Baptists, Does Scripture point to the Catholic Lord's Supper/Eucharist?

[Anna_Scott]

Response to AmateurPianist–Part 1 of 2

AmateurPianist,

First, I really appreciate your taking the time to comment directly on these passages. Unless someone posts, while I’m working on this response; you are the only non-Catholic Christian to do so.

Secondly, I haven’t come to a conclusion regarding the “Real Presence.” I was taught the Lord’s Supper is done in remembrance of Christ, and that it has nothing to do with one’s salvation or eternal life.

I started looking at these passages more closely after a conversation with a good friend of mine, who drove down to visit me in the Fall of 2006 (I remember the year, because I was diagnosed with cancer a few months after her visit.) My friend is an Evangelical Christian who finds the idea of the “Real Presences” quite disturbing and disagrees completely.

So, I’m not exactly moving at lightening speed on this issue. I’ve had a few years to think about it. As I question your responses, know that I am questioning the issue for myself as well.

. . . .Pro: Uses the verb is in its most common usage, one of equivalence. Why didn’t Jesus just say represents if this is symbolic
Con: When I point to an object and say this object is … when clearly it is not in the English language we understand is to mean represents.

It truly depends upon what the definition of is is.

. . . .the only command of Christ in respect to communion is the one “do”. He does not say “understand” or “have the right theology of” . . .

And in these passages He is not equating “doing” with having eternal life. This is important when you look at John 6.

You’ve identified a critical aspect in the discussion of the “Real Presence”: eternal life.

John 6 (ESV): 40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day."

41 So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” 42 They said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” 43 Jesus answered them, “Do not grumble among yourselves. 44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. 45 It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me— 46 not that anyone has seen the Father except he who is from God; he has seen the Father. 47 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.”

Important points:

• Whoever believes has eternal life.
• Christ is the living bread come down from heaven.
• One may eat of it and not die.
• Anyone who eats of this bread will live forever.
• The bread Christ will give for the life of the world is His flesh.

Christ does not say that eating this bread in “remembrance” will lead to living forever. Christ connects “eating of this bread” with living forever.

**John 6: **52 The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” 53 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 you. 54 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like the bread the fathers ate and died. Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.” 59 Jesus said these things in the synagogue, as he taught at Capernaum.

In the above passage from John Chapter 6:

Jesus said, “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 you.” Verse 53

Jesus said, “Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” Verse 54

Jesus said, “For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.” Verse 55

Jesus said, “Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.” Verse 56

Jesus said, “As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me.” Verse 57

Jesus said, “Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.” Verse 58

This seems to be much more than “remembrance.”

Continued—See Next Post for Part 2

 

[Anna_Scott]

Response to AmateurPianist Continued—Part 2 of 2

In my mind it is problematic whether these passages really support the real presence of communion.

First the passage predates the actual first communion celebration. Why is this significant?

• Whatever the audience had in mind when Jesus spoke these words, it would not have been communion.
• If I am reading John from beginning to end, I have not encountered communion. So thus my natural inclination would be to seek an interpretation that fits with the natural flow of the gospel.

You’ve made a good point in saying, “Whatever the audience had in mind when Jesus spoke these words, it would not have been communion.” This is a reasonable assumption; but I would not necessarily see this as ruling out the “Real presence.”

One reason being: Christ told the Disciples many things they did not fully understand, until Christ’s death and resurrection; and more was given through the Holy Spirit, after the Ascension of Christ.

Also whatever this passage means, eating His flesh and drinking His blood is so important that (v 51) if anyone eats of this bread he shall live forever, (v 53) unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourself. (v 54) He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life and I will raise him up on the last day (v56) He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in Me and I in him.

So I have two logical choices. Either Jesus is saying (1) You have to literally eat His flesh and eat His blood to have eternal life. In other words communion is on par with the gospel or (2) something else.

The problem with (1) is that you then have to ask why the apostes in the book of Acts do not preach that you have to literally eat His flesh and drink His blood to have eternal life

Must we have the words of the Apostles, in addition to the words of Christ—in order for Christ’s words to be true?

quote=AmateurPianist;6201393 when the apostle Paul teaches how one comes to eternal life in Christ he does not mention literally eating his flesh and drinking his blood.

As far as I know, Paul is still believed to have written 1 Corinthians (Bible scholars-please correct me if I’m wrong.)

In this passage, Paul does not limit the Lord’s Supper to “remembrance.” He speaks of the participation in the body and blood of Christ.

1 Corinthians 10: 14 Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry. 15 I speak as to sensible people; judge for yourselves what I say. 16 The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? 17 Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. 18 Consider the people of Israel: are not those who eat the sacrifices participants in the altar?"

In other words, the eternal importance that Jesus puts on eating His flesh and drinking His blood in John 6 works against wanting to relate this to the yet-to-be-introduced communion event.

See earlier comment re the Disciples lacking the full understanding of Christ’s words, while He was still with them.

This passage really does not tell you any more than the passages in the first section where the first communion was performed. If you believe the verb is has the transitive meaning, you will believe the same here. If you believe the verb is means represents you will believe the same here. . . . .

Would you clarify? You spoke earlier re the verb “is” and if “is” means “equivalence” or “symbolic.” Are you still referring to I Corinthians 10:14-17?

There is much to ponder, here. I welcome further comments.

Anna
[/quote]

 

[Anna_Scott]

Too much. Please specify the one or two to do first. I do not do shotgun apologetics.

I PREFER that she pick one or two so that I can do it it justice. The synoptics cover the same material but between Corinthians, the Synoptics, and then John 6 it will need individual treatment in my view. If she does not wish to do that, I am sure she will tell me that. I have a feeling based upon the tone of her thread, she will not mind narrowing it.

Rightlydivide,

Re: Lord’s Supper
It is best to consider the New Testament as a whole (Bible as a whole, really). The next best thing is to discuss specific passages pertaining to the Lord’s Supper and those related in any way. The next best is to discuss individual passages, which is fine, as long as you reassemble all the fragments by the end of the discussion.

So, I’ll give you one passage for “starters”:

John 6 (ESV): 40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day."

41 So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” 42 They said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” 43 Jesus answered them, “Do not grumble among yourselves. 44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. 45 It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me— 46 not that anyone has seen the Father except he who is from God; he has seen the Father. 47 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.”

Await your comments,
Anna

 

[Anna_Scott]

Baptists, Does Scripture point to the Catholic Lord’s Supper/Eucharist?

Where are the Baptists? Remain hopeful you will find this Thread. Need your (name removed by moderator)ut.

Signing off for the night. Be back tomorrow.

Goodnight All,
Anna

 

[Rightlydivide]

I will use the ESV because that appears to be your translation of choice. This is very different for me but I was recently convicted of the benefit of this approach.
There are two ways to approach John 6 for this thread.
One is the Catholic understanding that it refers to the Eucharist.
The other option I will present is that the bread refers to Jesus. Specifically believing in Jesus.

25 When they found him on the other side of the sea, they said to him, “Rabbi, when did you come here?” 26 Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you are seeking me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves. 27 Do not labor for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you. For on him God the Father has set his seal.” 28 Then they said to him, “What must we do, to be doing the works of God?” 29 Jesus answered them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.” 30 So they said to him, “Then what sign do you do, that we may see and believe you? What work do you perform? 31 Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’” 32 Jesus then said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven, but my Father gives you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.” 34 They said to him, “Sir, give us this bread always.”

Whatever this food is, it leads to eternal life. Understanding that helps you to understand that either belief in Christ or the Eucharist is what Christ means.
Now the Catholic will tell you that they believe in Christ. Of course. Absolutely. I am not saying they do not.
What I am saying is that Christ is talking about belief in him. Not the Eucharist. You mention the Real Presence. You can substitute that in as well. If you believe that eating the host and thus having the Real Presence (or Transubstantiation) will lead to eternal life, you can substitute that understanding as well. I do not believe that is the case obviously but if you are inclined to think this means a Eucharist with a Real Presence, throw that understanding in and see if it stands up to scrutiny.

35 Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. 36 But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. 37 All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. 38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. 39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. 40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”

Will the eating the host during the Eucharist cause someone to not not physically hunger or physically thirst? No of course not. Christ means it in a spiritual sense. Look this is the clue to the whole passage; whomever believes in him will have eternal life. .

41 So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” 42 They said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” 43 Jesus answered them, “Do not grumble among yourselves. 44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. 45 It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me— 46 not that anyone has seen the Father except he who is from God; he has seen the Father. 47 **Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life. **48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.”

The Jews are unhappy about him saying he came down from heaven. Their beef is with his pre-existence. Whoever believes in him has eternal life. Do Catholics believe that the Eucharist leads to eternal life? If so, all I have to do is go and partake of the Eucharist. IF that is what Jesus is talking about, then I just have to do that. Why would Catholics not want me to partake of the Eucharist if that is what it takes.

 

[Rightlydivide]

The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” 53 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 you. 54 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me.

He has just said previously that this means belief in him. He has not changed the subject he has just upped the imagery big time! He knows he is getting under their skin and shocking them. That is his intention. If I drink his blood, (ie the Eucharist) I will have eternal life then? Well, no says the Catholic. Is more complicated than that they would say. I prefer to take this at face value.
Lets go on to what Peter says. What does Christ have that leads to eternal life? His words. Belief in him
**
You have the words of eternal life**

Now why did the Jews walk away? They did not believe that he was pre-existent, that they literally would have to eat his flesh, that this was not what they wanted…the possibilities are endless. One more quick thing. Catholics will tell you that Christ always clarified his statements. That is not true. I hope someone, that has not spent enough time reading the New Testament will say that, and then I can show them how that is not the case (hint they thought he was talking about the Temple)
Oh one more thing, Catholics do not actually believe that someone who does not partake of the Eucharist cannot have eternal life. They do believe even if we never partake of the Eucharist we can have eternal life although certainly it is more of a process since we are not Catholic…so how does THAT square up with what Christ taught? I suggest you MUST believe in him to have eternal life and that is the crux of the whole passage.

 

[KathleenGee]

There is too much emphasis on the bible from a small, fundamentalist perspective…the mainline Protestants are not so hard…even if they disagree…part of the understanding of the Eucharist comes from the Living Tradition of the Church…

The great heresy in ancient times was not to believe the bread and wine were turned into the Body and Blood of Christ…

And again, you should understand Catholicism now from the Hebrew Catholic perspective as they do the best drawing on all the precursory symbols of the Old Testament to fulfillment in the Church in the New. Catholicism is truly the fulfillment of Judaism and John Paul II called us all Fulfilled Jews…our liturgies fulfill the ancient ones, and the symbols in our churches echo that we are a communion of believers including those who have passed on before us.

We are a gathering of people…our most precious times are when we gather around the table, especially in the Lord’s name…and the Great Banquet awaits us in heaven…

The Lord is providing the most ordinary means of daily life to be our food for Eternal Life, the Eucharist…you can analyze and draw…but the Real Presence abides in our churches in our tabernacles, the sanctuary light lit…the presence of God is there…the same of ancient times…and yes it is sad so many Catholics are caught up with so much in the world they don’t make time for Adoration. To hear the Word of God in the physical presence of God is not the same as reading the Bible in a room with Good Christians…there is much, much more awaiting those who continue to seek the Lord…He is waiting for you!

 

[Dancelittleewok]

Whatever this food is, it leads to eternal life. Understanding that helps you to understand that either belief in Christ or the Eucharist is what Christ means.
Now the Catholic will tell you that they believe in Christ. Of course. Absolutely. I am not saying they do not.
What I am saying is that Christ is talking about belief in him. Not the Eucharist. You mention the Real Presence. You can substitute that in as well. If you believe that eating the host and thus having the Real Presence (or Transubstantiation) will lead to eternal life, you can substitute that understanding as well. I do not believe that is the case obviously but if you are inclined to think this means a Eucharist with a Real Presence, throw that understanding in and see if it stands up to scrutiny.

From what I’ve heard from some Protestants, “Belief in Him” equates to more than intellect assent or faith but also forensic justification. How does that mean that He is food or the belief in him is food?
Catholics, indeed, believe in Christ. To believe in Christ, we must believe in what He says: that He is the Bread of Life. No contradiction here.

Will the eating the host during the Eucharist cause someone to not not physically hunger or physically thirst? No of course not. Christ means it in a spiritual sense. Look this is the clue to the whole passage; whomever believes in him will have eternal life. .

Jesus means we will have eternal assurance then? I’m sorry but I fail to understand this in a spiritual sense. The Eucharist is no less spiritual than belief in Jesus. See post 75.

The Jews are unhappy about him saying he came down from heaven. Their beef is with his pre-existence. Whoever believes in him has eternal life. Do Catholics believe that the Eucharist leads to eternal life? If so, all I have to do is go and partake of the Eucharist. IF that is what Jesus is talking about, then I just have to do that. Why would Catholics not want me to partake of the Eucharist if that is what it takes.

If the Jews’ beef is His divinity, then why use food as an analogy? Yes, the manna came down from Heaven but God didn’t send Himself in the wilderness but food. If Jesus is using manna to point to His divinity, God Himself must be eaten. Your interpretation taken to its logical conclusion helps the Catholic position.

Why can’t non-Catholic partake in the Eucharist? True communion is united in belief.

What does Christ have that leads to eternal life? His words. Belief in him

If we believe in Him and His words, we must believe that He is the bread of Life. These two aren’t an either/or.

He has just said previously that this means belief in him. He has not changed the subject he has just upped the imagery big time! He knows he is getting under their skin and shocking them. That is his intention. If I drink his blood, (ie the Eucharist) I will have eternal life then? Well, no says the Catholic. Is more complicated than that they would say. I prefer to take this at face value.

My question is: why use “true blood and true drink” and “And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh” if Jesus is pointing to the Jews to His divinity? The bread that He gives for us is his flesh–His real human flesh upon the Cross for the whole world so I don’t understand why this metaphor would lead to thoughts about His divinity instead rather more confirmation about His humanity.

 

[Anna_Scott]

I will use the ESV because that appears to be your translation of choice. This is very different for me but I was recently convicted of the benefit of this approach.
There are two ways to approach John 6 for this thread.
One is the Catholic understanding that it refers to the Eucharist.
The other option I will present is that the bread refers to Jesus. Specifically believing in Jesus.

Whatever this food is, it leads to eternal life. Understanding that helps you to understand that either belief in Christ or the Eucharist is what Christ means.

Before I answer your two posts, would you clarify your statement regarding “belief in Christ or the Eucharist?” Don’t think we have the same understanding of the word “Eucharist.”

EUCHARIST
"The true Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, who is really and substantially present under the appearances of bread and wine, in order to offer himself in the sacrifice of the Mass and to be received as spiritual food in Holy Communion. It is called Eucharist, or “thanksgiving,” because at its institution at the Last Supper Christ “gave thanks,” and by this fact it is the supreme object and act of Christian gratitude to God.

Although the same name is used, the Eucharist is any one or all three aspects of one mystery, namely the Real Presence, the Sacrifice, and Communion. As Real Presence, the Eucharist is Christ in his abiding existence on earth today; as Sacrifice, it is Christ in his abiding action of High Priest, continuing now to communicate the graces he merited on Calvary; and as Communion, it is Christ coming to enlighten and strengthen the believer by nourishing his soul for eternal life. (Etym. Latin eucharistia, the virtue of thanksgiving or thankfulness; from Greek eucharistia, gratitude; from eu-, good + charizesthai, to show favor.)"

Did you mean Real Presence, instead of Eucharist?

REAL PRESENCE
"The manner of Christ’s presence in the Holy Eucharist. In its definition on the subject, the Council of Trent in 1551 declared that “in the sacrament of the most holy Holy Eucharist is contained truly, really, and substantially the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Denzinger 1636, 1640).

Hence Christ is present truly or actually and not only symbolically. He is present really, that is objectively in the Eucharist and not only subjectively in the mind of the believer. And he is present substantially, that is with all that makes Christ Christ and not only spiritually in imparting blessings on those who recieve the sacrament. . . . ."

Difinitions taken from CatholicCulture.org.
Link: catholicculture.org/culture/library/dictionary/index.cfm?id=33393
“All items in this dictionary are from Fr. John Hardon’s Modern Catholic Dictionary, © Eternal Life. Used with permission.”

Thanks,
Anna

 

[KathleenGee]

The Real Presence is Jesus.

I am more of a visual person…guess my faith is more by site and not so much by spirit…so it isn’t so strong to go into all the theological points like others here…

Anna, St. Bernadette is one of my favorite saints, and it is said she never lost her baptismal innocence…meaning, she never wanted to deliberately sin.

The Catholic Church has incorruptibles. These were people who lived saintly lives. St. Bernadette’s body is at Nevers, France. It was exhumed, and in more or less, perfect condition. She saw Mary in Lourdes. I looked at a series of photos of her, from when she first saw Mary, and then on down through the years…and with the exception of the foto taken at her death—she looked sad—, it is like she is becoming more beautiful every day!

I think of the Real Presence of Jesus in her…the Bread of Eternal life, and how God not only saved us through Jesus Christ, but He also saved this world and mundane, ordinary life from its own extinction—He chose ordinary bread and wine to bring new meaning to the ordinary…and with us and the Real Presence within, living worthily, go out into the world and reconnect to it, but with the Real Presence…into ordinary life…we are the carriers of the Real Presence…and it is a high calling…to be lowly.

 

[Rightlydivide]

Before I answer your two posts, would you clarify your statement regarding “belief in Christ or the Eucharist?” Don’t think we have the same understanding of the word “Eucharist.”

EUCHARIST
"The true Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, who is really and substantially present under the appearances of bread and wine, in order to offer himself in the sacrifice of the Mass and to be received as spiritual food in Holy Communion. It is called Eucharist, or “thanksgiving,” because at its institution at the Last Supper Christ “gave thanks,” and by this fact it is the supreme object and act of Christian gratitude to God.

Although the same name is used, the Eucharist is any one or all three aspects of one mystery, namely the Real Presence, the Sacrifice, and Communion. As Real Presence, the Eucharist is Christ in his abiding existence on earth today; as Sacrifice, it is Christ in his abiding action of High Priest, continuing now to communicate the graces he merited on Calvary; and as Communion, it is Christ coming to enlighten and strengthen the believer by nourishing his soul for eternal life. (Etym. Latin eucharistia, the virtue of thanksgiving or thankfulness; from Greek eucharistia, gratitude; from eu-, good + charizesthai, to show favor.)"

Did you mean Real Presence, instead of Eucharist?

REAL PRESENCE
"The manner of Christ’s presence in the Holy Eucharist. In its definition on the subject, the Council of Trent in 1551 declared that “in the sacrament of the most holy Holy Eucharist is contained truly, really, and substantially the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Denzinger 1636, 1640).

Hence Christ is present truly or actually and not only symbolically. He is present really, that is objectively in the Eucharist and not only subjectively in the mind of the believer. And he is present substantially, that is with all that makes Christ Christ and not only spiritually in imparting blessings on those who recieve the sacrament. . . . ."

Difinitions taken from CatholicCulture.org.
Link: catholicculture.org/culture/library/dictionary/index.cfm?id=33393
“All items in this dictionary are from Fr. John Hardon’s Modern Catholic Dictionary, © Eternal Life. Used with permission.”

Thanks,
Anna

Ok. This concerns me. I am worried that you have no idea what I am talking about based upon your question. Eucharist=the part of the Mass that the host becomes the bread and wine becomes the blood according to Catholics and others. Communion. Real Presence. The Lord’s Supper.
Whatever. It does not matter what terms one uses.
Christ is not talking about the religious ceremony that will come to exist. He is referring to the belief in him. Not the religious ceremony to come. He is talking about belief in him. Catholics believe that John 6 is proof of a literal transubstantiation occuring.

 

[KathleenGee]

Best people study early Church history on the liturgy as it has helped many Protestants come to understand the original faith and its practices…and which we hold today.

The bible without the history of its people cannot give a person the full understanding…you have to see how the early church…in all the different regions became established as well as know their practices…and how they evolved from there…

Because Tradition is the Living Tradition and the work of the Holy Spirit from Pentecost to today that is incorporated as Christ’s Church with Jesus, the Word of God Made Flesh.

 

[zach_dunn]

I will use the ESV because that appears to be your translation of choice. This is very different for me but I was recently convicted of the benefit of this approach.
There are two ways to approach John 6 for this thread.
One is the Catholic understanding that it refers to the Eucharist.
The other option I will present is that the bread refers to Jesus. Specifically believing in Jesus.

Some, maybe many, Catholics (like me) understand John 6 to be talking about both. Why? That will be revealed in time.

I had to divide your post into two parts because there were too many characters!

Will the eating the host during the Eucharist cause someone to not not physically hunger or physically thirst? No of course not. Christ means it in a spiritual sense. Look this is the clue to the whole passage; whomever believes in him will have eternal life.

Catholics don’t believe that the Eucharist is supposed to cure people of physical hunger (even though it helps ease my stomach pains when I have forgotten breakfast! ), we believe that once we consume Christ’s Body and Blood — you receive both under either species — we are filled with grace and our souls are cleared of any venial sin we might have (even though temporal punishments remain). In this way our spiritual hunger to be close to Christ and to be in a right relationship with Him become manifest.

The Jews are unhappy about him saying he came down from heaven. Their beef is with his pre-existence. Whoever believes in him has eternal life. Do Catholics believe that the Eucharist leads to eternal life? If so, all I have to do is go and partake of the Eucharist. IF that is what Jesus is talking about, then I just have to do that. Why would Catholics not want me to partake of the Eucharist if that is what it takes.

Their “beef” was not simply with Christ’s pre-existence as I will show you in my nest post.

Anyway, there is more to eternal life than just believing or just receiving the Eucharist. We must have faith and cooperate with God and His grace by doing the good works for which we were made. You cannot receive the Eucharist right now because you do not believe in the Real Presence, to let you partake in it could be fatal to your soul . . .

1 Corinthians 11:26-29
For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself.

 

[zach_dunn]

What I am saying is that Christ is talking about belief in him. Not the Eucharist.

Let me post the passage for easy reference:

John 6:35-59
[sup]35[/sup]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. [sup]36[/sup]But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. [sup]37[/sup]All that the Father gives me will come to me; and him who comes to me I will not cast out. [sup]38[/sup]For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me; [sup]39[/sup]and this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up at the last day. [sup]40[/sup]For this is the will of my Father, that every one who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.” [sup]41[/sup]The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, “I am the bread which came down from heaven.” [sup]42[/sup]They said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” [sup]43[/sup]Jesus answered them, “Do not murmur among yourselves. [sup]44[/sup]No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day. [sup]45[/sup]It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught by God.’ Every one who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me. [sup]46[/sup]Not that any one has seen the Father except him who is from God; he has seen the Father. [sup]47[/sup]Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. [sup]48[/sup]I am the bread of life. [sup]49[/sup]Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. [sup]50[/sup]This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that a man may eat of it and not die. [sup]51[/sup]I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.” [sup]52[/sup]The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” [sup]53[/sup]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 you; [sup]54[/sup]he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. [sup]55[/sup]For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. [sup]56[/sup]He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. [sup]57[/sup]As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me. [sup]58[/sup]This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever.” [sup]59[/sup]This he said in the synagogue, as he taught at Caperna-um.

I believe it is evident that from v. 35 to v. 47 that Jesus is speaking metaphorically when He says I am the bread of life [v. 35], this is evident by the fact that, instead of questioning Jesus on why he called Himself bread, they ask, How does He now say,“I have come down from heaven”? It was completely obvious to the Jews that Jesus was speaking symbolically in v. 35.

