesn’t Jesus explain, “No… that’s not what I meant.”

John 6:63 does not say that eating his literal flesh will profit nothing. John 6:63 does not mention eating flesh.

It says that the flesh is of no avial (profit nothing). That means that your bodily senses are of no avial. Your eyes can’t see. Your tongue will taste bread. You will smell only wine, not flesh…

Jesus also said that his words about eating his flesh were spirit and life. The word spirit means breath - ruah in Hebrew, spiritus in Latin and pneuma in Greek. Spirit is the life giving breath of God.


This book explains everything and is very easy to read. Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist by Brand Pitre.


Excellent point! :thumbsup:

What’s your point? Jesus does explain in John 6 re. the Eucharist, doubles down, clarifies, repeats:

[41] The Jews therefore murmured at him, because he had said: I am the living bread which came down from heaven. [42] And they said: Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How then saith he, I came down from heaven? [43] Jesus therefore answered, and said to them: Murmur not among yourselves. [44] No man can come to me, except the Father, who hath sent me, draw him; and I will raise him up in the last day. [45] It is written in the prophets: And they shall all be taught of God. Every one that hath heard of the Father, and hath learned, cometh to me.

[44] Draw him: Not by compulsion, nor by laying the free will under any necessity, but by the strong and sweet motions of his heavenly grace.

[46] Not that any man hath seen the Father; but he who is of God, he hath seen the Father. [47] Amen, amen I say unto you: He that believeth in me, hath everlasting life. [48] I am the bread of life. [49] Your fathers did eat manna in the desert, and are dead. [50] This is the bread which cometh down from heaven; that if any man eat of it, he may not die.

[51] I am the living bread which came down from heaven. [52] If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world. [53] The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat? [54] Then*** Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man***, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. [55] He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day.

[56] For*** my flesh is meat*** indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. [57] He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him. [58] 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. [59] This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that eateth this bread, shall live for ever. [60] These things he said, teaching in the synagogue, in Capharnaum.

[61] Many therefore of his disciples, hearing it, said: This saying is hard, and who can hear it? [62] But Jesus, knowing in himself, that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you? [63] If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? [64] It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life. [65] But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning, who they were that did not believe, and who he was, that would betray him.

So what if he didn’t do it re. Temple, Nicodemus, or killing himself–that would suggest that the teaching on the Eucharist was that much more important–and could not be compromised for the benefit of the doubters.

Grasping at Straws: John 6:63

“The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken are spirit and they are life.” (John 6:63)

These words were spoken by Jesus shortly after delivering his teaching on the Eucharist, and some people claim that they indicate that Jesus was speaking figuratively when he commanded us to eat his body and drink his blood. However, this would be a misunderstanding of what Jesus meant when he said, “the flesh counts for nothing.”

First, notice that whenever Jesus referred to his own body and blood, he said “my flesh” or “the flesh of the Son of Man”. Here are the examples:

“This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.” (John 6:51)

"Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him.” (John 6:53-56)

At this point, the narrative explains that the disciples were on the verge of revolt over this teaching. Jesus tells them that they cannot understand this teaching with their natural minds. Here is the verse in context: “On hearing it, many of his disciples said, ‘This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?’ Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this, Jesus said to them, ‘Does this offend you? What if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before! The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life.’” (John 6:60-63)

In John 6:63, Jesus uses the phrase “the flesh” instead of “my flesh” or “the flesh of the Son of Man” because he is not talking about his own body; he is referring to natural man. Man is a tripartite being composed of Spirit, Soul (or mind) and Body/Flesh. Our flesh is that created, corruptible part of us; the spirit is that which is capable of relating to God and receiving his revelation, and the mind/soul is the union of spirit and body. Here are some scriptures that illustrate this:

“Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely, and may your whole spirit, soul and body be preserved blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (1 Thessalonians 5:23)

“And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being [nephesh – soul].” (Genesis 2:7) (dust is the body, breath of life - pneuma - is the spirit, living being is the soul).

Jesus tells the grumbling Jews (who can’t understand how he would give them his flesh to eat) that they cannot grasp it with their natural minds because it is a mystery beyond the ability of “the flesh” to understand. This is the same manner of speaking used by Paul in 1 Corinthians 2 & 3 when he is distinguishing between fleshly or carnal Christians and those who are discern the things of God with their spirits.

Second, it might be worth noting the obvious fact that Jesus cannot be saying that HIS own flesh “counts for nothing” otherwise his death upon the cross would be meaningless. Instead, we know that his own body, his flesh, was broken and pierced for our sake; no Christian would deny that. Therefore, since HIS flesh does count for something, he must have been referring to “flesh” other than his own in v. 63.

Thus, the one verse that many Protestants cling to as an argument against the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist does not mean what they falsely claim it means. Ironically, their “proof text” points out precisely why they cannot understand the Eucharist: they are using their flesh instead of their spirits to discern the things of God. Unfortunately, their flesh “counts for nothing”.

great post.:thumbsup:


JDGaney. Mr. Prasch had so many half-truths I just had to quit his presentation. It was too frustrating. I actually tried it a couple of times. I wouldn’t know where to begin with the many errors I saw.

He said John 6 did not concern the Passover but at least that I saw, he didn’t back it up. Admittedly, I could not sit through the whole thing so maybe he DID back it up.

It would be important to back this claim up considering John 6:4 (again maybe he addressed it and I did not see it in all fairness to him).

John 6:4 4 Now the Passover, the feast of the Jews, was at hand.

I went to his website and I could not see that he affirms Jesus as True God and True man (I am not saying he doesn’t, I am just saying I couldn’t find it).

If any readers know if Mr. Prasch affirms Jesus as God and worships Jesus (not just talks about Jesus) please let me know by linking it on here.

If Mr. Prasch does NOT affirm these basic things, to start with his teachings in the Papacy and the Eucharist will be like two ships passing in the night.

We won’t be building on the same foundation so when he says various things, he may MEAN something different (with the same words) as Christians would.

Jesus is LORD, may mean something quite different to an Arian for example (not saying Mr. Prasch is an Arian either).

Once again. I am not saying Mr. Prasch is NOT a Christian (in the sense I outlined above), I am just saying IF he isn’t, then these “teachings” of his are really nothing to build on. We’d need to start at a more basic level, THEN build upon that.

But I think it would be good to have a general discussion about John 6 and the Eucharist.

I hope you don’t mind. I think I will begin a thread on John 6 (irrespective of Mr. Prasch though on that thread) and possibly that thread will be helpful to you RE: Mr. Prasch’s objections too.

The other thing is, some people will do Google searches about “John 6” + “” and never be brought to your page here (“Can somebody help me understand this?”).

I am not criticizing the thread title, I am just thinking we can get deeper into John 6 AND two, five, or ten years from now when someone is doing a search, the thread topic WILL pop up and it may be of help to them too.

I’ll stick around here too as I want to see what develops in the context of Mr. Prasch (which is what your original post question linked to anyway).

God bless.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit