She's at it again!


I just don’t understand people who hate the Catholic Church! What’s even more is people who hate the Eucharist. I mean that’s Jesus! What’s so hard to understand about John 6???


From the site:

I am a Christian - period. I claim no denomination; I am simply a Born Again, Saved, Bible Believing Christian. I keep a clean house, and healthy body. I’m the blessed wife of my handsome husband, and happy stay at home homeschooling mom to my four fabulous children. Two of my favorite things to discuss are Christianity and conservatism. This site is not for the "wishy washy.

I’m sure she’s a fairly nice person. These apple-pie type Moms usually are. Just not terribly intelligent. We are not all lucky enough to live a middle-class American lifestyle.


RCCDefender;2430709]I just don’t understand people who hate the Catholic Church! What’s even more is people who hate the Eucharist. I mean that’s Jesus! What’s so hard to understand about John 6???

I understand John 6, it is all summed up by verse 63
Joh 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.


Malcolm McLean;2430982]From the site:

I am a Christian - period. I claim no denomination; I am simply a Born Again, Saved, Bible Believing Christian. I keep a clean house, and healthy body. I’m the blessed wife of my handsome husband, and happy stay at home homeschooling mom to my four fabulous children. Two of my favorite things to discuss are Christianity and conservatism. This site is not for the "wishy washy.

I’m sure she’s a fairly nice person. These apple-pie type Moms usually are. Just not terribly intelligent. We are not all lucky enough to live a middle-class American lifestyle.

Hey Malcolm
What makes you think you are so intelligent, just because you wrote a few books? This apple-pie type might surprise you, although you might not see it through your arrogance. I would suggest finding a little more humility and less pride.


To correct you, you are quoting from John 6:64, not 63.

Further, it is LIVING flesh that gives life, not DEAD flesh. That is, it is Life that gives life. That is, it is the GLORIFIED, RISEN Lord that we receive in the Blessed Sacrament that gives us eternal life, not the dead flesh of Jesus upon the Cross, nor does the flesh of sinful humans give us life - faith, not works, saves us; Jesus Saves, nothing else; it is His Resurrection that gives us life, it was His work on the Cross that made the life-giving Resurrection possible; it was His work on the Cross that makes His life-giving Flesh possible .


Ya know - this always cracks me up.
Jesus said that the flesh profits - BUT there is one flesh that DOES profit us - the flesh of our Lord and Savior. He wasn’t talking about himself. Jesus was spirit but he was ALSO flesh and blood.
HIS flesh and blood CERTAINLY profited you when he was hanging on the cross - didn’t it?
Why on EARTH would ANYone take this verse to mean JESUS’s flesh?? WHY would Jesus say, “Unless you eat of the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood you have no life within you” - just to follow up with, "Uh, gee, I was just kidding. My flesh profits NOTHING. The joke’s on YOU!"
Another thing - we ARE saved by faith. Do you have enough faith to believe what Jesus was teaching us John 6 or are you like those disciples that left because this they just couldn’t BELIEVE him anymore (John 6:66)?
THAT’s what you need to ask yourself . . .


That’s why we are much worse than those who eat the flesh of animal sacrifices in order to partake of their death and join with God, and even worse than the cannibals, who eat their enemies in order to gain their strength.

We eat the Living Christ; Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity - not dead flesh. :smiley:


So your position is that Christ’s flesh profiteth nothing?! :eek:

Let’s be very, very clear on this. Does Christ’s flesh profit or not?

I vote YES.


Are you saying here that the flesh of Jesus profits us nothing?

Didn’t Jesus say, “This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world”? When did He give His flesh for the world? At Calvary.

Did the flesh of Jesus profit us nothing on the Cross?

You see, the bread which we receive in the Eucharist becomes real flesh at the consecration, and that very real flesh has profited us greatly when it was nailed to the cross.

There is nothing symbolic about this at all.

But perhaps you are confused because you did not notice that Jesus did not say, “my flesh profiteth nothing” but instead said, “the flesh profiteth nothing” which means that by the flesh - that is, your unspiritual natural reasoning - you cannot understand and profit from the truth that Jesus was proclaiming when he “previewed” the doctrine of the Eucharist which would be made more clear at the Last Supper.

Hope this helps. :tiphat:


Why give a meaning here to the word flesh than the meaning it has elsewhere in Scripture? Maybe because to do so supports your position. If two people take this action, who determines which one has it correct. In short what is your authority to give it the meaning you have other than your own opinion.? The Holy Spirit? Well He speaks to me also. Now what?


So are you telling us that maybe Christ did not say “Unless you do something which profits nothing, you will not have eternal life”? :wink:


For an understanding of “the flesh profits nothing” NonDenom should read Matt 16:17: And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.”


Laudatur Iesus Christus.

Could you please explain to me exactly what you take this verse to mean? I have heard this sort of comment before, but I am not sure that I follow the logic of it very well. What do you take the “they are spirit” comment to mean?

It seems to me to be consistent with the Real Presence in the Eucharist, but you apparently are taking it to mean the opposite. Whose spirit? Whose flesh? When?

I would appreciate any help you can give me here.

Pax Christi nobiscum.

John Hiner


Well it appears I’m making a career out of refuting this kinds of stuff. This will be no exception.

By "Dawn Marie"
Wednesday, July 04, 2007
Eucharist, Mass, “The Church,” and works

I have spoken to so many Roman Catholics who think that receiving Christ is via the eucharist. If you think this, you are decieved. To find out how to REALLY receive Christ, Click Here

.She messed up this time because she targeted something that I hold very dear and can explain and defend.

And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Notice receiving the Eucharist and attending Mass is not in the above list as a requirement for salvation.

This is known as “cherry picking” verses. Is that the only verse of scripture that speaks to or applies to salvation? Of course not! :rolleyes:

My response is something like this, since she wants to try to infer that the Eucharist is not mentioned with regard to salvation.

John 6:54 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.

Also note that the word “gospel” means the good news of Christ’s dying in our place to pay for our sins, and that we need only believe that. No works/ritual/tradition/eucharist/mass is required to get you into heaven, only faith. See Ephesians 2:8-9:

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Here she is trying to imply that we Catholics believe “a different gospel”, (Check her “really receive Christ” link above and you’ll see how she plays that.)

Now, we Catholics know very well that Our Lord died on that cross for our sins, and we profess faith in that sacrifice. Do any of us profess that we save ourselves by our works? No one that I know of who knows his Catholic faith…

What does the Word of God say concerning faith and good works relative to salvation?

Matthew 25:31-46 and James 2:24 Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only? 25 And in like manner also Rahab the harlot, was not she justified by works, receiving the messengers, and sending them out another way? 26 For even as the body without the spirit is dead; so also faith without works is dead.

Acts 2:38: And Peter said to them, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39: For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him.”

Acts 22:16: And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.’

So…she believes in Sola Fide (faith alone), but if she does, then what about all these other verses? (Just for a start.)


This is incorrect exegesis. By putting the blinders on to context, interpretation is meaningless.


Being saved does not involve being a member of “The Roman Catholic Church.”

Really? Acts 9:31 actually uses the name “ekklesia kath olos” in the Greek.

What did Our Lord actually say He was building? (Matthew 16) 18: And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. 19: I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

As John Cardinal Newman said, “To be deep in history is to cease to be protestant.” Why? Because when you go back and read the history of Christianity, guess what you find? The original New Testament Church really was Catholic in its teachings.

. . . foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith . . . -Galatians 3:8

It’s JUST a matter of faith. The Bible tells us in whom that faith is to be put, and why.

See…back to Sola Fide again. And again, stated as if it’s a given gospel fact. But is it? No.

I am a member of the one true church, which is the Body of Christ. This body of Christ is made up of people who are in many denominations, but itself is of no denomination. It is made up of those who have believed and received the true gospel message.

The body of Christ is God’s church, made up of the saints both living and dead. (Not the Roman Catholic canonized saints, but the Bible’s definition of saints - which is every saved, born again Christian.)See here how she jerks the teachings of the faith around to make them appear different than what the Church actually teaches?

Besides, she has to take the bolded position, because the facts of both the Word of God and Christian history blow her beliefs right out the airlock into empty space.

One more point on this. She speaks of those who have believed the “true gospel”, but how does she know that what she believes really is “the true gospel”? Her answer will probably be something about her believing what the Bible says, and only what the Bible says. This is the basic and fundamental error of her beliefs (regardless of where she got it). Even though she appeals to the Bible for all she says that she believes, is her essential belief in the “Bible alone” a valid Biblical doctrine? No, it is not.

What does the Bible actually say is “the pillar and ground of the truth.”? 1st Timothy 3:15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. -John 3:3

[SIGN][size=]Glory Be To God![/SIGN]Finally! Something that every Catholic can read and shout AMEN! Alleluia, Alleluia!

