It was that exact verse I heard in a Bible study that began my return back to Catholicism after spending 25 years in a reformed Presbyterian church where I served as a ruling elder.
Same exact story with me. 30 years as a protestant before this verse started leading me back. Unfortunately I still can't accept the papacy, Mary, and works based salvation. But I started attending as Catholic church again.
YES!!! I'm no teacher, and I lack the ancient Greek (but I do know how to use my Interlinear), but I was a sola scriptura Protestant for 36 years. I spent near-daily time in my Bible. When John 6 was opened to me by Catholic apologeticists that I was reading and listening to, it blew my mind! (I wasn't listening/reading them for fun -- I was having a serious argument with a family member who wanted to become Catholic, and I was looking for places where I can punch holes in the Catholic beliefs). The real presence IS very real indeed! There is no other way to take John 6. And it's not lost on me that it came right after the feeding of the 5000 -- Jesus performs a similar miracle every time and everywhere the Mass is celebrated. This was the first domino to fall, and the rest is history. I've now been Catholic for more than 2 years, and it has been revolutionary to my faith! My faith has never been more strong, nor my love for God as intense. Christ IS actually with us, indeed! I experience him personally every time I go to Mass.
Same here, re: John 6. Now, on to sola scriptura. It is untenable even upon a cursory reading. If it were practical, then everyone who subscribes to the Holy Bible would have the same beliefs, practices, ecclesiology, etc., but obviously that isn't the case. When I brought this up with the other elders, they had no answer other than " the main things are the plain things". But who decides what are the main things and the plain things becomes a rhetorical question.
As a Catholic devoted to our Lord Jesus Christ, I loved hearing this testimony ❤! How I wish all could come to understand it and recieve Jesus in the blessed Sacrament! Peace of Christ to all who read this.
Hi lynda good afternoon My honest and sincere apologies for invading your privacy abruptly. I was going through a comment when I came across your amazing comment I was fascinated and became interested in knowing you, I'll be so glad if you send me a mess📧. I hope there are no problems to be part of your friend list 🌺but If you find this message embarrassing please pardon my manners.🌺☘️🌺🙏
@@Raymondgogolf Your comments are very nice, don't worry. You do need to know that I am married and not looking for romance. Otherwise, we can chat here on UA-cam. I am wondering which of my comments were so interesting and why.
This is an honest truly "follow the Bible where it actually leads one" testimony by a truthful,, faithful, and courageous follower of Christ. Thank you! A hundred times, thank you, for explaining the biblical truth of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
Wow. Crucial questions. When did the incarnation begin? At fiat of Our Lady, in the annunciation. When did the incarnation end? It did not end. Glory to God!
Hi Cathy Good afternoon My honest and sincere apologies for invading your privacy abruptly. I was going through a comment when I came across your amazing comment I was fascinated and became interested in knowing you, I'll be so glad if you send me a mess📧. I hope there are no problems to be part of your friend list 🌺but If you find this message embarrassing please pardon my manners.🌺☘️🌺🙏
What an honest, decent man to admit the inevitable. Another pathway that brings Protestants to the Church is researching where the Church that Christ founded is today. It always leads you to the Catholic Church, if you're decent and honest.
Yes and no. Some Protestants are absolutely convinced it’s spiritual and not real presence. It’s not about being honest. It’s about hermeneutic. And many Protestants believe in real presence. The Catholic Church itself spent decades working out their position. So it’s not inevitable. Otherwise I would ask you why 1 million Catholics in Latin America have left the church to become Pentecostal if it was so obvious.
@@ntlearning only a blind or proud man could not see that Christ founded the Catholic Church. The Real Presence has been around since the last supper. Many people have left the Church because of the new relativism movement. Do what makes you feel good, not what God wants. They have been poorly catechised. Now, do we have problems in Christ's Church? You bet, but I'd still rather be inside than outside the one Our Lord founded.
I believe Science proof of the Eucharist miracle. ua-cam.com/video/93cqR-nwI8sh/v-deo.html Eucharist Miracle of a beating heart. ua-cam.com/video/747s-WgS7a0/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/6EIam9EFhsM/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/soCkftBBsBo/v-deo.html
i'm so happy that I Who is blessed with good formation, right from the beginning of my Catholic baptism three years ago Bible in a year father Mike Schmitz catechism in a year, the church fathers, and still barely scratching the surface on the mystery, and the deep wisdom, and the fulness of our faith, that is the Catholic Church. I like that this pastor now Catholic saw the Truth. So many protestants look, but do not see listen but do not hear
Plus, Jesus is incarnated in Heaven forever - always fully God and fully man. His desire to identify with us for eternity is so beautiful. Anyway, I love these conversion stories.
It's apparent that practicing protestants haven't read John 6. If they have they may have ignored it and /or don't believe it. If they're into solo Scritura since that's all they have, why do they ignore it? That in itself says alot.
Hi Maria! Just wanted to answer that too be fair, Protestants don’t ignore it, they just interpret it as meaning that Jesus’ body and blood on the cross has spiritually saved us and is our spiritual life (food and drink). I never had a problem reading it as a Protestant until recently. I’m now looking into Catholicism and seeing that this may be the real and true literal interpretation. I’m on that journey, but I also sympathize with Protestants who learned to interpret scripture differently. Hope that helps for perspective! 😊
@KaitlinRay by whose authority do Protestants interpret the Bible? There has to be ONLY ONE TRUE INTERPRETATION, right? Even if Protestants get 90% of it right, how would they know? Upon whose authority to they interpret it? It can't be the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit wouldn't teach tens of thousands of different denominations differently. Who told the first Protestants what the Bible actually says, especially in the parts where their interpretation differs from those of the people who wrote the New Testament--the first Catholics? By whose authority did that person or persons claim their interpretation was correct? Jesus' Church created the Bible. Shouldn't Jesus' Church be able to infallibly interpret it? Wouldn't Jesus make sure the Holy Spirit was part of the process? To claim that Jesus' Church can create the Bible, but it's not qualified to interpret it defies logic. But to claim that tens of thousands of Protestant denominations can also interpret it (differently) also defies logic.
@@KaitlinRay Thank you. If you've read the Gospel of John 6 to the end you'll read that many walked away and misinterpreted what Jesus meant. He didn't try to stop them. But, if He said that the Eucharist IS literally His Body and Blood, then that's what It is. As Catholics we believe it. I'm with the RCIA in my parish and always have non-Catholics joining the Church that are also accepting that. Thank you for your comment. Hopefully, you'll consider joining the Catholic Church there's alot to it that many non-Catholic dont understand.
They say Bible alone but when this passage is read, they cannot accept it as it is. I hope all Protestant in the world realized that they are denying themselves and their family of the Eucharist. There is no more reason to stay in a religion of lies and deceit. The truth is already out.
I was walking by a small Baptist church on country lane recently. It was Bible study night. I wanted to shout out "Read John Chapter 6!". I refrained, but just barely. 🤣
You should of. But, I don't think that's going to do anything. Reasons for not joining the Catholic Church is different for everyone. For example, for some it might be the papacy is an issue - like the Orthodox who see it as invalid and that God gave Peter a primacy but never a supremacy.
@@ntlearning - Faith in God is faith in objective truth. I am sorry you don't have it, but there's nothing I can do about it except pray for you. It's you along with the help of the Holy Spirit that has to make that leap of faith.
@@atrifle8364 ahhhh you've lost the argument! Starting to get into personal ad hoc hominem. 😅 🤣 😂 Firstly, you are lying, because I don't believe you would pray for me. This is just a cliche comment people make when they are condescending. Secondly, you need to pray for yourself. The irony with this argument is that the body and blood of Christ in us is meant to form us into His image. It hasn't done anything for you. I highly recommend you watch Jimmy Akin, and Trent Horn to see what true "Christ formed" Catholics look like. Because you absolutely don't have it. And thirdly, to respond to your comment about faith which is half correct: Faith is objective AND subjective: Pope Francis: "Faith is not a light that scatters all our darkness, but a lamp that guides our steps in the night and suffices for the journey." (Lumen Fidei - Encyclical Letter on Faith) St. John Paul II: "Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth." (Fides et Ratio - Encyclical Letter on Faith and Reason) St. Teresa of Avila: "To have courage for whatever comes in life, everything lies in that." (Interior Castle) Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI): "Faith is a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. It is to encounter God in Christ." (God and the World) St. Augustine of Hippo: "Faith is to believe what you do not see; the reward of this faith is to see what you believe." (Sermons of St. Augustine on Selected Lessons of the New Testament)
@@geordiewishart1683 Did Our Lord say "verily, verily," "truly, truly," "amen, amen," I am a door? No. But, He did use that phrase, however you translate it, with regard to eating His flesh and drinking His blood. And His true followers believed Him. Which is why the pagans accused the early Church of being cannibals.
Thank you for sharing your testimony with us . God bless and God bless all your family.. VIVA CRISTO REY SEŇOR DE SEŇORES Y REY DE REYES 🛐 VIVA LA SANTISIMA VIRGEN MARIA Y VIVA NUESTRA SANTA MADRE IGLESIA CRISTIANA CATOLICA Y APOSTOLICA AMEN 🙏
YES! 1 Corinthians 10:16 Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ? 17 Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all share the one loaf. 1 Corinthians 11:23 For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. 27 So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. 29 For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves. 30 That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep. 31 But if we were more discerning with regard to ourselves, we would not come under such judgment.
"...and the WORD was made flesh, and dwelt among us..." Catholics literally eat the WORD of God! Isn't that amazing? Come to think of it- why would the scripture cite the people walking away from Jesus when he said those words? To confirm that Jesus words were not symbolic.
Brothers and sisters, the question of whether Jesus is speaking metaphorically, symbolically, spiritually or Literally, is answered by guess who? Jesus Himself. John 6:51 KJVS Broken down into 3 parts: #1 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: #2 👉and the bread that I will give is my flesh,👈 #3 which I will give for the life of the world. (When does this occur? On the cross). Was the flesh on the Cross his metaphorical flesh? Spiritual flesh? Symbolic flesh? or his Literal Fesh? There is NO way for the Heterodox to get around these Red Letter Words of Christ on what is going to be given to us in the Holy Eucharist. The Bread of Life Discource is revealed at the Last Supper. Blessing, Ryan Zell of the Catholic Forum.
The Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation teaches that the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper literally (though invisibly) transform into the actual flesh and blood of Jesus’ human body. These elements are thus considered proper objects of worship, as they are thought to be God Himself physically present. They are also a sacramental means of obtaining the grace of Jesus Christ for faithful Roman Catholics who partake of them. Perhaps the primary text that Roman Catholics appeal to in defense of this doctrine is John 6:51-55 and Jesus’ words about eating His flesh and drinking His blood: “’I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.’ Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, ‘How can this man give us His flesh to eat?’ So Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink,’” (John 6:51-55). They argue that Jesus plainly claims that you must literally eat His flesh and blood to attain eternal life and that this is talking about the bread and wine of communion which Jesus would later institute. If one were to accept this interpretation, however, it would have to mean that anyone who performs the physical act of eating the communion elements is absolutely guaranteed eternal life. Note again that Jesus says: “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day,” (John 6:54). Jesus also says immediately after this: “As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also will live because of Me,” (John 6:57). Whatever it means to eat Jesus, to eat His flesh and drink His blood, whoever does it is promised eternal life and future resurrection. Jesus swears on the Father who sent Him that anyone who eats Him will live. Again, whatever Jesus means by “eating” Him, everyone who does it has eternal life. Guaranteed. Roman Catholicism, however, denies any such guarantee. Likewise, if anyone doesn’t eat His flesh and blood they will not have eternal life: “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves,” (John 6:53). If this refers to physically eating Jesus’ human body in the form of the bread and wine of communion, then it also ends up saying more than the modern Roman Catholic would intend. The man who truly repents and believes on Christ but dies before he makes it to his first Catholic Mass is still bound for hell. So, too, with faithful Protestants who partake of communion without a Roman Catholic priest to perform the miracle of Transubstantiation. They are likewise bound for hell since their communion elements have not transformed into the literal body and blood of Christ. Thus, this reading of the passage would claim that everyone who performs the physical act of eating the bread and wine at a Catholic mass will be saved, and no one who does not eat these elements can be saved. Salvation is, thus, based on the performance of a ritual rather than on faith in Christ or repentance of sin, which would be contrary to everything else the Bible says. A quick look at the context, however, shows that this is not at all what Jesus had in mind when He told men to eat His flesh and drink His blood. A consistent theme that runs through the Gospel of John is that of Jesus using analogies to express His purpose, and then of people missing His point by taking such imagery literally. For example: In John 2:18-22, after driving the money changers from the temple in Jerusalem, Jesus tells His accusers to “destroy this temple, and in three days I will rebuild it.” They think He means the literal temple, but John explains that Jesus is actually referring to His own body. In John 3:1-18, Jesus tells Nicodemus that he must be “born again.” Nicodemus mistakenly believes He is talking about literal birth. He is actually talking about regeneration by the Spirit and eternal life through faith. In John 4:7-14, Jesus tells the Samaritan woman that she should be seeking the living water that He can give. She thinks that He means literal water. He explains that He means regeneration within unto eternal life. In John 4:31-38, Jesus tells the disciples that He has food about which they do not know. They think He means literal, physical food. He explains that His food is to accomplish what the Father sent Him to do, namely, bringing about the salvation of many (including the Samaritans). In John 7:37-39, Jesus says, “If anyone is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink,” and “From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water.” The passage makes clear that Jesus was actually talking about coming to Christ in faith and being made new by receiving the Holy Spirit (regeneration).
Further examples could be multiplied. These, however, are sufficient to demonstrate that John 6 falls in the midst of a long series of episodes where Jesus uses physical imagery to speak of spiritual reality (most frequently of faith, regeneration by the Spirit, and Christ’s giving of eternal life to those who believe.) Several of these images involved comparisons to food and drink. When we arrive at John 6 and find Jesus telling a crowd that they must eat His flesh and drink His blood to have eternal life, and they take His words literally and are appalled, the most obvious assumption seems to be that they have misunderstood Jesus and His words are figurative and pointing to something else. This would be consistent with the rest of John’s narrative. Such are the kind of incidents in Jesus’ life that John goes out of his way to emphasize. When we read the passage, this is indeed exactly what we find. In the aftermath of the feeding of the 5,000, there are crowds following Jesus in hopes of being fed again by Jesus miracles. Jesus says to them: “Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled. Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you, for on Him the Father, God, has set His seal.’ Therefore, they said to Him, ‘What shall we do, so that we may work the works of God?’ Jesus answered and said to them, ‘This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent,” (John 6:26-29). Jesus tells us up front that He is commanding them to come to Him in faith rather than seeking literal, physical food. They even ask Him about the plural “works” of God, but Jesus responds with only one, singular work, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.” Jesus goes on to further explain: “I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst,” (John 6:35). You partake of Jesus as the bread of life by coming to Him and believing in Him. It is by faith in Christ that one will cease to hunger and thirst. Jesus is using the image of food, but He is talking about coming to Him in faith, as Jesus says plainly just a few verses later: “For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day,” (John 6:40). Jesus promises eternal life and future resurrection to “everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him.” This is the literal reality to which His food analogy corresponds. As we read on, Jesus explains this yet again: “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh,” (John 6:48-51). Jesus begins with the plain statement that “he who believes has eternal life.” He goes on to say, “Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die.” Notice how this parallels with Jesus’ earlier conversation with the Samaritan woman: “She said to Him, ‘Sir, You have nothing to draw with and the well is deep; where then do You get that living water? You are not greater than our father Jacob, are You, who gave us the well, and drank of it himself and his sons and his cattle?’ Jesus answered and said to her, ‘Everyone who drinks of this water will thirst again; but whoever drinks of the water that I will give him shall never thirst; but the water that I will give him will become in him a well of water springing up to eternal life,’” (John 4:11-14). Jesus is comparing physical eating and drinking, which can only sustain temporarily, to the gift of life that He gives by the Spirit, which is eternal and satisfies fully. Jesus was not telling the woman to physically drink some particular liquid He would give, nor was He telling the crowd to literally eat His human body. He was using imagery to illustrate the fact that regeneration and eternal life found in Christ through faith satisfy and sustain as no food or beverage could ever do. Jesus is talking about coming to Him in faith to receive eternal life through His death and resurrection. As Jesus also earlier explained to Nicodemus: “As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God,” (John 3:15-18). John’s gospel never focuses on the communion meal. Even in John’s telling of the Last supper, there is no mention made of Jesus’ discussion of the bread and cup. That’s not John’s focus. Instead, as He explains: “Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name,” (John 20:20-21). John had a very specific focus in what he chose to report about Jesus’ life and teaching. His point was that the reader would have life by believing in Jesus. This is the message that flows through the whole gospel. Jesus wasn’t talking about the ritual of the Lord’s Supper in John 6. He was talking about eternal life in the Spirit through faith in Jesus Christ. He says so Himself toward the end of the passage: “It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life,” (John 6:63). Far from teaching transubstantiation, John 6:51-55 is not even talking about the bread and wine at all. When Jesus says, “if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.” He is talking about giving Himself on the cross, and to “eat the bread” is to come to Him by faith. When Jesus says, “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day,” He is merely repeating what He said earlier in the chapter, “everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.” To “eat” or “drink” Jesus is to come to Him in faith. This is the point Jesus was making. Just as He would later go on to say: “I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in Me will live even if he dies,” (John 11:25).
@@jesusrosary9067 1 Corinthians 10:16 Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ? 17 Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all share the one loaf. 1 Corinthians 11:23 For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. 27 So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. 29 For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves. 30 That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep. 31 But if we were more discerning with regard to ourselves, we would not come under such judgment.
John 6:54 is clearly parallel to v40. This man does not read in context. How does he explain that the RCC denied the cup to the congregation for 100s of years. In this way according to THEIR interpretation of John 6:54 they deprived millions of eternal life. As I have said v40 is the key to v54.
Basically, Dean's point is that Jesus is not making a mere analogy here. He is being repeatedly emphatic that, for instance, HIs flesh is true food and His blood is true drink. It's not a mere parable about the spiritual life, but an actual physical act that he his calling his disciples to do -- to participate in an outward sign (which would be instituted later at the Last Supper) that conveys grace. Of course, bear in mind, that as a Presbyterian minister, Dean would have thought about "sacramentality" in different terms than he does now as a Catholic! But it became clear to him that Jesus was asking much more of his followers in this passage than Dean's theology allowed for at the time. Essentially, Dean realized that this IS the event from the life of Christ that John records as a way of illuminating the meaning of the Last Supper.
John 6 is speaking in spiritual terms, not physical. Look at verses 60-64. The disciples come to Jesus after this teaching to discuss what Jesus had said. Jesus then, in response in verse 63, first draws a contrast between the spirit and the flesh. He says that the spirit gives life in the flesh is no help at all. He then goes on to directly comment on what he just said, saying that “the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.” Jesus is saying that His words about eating His flesh and drinking His blood are about consuming Jesus’s spirit, that it may dwell in you and grant you eternal life. This is confirmed by the fact that John 6:40 and John 6:54, have the same conclusion in Jesus‘s teaching. In verse 40 it says, “everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” And verse 54 says, “whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” These, in this chapter, are treated as equivalent by Jesus. They mean the same thing because they have the same conclusion. But where does it say that he is talking about communion? He is talking about the spiritual reality of consuming his body and blood when you become a Christian. Jesus was an amazing teacher who made his teachings clear in the verses following between verses 61 and 65. The disciples, on the other hand, were called out many times by Jesus for lacking understanding but once they were given the Holy Spirit, then all wisdom came to them making them great teachers. AND YET, some students, just like the disciples did once, sometimes lacked understanding. That is Catholics. They lack this understanding. Notice that Jesus never offers his flesh to be eaten. He only offers his flesh in the context of communion, which is bread, and in this spiritual context in John 6. When Jesus says “ I am the light of the world” is he the actual Sun that continually illuminates the world or speaking in a spiritual sense of being the hope for the world? When Jesus says “I am the door of the sheep“ is he an actual door that sheep walk through or does he speak in a spiritual sense of us being the sheep and him being the door? When Jesus says “I am the good shepherd“ is he actually really good at being a shepherd or is he talking in a spiritual sense of being our shepherd and we being his sheep? When Jesus says “I am the true vine“ is he talking about being a thin plant or is he talking in a spiritual sense of us being part of him? Therefore, why would we assume that he means for us to actually feast on him? I would love to reply to any rebuttal. May the grace of God be with you.
They also have a weird interpretation of real presence. The Eastern Orthodox are much closer to if not identical to the Catholic understanding. In any event, if you are going to start taking John 6 literally, it would make sense to do the same to Matthew 16. That leaves only Catholicism.
It was that exact verse I heard in a Bible study that began my return back to Catholicism after spending 25 years in a reformed Presbyterian church where I served as a ruling elder.
Wow! Welcome home!
Glory to God and Praised be Jesus.
Praise God! ❤️🙏♥️
Same exact story with me. 30 years as a protestant before this verse started leading me back. Unfortunately I still can't accept the papacy, Mary, and works based salvation. But I started attending as Catholic church again.
@@staza1 If you are open to truth, He will lead you. God Bless you.
YES!!! I'm no teacher, and I lack the ancient Greek (but I do know how to use my Interlinear), but I was a sola scriptura Protestant for 36 years. I spent near-daily time in my Bible. When John 6 was opened to me by Catholic apologeticists that I was reading and listening to, it blew my mind! (I wasn't listening/reading them for fun -- I was having a serious argument with a family member who wanted to become Catholic, and I was looking for places where I can punch holes in the Catholic beliefs). The real presence IS very real indeed! There is no other way to take John 6. And it's not lost on me that it came right after the feeding of the 5000 -- Jesus performs a similar miracle every time and everywhere the Mass is celebrated.
This was the first domino to fall, and the rest is history. I've now been Catholic for more than 2 years, and it has been revolutionary to my faith! My faith has never been more strong, nor my love for God as intense. Christ IS actually with us, indeed! I experience him personally every time I go to Mass.
Same here, re: John 6. Now, on to sola scriptura. It is untenable even upon a cursory reading. If it were practical, then everyone who subscribes to the Holy Bible would have the same beliefs, practices, ecclesiology, etc., but obviously that isn't the case. When I brought this up with the other elders, they had no answer other than " the main things are the plain things". But who decides what are the main things and the plain things becomes a rhetorical question.
“If Jesus could’ve gave us a better gift than the Eucharist, he would’ve done so.”
St John Vianney
Amen...💕💕
St. John Vianney pray for us !
Thank you my Catholic brothers & sisters. God Bless 🙏🏼
As a Catholic devoted to our Lord Jesus Christ, I loved hearing this testimony ❤! How I wish all could come to understand it and recieve Jesus in the blessed Sacrament! Peace of Christ to all who read this.
Hi lynda good afternoon My honest and sincere apologies for invading your privacy abruptly. I was going through a comment when I came across your amazing comment I was fascinated and became interested in knowing you, I'll be so glad if you send me a mess📧. I hope there are no problems to be part of your friend list 🌺but If you find this message embarrassing please pardon my manners.🌺☘️🌺🙏
@@Raymondgogolf Your comments are very nice, don't worry. You do need to know that I am married and not looking for romance. Otherwise, we can chat here on UA-cam. I am wondering which of my comments were so interesting and why.
This is an honest truly "follow the Bible where it actually leads one" testimony by a truthful,, faithful, and courageous follower of Christ. Thank you! A hundred times, thank you, for explaining the biblical truth of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
Wow. Crucial questions.
When did the incarnation begin? At fiat of Our Lady, in the annunciation.
When did the incarnation end? It did not end.
Glory to God!
Amen! What a blessing that he heard, saw, followed and proclaimed the true words of Jesus Christ!
Hi Cathy Good afternoon My honest and sincere apologies for invading your privacy abruptly. I was going through a comment when I came across your amazing comment I was fascinated and became interested in knowing you, I'll be so glad if you send me a mess📧. I hope there are no problems to be part of your friend list 🌺but If you find this message embarrassing please pardon my manners.🌺☘️🌺🙏
What an honest, decent man to admit the inevitable. Another pathway that brings Protestants to the Church is researching where the Church that Christ founded is today. It always leads you to the Catholic Church, if you're decent and honest.
Yes and no. Some Protestants are absolutely convinced it’s spiritual and not real presence. It’s not about being honest. It’s about hermeneutic. And many Protestants believe in real presence. The Catholic Church itself spent decades working out their position. So it’s not inevitable.
Otherwise I would ask you why 1 million Catholics in Latin America have left the church to become Pentecostal if it was so obvious.
@@ntlearning only a blind or proud man could not see that Christ founded the Catholic Church. The Real Presence has been around since the last supper. Many people have left the Church because of the new relativism movement. Do what makes you feel good, not what God wants. They have been poorly catechised. Now, do we have problems in Christ's Church? You bet, but I'd still rather be inside than outside the one Our Lord founded.
God is again cleaning out His Church, whatever it takes may it be 1, 2, 10, or 30 million, He has His, not ours, plan.
@@ntlearning what PROTEST-ants believe in real presence? is physically or mentally/spiritually?
I believe Science proof of the Eucharist miracle.
ua-cam.com/video/93cqR-nwI8sh/v-deo.html
Eucharist Miracle of a beating heart.
ua-cam.com/video/747s-WgS7a0/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/6EIam9EFhsM/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/soCkftBBsBo/v-deo.html
i'm so happy that I Who is blessed with good formation, right from the beginning of my Catholic baptism three years ago Bible in a year father Mike Schmitz catechism in a year, the church fathers, and still barely scratching the surface on the mystery, and the deep wisdom, and the fulness of our faith, that is the Catholic Church. I like that this pastor now Catholic saw the Truth. So many protestants look, but do not see listen but do not hear
What a beautiful testimony. VIVA CRISTO REY BROTHER welcome home
Welcome home, Dean. Praise God!
Dean's conversion strengthens all of us ! Pax vobiscum.
Jesus: This is my Body; this is my Blood .
Protestants: This is not really His Body; this is not really His Blood .
Lutheranism: Is means is. In the sacrament we receive the true body and true blood of Christ.
Amen brother.
Well said and welcome back to the faith of your forefathers. Deus Benedicta tibi.
Indeed. If you want to see Christ visible and present in the world, go to adoration. There He is.
Plus, Jesus is incarnated in Heaven forever - always fully God and fully man. His desire to identify with us for eternity is so beautiful. Anyway, I love these conversion stories.
Excellent teaching! Thank you!
Amazing presentation here.
It's apparent that practicing protestants haven't read John 6. If they have they may have ignored it and /or don't believe it. If they're into solo Scritura since that's all they have, why do they ignore it? That in itself says alot.
Hi Maria! Just wanted to answer that too be fair, Protestants don’t ignore it, they just interpret it as meaning that Jesus’ body and blood on the cross has spiritually saved us and is our spiritual life (food and drink). I never had a problem reading it as a Protestant until recently. I’m now looking into Catholicism and seeing that this may be the real and true literal interpretation. I’m on that journey, but I also sympathize with Protestants who learned to interpret scripture differently. Hope that helps for perspective! 😊
@KaitlinRay by whose authority do Protestants interpret the Bible? There has to be ONLY ONE TRUE INTERPRETATION, right? Even if Protestants get 90% of it right, how would they know? Upon whose authority to they interpret it? It can't be the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit wouldn't teach tens of thousands of different denominations differently.
Who told the first Protestants what the Bible actually says, especially in the parts where their interpretation differs from those of the people who wrote the New Testament--the first Catholics? By whose authority did that person or persons claim their interpretation was correct?
Jesus' Church created the Bible. Shouldn't Jesus' Church be able to infallibly interpret it? Wouldn't Jesus make sure the Holy Spirit was part of the process?
To claim that Jesus' Church can create the Bible, but it's not qualified to interpret it defies logic. But to claim that tens of thousands of Protestant denominations can also interpret it (differently) also defies logic.
@@KaitlinRay Thank you. If you've read the Gospel of John 6 to the end you'll read that many walked away and misinterpreted what Jesus meant. He didn't try to stop them. But, if He said that the Eucharist IS literally His Body and Blood, then that's what It is. As Catholics we believe it. I'm with the RCIA in
my parish and always have non-Catholics joining the Church that are also accepting that. Thank you for your comment. Hopefully, you'll consider joining the Catholic Church there's alot to it that many non-Catholic dont understand.
God Bless you Kaitlin. Such a journey can’t be easy and I will be praying for you.
@@KaitlinRay In John 6, Jesus made it very clear. He was straight to the point.
Hallelujah! ✝️✝️✝️👍👍❤️
They say Bible alone but when this passage is read, they cannot accept it as it is. I hope all Protestant in the world realized that they are denying themselves and their family of the Eucharist. There is no more reason to stay in a religion of lies and deceit. The truth is already out.
I was walking by a small Baptist church on country lane recently. It was Bible study night. I wanted to shout out "Read John Chapter 6!". I refrained, but just barely. 🤣
You should of. But, I don't think that's going to do anything. Reasons for not joining the Catholic Church is different for everyone. For example, for some it might be the papacy is an issue - like the Orthodox who see it as invalid and that God gave Peter a primacy but never a supremacy.
@@ntlearning That thousands of wrong answers exist does not prevent the existence of a correct one.
@@atrifle8364 That's true, and yet that's exactly what they will say to you.
@@ntlearning - Faith in God is faith in objective truth. I am sorry you don't have it, but there's nothing I can do about it except pray for you. It's you along with the help of the Holy Spirit that has to make that leap of faith.
@@atrifle8364 ahhhh you've lost the argument! Starting to get into personal ad hoc hominem. 😅 🤣 😂
Firstly, you are lying, because I don't believe you would pray for me. This is just a cliche comment people make when they are condescending.
Secondly, you need to pray for yourself. The irony with this argument is that the body and blood of Christ in us is meant to form us into His image. It hasn't done anything for you. I highly recommend you watch Jimmy Akin, and Trent Horn to see what true "Christ formed" Catholics look like. Because you absolutely don't have it.
And thirdly, to respond to your comment about faith which is half correct:
Faith is objective AND subjective:
Pope Francis:
"Faith is not a light that scatters all our darkness, but a lamp that guides our steps in the night and suffices for the journey." (Lumen Fidei - Encyclical Letter on Faith)
St. John Paul II:
"Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth." (Fides et Ratio - Encyclical Letter on Faith and Reason)
St. Teresa of Avila:
"To have courage for whatever comes in life, everything lies in that." (Interior Castle)
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI):
"Faith is a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. It is to encounter God in Christ." (God and the World)
St. Augustine of Hippo:
"Faith is to believe what you do not see; the reward of this faith is to see what you believe." (Sermons of St. Augustine on Selected Lessons of the New Testament)
If Jesus is the Passover Lamb, the Passover Lamb was meant to be eaten.
So Jesus is also an actual door too?
@@geordiewishart1683 Did Our Lord say "verily, verily," "truly, truly," "amen, amen," I am a door? No. But, He did use that phrase, however you translate it, with regard to eating His flesh and drinking His blood. And His true followers believed Him. Which is why the pagans accused the early Church of being cannibals.
Thank you for sharing your testimony with us . God bless and God bless all your family..
VIVA CRISTO REY SEŇOR DE SEŇORES Y REY DE REYES 🛐 VIVA LA SANTISIMA VIRGEN MARIA Y VIVA NUESTRA SANTA MADRE IGLESIA CRISTIANA CATOLICA Y APOSTOLICA AMEN 🙏
My flesh is real food.
Jn 6
Welcome home brother in Christ
Amen 🙏
Amen.🙏📿✝️❤️💚💙
That screen name!!!🤣
Welcome home
Excellent!!!!
Catholics has the most intimate relationship with Jesus by drinking his blood and eating his flesh through the Eucharist.
YES!
1 Corinthians 10:16 Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ? 17 Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all share the one loaf.
1 Corinthians 11:23 For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.
27 So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. 29 For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves. 30 That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep. 31 But if we were more discerning with regard to ourselves, we would not come under such judgment.
"...and the WORD was made flesh, and dwelt among us..."
Catholics literally eat the WORD of God! Isn't that amazing?
Come to think of it- why would the scripture cite the people walking away from Jesus when he said those words? To confirm that Jesus words were not symbolic.
Methodists and Anglicans and eastern "Orthodox" have a difference with Presbyterians.
Brothers and sisters, the question of whether Jesus is speaking metaphorically, symbolically, spiritually or Literally, is answered by guess who? Jesus Himself.
John 6:51 KJVS Broken down into 3 parts:
#1 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever:
#2 👉and the bread that I will give is my flesh,👈
#3 which I will give for the life of the world. (When does this occur? On the cross).
Was the flesh on the Cross his metaphorical flesh? Spiritual flesh? Symbolic flesh? or his Literal Fesh?
There is NO way for the Heterodox to get around these Red Letter Words of Christ on what is going to be given to us in the Holy Eucharist.
The Bread of Life Discource is revealed at the Last Supper.
Blessing,
Ryan Zell of the Catholic Forum.
Amen
The Lutherans also affirm actual presence
The Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation teaches that the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper literally (though invisibly) transform into the actual flesh and blood of Jesus’ human body. These elements are thus considered proper objects of worship, as they are thought to be God Himself physically present. They are also a sacramental means of obtaining the grace of Jesus Christ for faithful Roman Catholics who partake of them. Perhaps the primary text that Roman Catholics appeal to in defense of this doctrine is John 6:51-55 and Jesus’ words about eating His flesh and drinking His blood:
“’I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.’ Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, ‘How can this man give us His flesh to eat?’ So Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink,’” (John 6:51-55).
They argue that Jesus plainly claims that you must literally eat His flesh and blood to attain eternal life and that this is talking about the bread and wine of communion which Jesus would later institute. If one were to accept this interpretation, however, it would have to mean that anyone who performs the physical act of eating the communion elements is absolutely guaranteed eternal life. Note again that Jesus says:
“He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day,” (John 6:54).
Jesus also says immediately after this:
“As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also will live because of Me,” (John 6:57).
Whatever it means to eat Jesus, to eat His flesh and drink His blood, whoever does it is promised eternal life and future resurrection. Jesus swears on the Father who sent Him that anyone who eats Him will live. Again, whatever Jesus means by “eating” Him, everyone who does it has eternal life. Guaranteed. Roman Catholicism, however, denies any such guarantee.
Likewise, if anyone doesn’t eat His flesh and blood they will not have eternal life:
“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves,” (John 6:53).
If this refers to physically eating Jesus’ human body in the form of the bread and wine of communion, then it also ends up saying more than the modern Roman Catholic would intend. The man who truly repents and believes on Christ but dies before he makes it to his first Catholic Mass is still bound for hell. So, too, with faithful Protestants who partake of communion without a Roman Catholic priest to perform the miracle of Transubstantiation. They are likewise bound for hell since their communion elements have not transformed into the literal body and blood of Christ. Thus, this reading of the passage would claim that everyone who performs the physical act of eating the bread and wine at a Catholic mass will be saved, and no one who does not eat these elements can be saved. Salvation is, thus, based on the performance of a ritual rather than on faith in Christ or repentance of sin, which would be contrary to everything else the Bible says. A quick look at the context, however, shows that this is not at all what Jesus had in mind when He told men to eat His flesh and drink His blood.
A consistent theme that runs through the Gospel of John is that of Jesus using analogies to express His purpose, and then of people missing His point by taking such imagery literally. For example:
In John 2:18-22, after driving the money changers from the temple in Jerusalem, Jesus tells His accusers to “destroy this temple, and in three days I will rebuild it.” They think He means the literal temple, but John explains that Jesus is actually referring to His own body.
In John 3:1-18, Jesus tells Nicodemus that he must be “born again.” Nicodemus mistakenly believes He is talking about literal birth. He is actually talking about regeneration by the Spirit and eternal life through faith.
In John 4:7-14, Jesus tells the Samaritan woman that she should be seeking the living water that He can give. She thinks that He means literal water. He explains that He means regeneration within unto eternal life.
In John 4:31-38, Jesus tells the disciples that He has food about which they do not know. They think He means literal, physical food. He explains that His food is to accomplish what the Father sent Him to do, namely, bringing about the salvation of many (including the Samaritans).
In John 7:37-39, Jesus says, “If anyone is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink,” and “From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water.” The passage makes clear that Jesus was actually talking about coming to Christ in faith and being made new by receiving the Holy Spirit (regeneration).
Further examples could be multiplied. These, however, are sufficient to demonstrate that John 6 falls in the midst of a long series of episodes where Jesus uses physical imagery to speak of spiritual reality (most frequently of faith, regeneration by the Spirit, and Christ’s giving of eternal life to those who believe.) Several of these images involved comparisons to food and drink. When we arrive at John 6 and find Jesus telling a crowd that they must eat His flesh and drink His blood to have eternal life, and they take His words literally and are appalled, the most obvious assumption seems to be that they have misunderstood Jesus and His words are figurative and pointing to something else. This would be consistent with the rest of John’s narrative. Such are the kind of incidents in Jesus’ life that John goes out of his way to emphasize. When we read the passage, this is indeed exactly what we find.
In the aftermath of the feeding of the 5,000, there are crowds following Jesus in hopes of being fed again by Jesus miracles. Jesus says to them:
“Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled. Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you, for on Him the Father, God, has set His seal.’ Therefore, they said to Him, ‘What shall we do, so that we may work the works of God?’ Jesus answered and said to them, ‘This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent,” (John 6:26-29).
Jesus tells us up front that He is commanding them to come to Him in faith rather than seeking literal, physical food. They even ask Him about the plural “works” of God, but Jesus responds with only one, singular work, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.” Jesus goes on to further explain:
“I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst,” (John 6:35).
You partake of Jesus as the bread of life by coming to Him and believing in Him. It is by faith in Christ that one will cease to hunger and thirst. Jesus is using the image of food, but He is talking about coming to Him in faith, as Jesus says plainly just a few verses later:
“For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day,” (John 6:40).
Jesus promises eternal life and future resurrection to “everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him.” This is the literal reality to which His food analogy corresponds. As we read on, Jesus explains this yet again:
“Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh,” (John 6:48-51).
Jesus begins with the plain statement that “he who believes has eternal life.” He goes on to say, “Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die.” Notice how this parallels with Jesus’ earlier conversation with the Samaritan woman:
“She said to Him, ‘Sir, You have nothing to draw with and the well is deep; where then do You get that living water? You are not greater than our father Jacob, are You, who gave us the well, and drank of it himself and his sons and his cattle?’ Jesus answered and said to her, ‘Everyone who drinks of this water will thirst again; but whoever drinks of the water that I will give him shall never thirst; but the water that I will give him will become in him a well of water springing up to eternal life,’” (John 4:11-14).
Jesus is comparing physical eating and drinking, which can only sustain temporarily, to the gift of life that He gives by the Spirit, which is eternal and satisfies fully. Jesus was not telling the woman to physically drink some particular liquid He would give, nor was He telling the crowd to literally eat His human body. He was using imagery to illustrate the fact that regeneration and eternal life found in Christ through faith satisfy and sustain as no food or beverage could ever do. Jesus is talking about coming to Him in faith to receive eternal life through His death and resurrection. As Jesus also earlier explained to Nicodemus:
“As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God,” (John 3:15-18).
John’s gospel never focuses on the communion meal. Even in John’s telling of the Last supper, there is no mention made of Jesus’ discussion of the bread and cup. That’s not John’s focus. Instead, as He explains:
“Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name,” (John 20:20-21).
John had a very specific focus in what he chose to report about Jesus’ life and teaching. His point was that the reader would have life by believing in Jesus. This is the message that flows through the whole gospel. Jesus wasn’t talking about the ritual of the Lord’s Supper in John 6. He was talking about eternal life in the Spirit through faith in Jesus Christ. He says so Himself toward the end of the passage:
“It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life,” (John 6:63).
Far from teaching transubstantiation, John 6:51-55 is not even talking about the bread and wine at all. When Jesus says, “if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.” He is talking about giving Himself on the cross, and to “eat the bread” is to come to Him by faith. When Jesus says, “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day,” He is merely repeating what He said earlier in the chapter, “everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.” To “eat” or “drink” Jesus is to come to Him in faith. This is the point Jesus was making. Just as He would later go on to say:
“I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in Me will live even if he dies,” (John 11:25).
Titus 3 5 he saved through the Washing of Regeneration and renewal of the holy spirit
This is water and spirit
It takes a lot text to deny the Real Presence. It's sorta sad really. Jesus is offering himself an amazing and admittedly weird way.
@@jesusrosary9067
1 Corinthians 10:16 Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ? 17 Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all share the one loaf.
1 Corinthians 11:23 For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.
27 So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. 29 For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves. 30 That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep. 31 But if we were more discerning with regard to ourselves, we would not come under such judgment.
When did it end? The ascension.
👍👍👍👍👍
John 6:54 is clearly parallel to v40. This man does not read in context. How does he explain that the RCC denied the cup to the congregation for 100s of years. In this way according to THEIR interpretation of John 6:54 they deprived millions of eternal life. As I have said v40 is the key to v54.
Brain my just not be working, but how does the fact that there is no last supper narrative in John make this Sacramental?
Basically, Dean's point is that Jesus is not making a mere analogy here. He is being repeatedly emphatic that, for instance, HIs flesh is true food and His blood is true drink. It's not a mere parable about the spiritual life, but an actual physical act that he his calling his disciples to do -- to participate in an outward sign (which would be instituted later at the Last Supper) that conveys grace. Of course, bear in mind, that as a Presbyterian minister, Dean would have thought about "sacramentality" in different terms than he does now as a Catholic! But it became clear to him that Jesus was asking much more of his followers in this passage than Dean's theology allowed for at the time.
Essentially, Dean realized that this IS the event from the life of Christ that John records as a way of illuminating the meaning of the Last Supper.
John 6 is speaking in spiritual terms, not physical. Look at verses 60-64. The disciples come to Jesus after this teaching to discuss what Jesus had said. Jesus then, in response in verse 63, first draws a contrast between the spirit and the flesh. He says that the spirit gives life in the flesh is no help at all. He then goes on to directly comment on what he just said, saying that “the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.” Jesus is saying that His words about eating His flesh and drinking His blood are about consuming Jesus’s spirit, that it may dwell in you and grant you eternal life. This is confirmed by the fact that John 6:40 and John 6:54, have the same conclusion in Jesus‘s teaching. In verse 40 it says, “everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” And verse 54 says, “whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” These, in this chapter, are treated as equivalent by Jesus. They mean the same thing because they have the same conclusion. But where does it say that he is talking about communion? He is talking about the spiritual reality of consuming his body and blood when you become a Christian. Jesus was an amazing teacher who made his teachings clear in the verses following between verses 61 and 65. The disciples, on the other hand, were called out many times by Jesus for lacking understanding but once they were given the Holy Spirit, then all wisdom came to them making them great teachers. AND YET, some students, just like the disciples did once, sometimes lacked understanding. That is Catholics. They lack this understanding. Notice that Jesus never offers his flesh to be eaten. He only offers his flesh in the context of communion, which is bread, and in this spiritual context in John 6. When Jesus says “ I am the light of the world” is he the actual Sun that continually illuminates the world or speaking in a spiritual sense of being the hope for the world? When Jesus says “I am the door of the sheep“ is he an actual door that sheep walk through or does he speak in a spiritual sense of us being the sheep and him being the door? When Jesus says “I am the good shepherd“ is he actually really good at being a shepherd or is he talking in a spiritual sense of being our shepherd and we being his sheep? When Jesus says “I am the true vine“ is he talking about being a thin plant or is he talking in a spiritual sense of us being part of him? Therefore, why would we assume that he means for us to actually feast on him? I would love to reply to any rebuttal. May the grace of God be with you.
Why is it that all Protestants dont believe this? Seems like you really need to clean up your own 1st.
John 6 39-54 Jesus says at the Last day four times. Jesus is Truth
The Resurrection of the church is at judgment day
Oh come on. Why did You skip over groups like Confessional Lutherans, for example, who hold to the actual true real presence in the Eucharist?
There is no Apostolic succession in Lutheranism
They also have a weird interpretation of real presence. The Eastern Orthodox are much closer to if not identical to the Catholic understanding. In any event, if you are going to start taking John 6 literally, it would make sense to do the same to Matthew 16. That leaves only Catholicism.
Being Lutheran is to be a heretic. The man who started the separation of the one holy apostolic Catholic church.
Also Martin Luther was a ex crazy Catholic priest.