John 6 and Eucharist?


#1

Many Protestants argue that the earing and drinking referred to in John 6:53 is actually referring to belief in Jesus, since it says that those who eat and drink the flesh and blood of Jesus have eternal life and John 6:47 states that “whoever believes has eternal life.” One Protestant Bible commentary states that:

“The separation of the blood from the flesh emphasizes the reality of Jesus’ death. To “eat” and “drink” is to believe (v.47), to appropriate , assimilate, and abide in Christ (v.56).”

How do I respond to this?

God Bless,
Michael


#2

Amen, amen, I say to you,** My Flesh is True Food and My Blood is True Drink,** who ever eats my flesh and drinks my blood shall abide in me and I in them…many of his disciples thought this a pretty crazy thing to say…they walked away…and I don’t remember Jesus calling them back and saying,no, no, !! I don’t really mean to actually EAT, it’s just a way to explain to you to believe in me…everyone, come on, I didn’t really mean it! His disciples understood him to mean *really *eat and *really *drink. In Hebrew, I understand that when someone says a word 2x, like amen amen, verily, verily, truely, truely…they really mean exactly what they say.

And don’t forget, the meal he shared with the two at Emaus, they recognized him in the breaking of the bread, and he disappeared.

I would read the Catholic Answers tract on the Eucharist. It’s loaded with all kinds of great answers to this objection.
catholic.com/library/Christ_in_the_Eucharist.asp


#3

to believe on Him, you have to believe what He says… and He says
to eat His flesh… and the Jews knew exactly what He meant, because …

John 6: ( KJV )
52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?
53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.
58 This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.
59 These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum.
60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?
61 When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?
62 What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?
63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

some of his disciples refused to believe that they should ‘eat of
his flesh’ and they left… refusing to follow… if they thought it was
figurative, why would they have left? and if He meant it to be
figurative, why would He let them leave??

:slight_smile:


#4

Some Proetstatnts might reply that in the Gospel of John there are plenty of instances when Jesus is speaking spiritually while others interpret him literally. For example being “born again” and Nicodemus and “living water” and the Samaritan woman. How do I respons to that?

God Bless


#5

[quote=mikeledes]Some Proetstatnts might reply that in the Gospel of John there are plenty of instances when Jesus is speaking spiritually while others interpret him literally. For example being “born again” and Nicodemus and “living water” and the Samaritan woman. How do I respons to that?

God Bless
[/quote]

Jesus is oftentimes always speaking spiritually. Protestants confuse “spiritually” with “symbolically” or “metaphorically.” However, spiritual realities are both physically and metaphysically true.

Fiat


#6

[quote=mikeledes]Many Protestants argue that the earing and drinking referred to in John 6:53 is actually referring to belief in Jesus, since it says that those who eat and drink the flesh and blood of Jesus have eternal life and John 6:47 states that “whoever believes has eternal life.” One Protestant Bible commentary states that:
[/quote]

Verse 30:

30 So they said to him, "What sign can you do, that we may see and believe in you? What can you do?

Perhaps this is Johannine irony, as Jesus had just fed the five thousand, and the apostles ask “what sign can you do?” But either way, Jesus’ dialogue is a direct response to their request of what sign he could perform that they might see and believe in Him. Jesus responds…

32 So Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, it was not Moses who gave the bread from heaven; my Father gives you the true bread from heaven.33 For the bread of God is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.” 34 So they said to him, “Sir, give us this bread always.” 35 17 Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me will never hunger, and whoever believes in me will never thirst.

Verses 48-60 nicely define what the bread of life is. Does belief in Christ fit the category of a “sign?” Why would Jesus respond that He is the Bread of Life if the apostles asked him for a sign?


#7

Is Jesus capable of lying to us and committing a sin? God fobids man to eat human flesh and drink blood. Jesus obeyed and fulfilled the Law. Jesus was speaking in the supernatural.All we had to do was recieve with the eyes of faith, for Jesus said the words He just finished speaking bring life. :confused: God Bless.


#8

[quote=SPOKENWORD]Is Jesus capable of lying to us and committing a sin? God fobids man to eat human flesh and drink blood. Jesus obeyed and fulfilled the Law. Jesus was speaking in the supernatural. All we had to do was recieve with the eyes of faith, for Jesus said the words He just finished speaking bring life. :confused: God Bless.
[/quote]

I agree. The Eucharist is supernatural, we are not eating a mutilated carcass dripping with blood here, but the living divine Body and Blood of our Lord transformed in a supernatural way from what appears as and once was bread and wine.


#9

[quote=Catholic Dude]I agree. The Eucharist is supernatural, we are not eating a mutilated carcass dripping with blood here, but the living divine Body and Blood of our Lord transformed in a supernatural way from what appears as and once was bread and wine.
[/quote]

Its all about our understanding. :thumbsup: God Bless


#10

[quote=SPOKENWORD]Is Jesus capable of lying to us and committing a sin? God fobids man to eat human flesh and drink blood. Jesus obeyed and fulfilled the Law. Jesus was speaking in the supernatural.All we had to do was recieve with the eyes of faith, for Jesus said the words He just finished speaking bring life. :confused: God Bless.
[/quote]

then why would Jesus allow disciples to turn away from Him
and His truth, because of semantics? the Jews knew what he
meant… they said so…

:slight_smile:


#11

[quote=johnshelby]then why would Jesus allow disciples to turn away from Him
and His truth, because of semantics? the Jews knew what he
meant… they said so…

:slight_smile:
[/quote]

Because they were walking in the flesh and not in the Spirit. :wink: God Bless


#12

[quote=SPOKENWORD]Because they were walking in the flesh and not in the Spirit. :wink: God Bless
[/quote]

Bingo, Spokes. . . . . and Jese knew who would “walk away.”

Y’know, I get all squishy inside when you “talk Catholic” like this.


#13

Some Protestants believe the bread and wine are only symbolic. Others believe in the Real Presence. If both groups are inspired by the Holy Spirit, how do we know who’s right and who’s wrong?

The Catholics and Eastern Orthodox can both trace their bishops back to the Apostles. Both groups believe in the Real Presence.


#14

[quote=SPOKENWORD]Because they were walking in the flesh and not in the Spirit. :wink: God Bless
[/quote]

i still can’t see that he was speaking figuratively…

plus there is the ‘covenant’ comparisons… the original ark contained
the Word, the rod of Aaron ( authority ) and a gamor of manna…

Jesus, is the Word, is the authority, and is the manna from heaven.

i guess some people will just believe in the real presence and some
won’t… like lots of things people differ on…

:slight_smile:


#15

“Jesus says the bread of life is his flesh. Lest we not understand whether he means ‘flesh’ in a real, physical, touchable way, he tell us next that it is the same flesh that will be given up on the Cross! He goes on to say that this flesh must be eaten by his followers. The analogy has been clearly explained. There is no doubt about its meaning. If the flesh we eat for eternal life is meant in only a ‘figurative way’, or ‘spiritually speaking’, then so is the flesh of the crucifixion! Jesus equates the two. Either they are both literal, or they are both figurative.”

Born Fundamentalist Born Again Catholic; David B. Currie


#16

[quote=SPOKENWORD]Is Jesus capable of lying to us and committing a sin? God fobids man to eat human flesh and drink blood.
[/quote]

God forbid us from eating the flesh and blood of creatures. I think Jesus is not a creation.

Also, how does, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you” signify figurative speaking? How many “figurative speeches” begin with, “Amen, amen, I say to you”?

Notworthy


#17

**Some comments on the Real Presence:

Jesus repeats the command to “eat his flesh” six times in different ways. Four times the word used is “chew” or “gnaw”, which is very graphic. The word is never used symbolically anywhere in the Bible, or in ancient secular literature. Jesus makes it clear that the flesh to be eaten is as literal as the body on the cross was literal.


[font=Berlin Sans FB]Catholics believe that Jesus is really present in the consecrated host. This is the only way to explain adequately Paul’s assumption in 1 Cor 11:25-32. “Whoever drinks the cup of the Lord or eats the bread in an unworthy manner, will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord …… for everyone who eats and drinks* without recognising the body of the Lord*** eats and drinks judgement to himself”.


[/font][font=Berlin Sans FB]In the early Church, the Real Presence of Christ in the elements of Communion was universally believed. Ignatius was the second bishop of Antioch and died a martyr at about the same time the apostle John died. Speaking of the Docetist heretics who denied the humanity of Jesus, he wrote: “They confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins and which the Father, of his goodness, raised up again”. (Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyrneans, 7). Ignatius equated the flesh of the Eucharist with the flesh of the Cross just as John had done in John 6.


[/font][font=Berlin Sans FB][font=Times New Roman][size=3]Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp who remembered Polycarp’s firsthand stories about the apostle John. He used the real presence in the Eucharist to prove the resurrection of the Christian dead: “The Eucharist becomes the Body of Christ” (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5, 2, 3). “How can they say that the flesh which is nourished with the Body of the Lord and with his blood passes into corruption and partakes not of life?” (4. 18. 5).

Notworthy
[/font][/size][/font]


#18

[quote=SPOKENWORD]Is Jesus capable of lying to us and committing a sin? God fobids man to eat human flesh and drink blood. Jesus obeyed and fulfilled the Law. Jesus was speaking in the supernatural.All we had to do was recieve with the eyes of faith, for Jesus said the words He just finished speaking bring life. :confused: God Bless.
[/quote]

I recommend you read a little booklet by Mark P. Shea, “This Is My Body”. It’s only 63 pages long including the foreward and the introduction. Your statement is one of the issues addressed by Shea.


#19

[quote=mikeledes]Many Protestants argue that the earing and drinking referred to in John 6:53 is actually referring to belief in Jesus, since it says that those who eat and drink the flesh and blood of Jesus have eternal life and John 6:47 states that “whoever believes has eternal life.” One Protestant Bible commentary states that:

“The separation of the blood from the flesh emphasizes the reality of Jesus’ death. To “eat” and “drink” is to believe (v.47), to appropriate , assimilate, and abide in Christ (v.56).”

How do I respond to this?

God Bless,
Michael
[/quote]

From CA Library Christ in the Eucharist
They say that in John 6 Jesus was not talking about physical food and drink, but about spiritual food and drink. They quote John 6:35: “Jesus said to them, ‘I am the bread of life; he who comes to me shall not hunger, and he who believes in me shall never thirst.’” They claim that coming to him is bread, having faith in him is drink. **Thus, eating his flesh and blood merely means believing in Christ.

**
But there is a problem with that interpretation. As Fr. John A. O’Brien explains, “The phrase ‘to eat the flesh and drink the blood,’ when used figuratively among the Jews, as among the Arabs of today, meant to inflict upon a person some serious injury, especially by calumny or by false accusation. To interpret the phrase figuratively then would be to make our Lord promise life everlasting to the culprit for slandering and hating him, which would reduce the whole passage to utter nonsense” (O’Brien, The Faith of Millions, 215). For an example of this use, see Micah 3:3.


#20

John 6:66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

Let’s be honest, the 666 in Revelations is without doubt referring to Nero. But Protestants love to play with this end-times prophecy stuff, so there you go. The true anti-Christs are the Protestant Churches who lead people away from the true presence.


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