Catholics believe every word of that verse! :slight_smile:
Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.[/size]


This means that Man(the Flesh part of him) can not understand with( HUMAN REASONING) the Eucharist, because its a Supernatural Thing in the Spirit World.


Unfortunately, this interpretation makes Jesus contradict himself and makes him a lousy teacher. Earlier, he already said that unless one chews on the flesh of the Son of Man, you have no life in you. And you know that Jesus cannot contradict himself. He already said that his flesh profits (that is, gives) unto eternal life.

Context therefore demands that for Jesus to not contradict himself (by taking back what he just said, and losing his disciples in the process), we must look at that “the” flesh means in v.63. In the New Testament, when “the” flesh is used in an abstract manner, it talks of pure human nature, not of the spirit. This simply points to the passage as saying, “you cannot understand what I am saying on your own, but only through the Spirit.” But this is not the way “flesh” is used in the immediately preceding verses. Rather, he identifies it as “his” flesh, not merely “the” flesh, uses it in the same context as his blood, and uses two different imperatives to command his listeners to eat (phago and trogo; trogo being the most graphic and unsuitable for symblic interpretation).

Second, never in the New Testament does spirit=symbolic.


So I guess that Cyril of Jerusalem and Augustine got John 6 wrong. At least we are in good company.

  1. Christ on a certain occasion discoursing with the Jews said, Except ye eat My flesh and drink My blood, you have no life in you John 6:53 . They not having heard His saying in a spiritual sense were offended, and went back, supposing that He was inviting them to eat flesh. .-Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lectures, Lecture 22, Paragraph 4)

Chapter 16.—Rule for Interpreting Commands and Prohibitions.

  1. If the sentence is one of command, either forbidding a crime or vice, or enjoining an act of prudence or benevolence, it is not figurative. If, however, it seems to enjoin a crime or vice, or to forbid an act of prudence or benevolence, it is figurative. “Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man,” says Christ, “and drink His blood, you have no life in you.” John 6:53 This seems to enjoin a crime or a vice; it is therefore a figure, enjoining that we should have a share in the sufferings of our Lord, and that we should retain a sweet and profitable memory of the fact that His flesh was wounded and crucified for us.-Augustine (On Christian Doctrine, Book 3, Chapter 16, Paragraph 24)


Laudatur Iesus Christus.

I agree with the general outline of this interpretation. However, I usually think of this verse as a command to cultivate and use “the eyes of faith.”

I take the reference to “flesh” in verse 64 (63) to refer to my flesh – my senses of sight, smell, hearing, touch, and taste – which strongly urge me to disregard the Savior’s words and to think that the host is mere bread and that the cup contains mere wine.

The reference to the spirit and to the gist of what Christ said as “spirit” then seems to me to be a call to believe Jesus more than my senses, to regard the spirit (His words) as more true than the physical world (my flesh).

This seems to me to be more consistent with Jesus’ willingness to allow those to leave who found His saying too hard to hear.

It harkens to other parts of the Scriptures:

The mountains melted like wax, at the presence of the Lord: at the presence of the Lord of all the earth. Psalm 96:5 (Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition.)

Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my word shall not pass away. Mark 13:31; Luke 21:33

This establishes the important principle that faith in the words of Jesus is more basic than belief in the report of the senses. This is important because it offers a foundation for both true religion and for empiricism. Because of this proper ordering of understanding, Jesus becomes the guarantor of the reliability of sentience – a solid basis of reliability which empiricism itself cannot offer. It is also consistent with the fundamental truth that Jesus is the one,

“Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For in him were all things created in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or dominations, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him and in him. And he is before all, and by him all things consist. Colossians 1:15-17

Thus it is reasonable that His word about what is real is more reliable than our imperfect perception of reality through the senses. In believing this, we gain the ability to rely on our senses in their proper application. For example, sight, and touch are reliable when the Lord commands their use to St. Thomas: “Then he saith to Thomas: Put in thy finger hither, and see my hands; and bring hither thy hand, and put it into my side; and be not faithless, but believing.” John 20:27

All of this gives us a proper grasp of the role of faith in Christ as the foundation of faith in everything that has been made through Him and is maintained in being through Him. This makes both faith and reason (including empirical science) possible and reliable.

Spiritus Sapientiae nobiscum.

John Hiner

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