Now, it is no accident that Jesus says, once again, I am the bread of life in v. 48. He is using the exact same statement as that of v. 35 to usher in a new understanding of what He is saying. This is made known by the Scriptures when the Jews no longer understand Him to be speaking metaphorically about His flesh being bread; in v. 50 He says that He has come down from heaven again, but the Jews are no longer scandalized at this because a new teaching has been brought to the front: that Christ will give us His very flesh to eat and be nourished by. This is why they ask, How can this man give us His flesh to eat? Jesus meant it literally when He said my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. There is no other explanation as to why the Jews would be so scandalized by His teaching. They even go on to say in v. 60, This is a hard saying; who can listen to it? What is so hard about Christ telling us to believe in Him? He had already been preaching that! The only conclusion left is that he was being literal when He told us to eat His flesh.

 

[Anna_Scott]

. . . . .**Whatever this food is, it leads to eternal life. **Understanding that helps you to understand that **either belief in Christ or the Eucharist is what Christ means. **

. . . .What I am saying is that Christ is talking about belief in him. Not the Eucharist. . . If you believe that eating the host and thus having the Real Presence (or Transubstantiation) will lead to eternal life, you can substitute that understanding as well. I do not believe that is the case. . . .

. . . .Look this is the clue to the whole passage; whomever believes in him will have eternal life. . .

Do Catholics believe that the Eucharist leads to eternal life? If so, all I have to do is go and partake of the Eucharist. . . .

. . . . Lets go on to what Peter says. What does Christ have that leads to eternal life? His words. Belief in him You have the words of eternal life

. . . .I suggest you MUST believe in him to have eternal life and that is the crux of the whole passage.

Rightlydivide,

I’m trying to draw from your posts, that which you believe. I peeled away your statements about what Catholics believe. Catholics have stated their beliefs. I’m interested in what you believe and why.

The meat of what you said, seems to come down to these statements (please correct any misquotes or misconceptions):

• “Whatever this food is, it leads to eternal life.”
• “Either belief in Christ or the Eucharist is what Christ means.”
• “Christ is talking about belief in him, not the Eucharist”
• “whomever believes in Him will have eternal life.”
• “You do not believe eating the host and thus having the Real Presence (or Transubstantiation) will lead to eternal life.”

**John 6: **32 Jesus then said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven, but my Father gives you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world."

As we continue in John Chapter 6, we find some conditions for eternal life:
**
John 6 (ESV): 40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day."
**
John 6: 43 Jesus answered them, "Do not grumble among yourselves. 44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.
**
John 6:** 47 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life. **
**
John 6: 48 **I am the bread of life. **

John 6: 51 **I am the living bread that came down from heaven. **

John6: If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the** bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.**

Summary:

One must be drawn to Christ by the Father
One must believe in the Son
Christ is the Bread of Life
One must eat the Bread of Life, defined as the living bread that came down from heaven/the flesh of Christ

According to this passage, one must not only believe in Christ, but also believe that Christ is the living bread; and one must eat this Bread, which is the flesh of Christ.

• Whoever believes has eternal life.
• Christ is the living bread come down from heaven.
• One may eat of it and not die.
• Anyone who eats of this bread will live forever.
• The bread Christ will give for the life of the world is His flesh.

Christ does not say that eating this bread in “remembrance” will lead to living forever. Christ connects “eating of this bread” with living forever.

In John Chapter 6, we find:

Jesus said, “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 you.” Verse 53

Jesus said, “Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” Verse 54

Jesus said, “For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.” Verse 55

Jesus said, “Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.” Verse 56

Jesus said, “As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me.” Verse 57

Jesus said, “Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.” Verse 58

Questions for you regarding what you believe:

When Christ said, “For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink” (John 6:55); is this literal?

What does it mean to eat the flesh of Christ?

How do we fulfill the requirement to “eat the flesh of Christ,” if not through the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist?

Other forum members have answered most of your issues. So, I’m looking for not only what you believe, but justification for your beliefs.

Thanks,
Anna

 

[Anna_Scott]

I appreciate the excellent posts and resources from Catholic Forum Members.

Still hopeful that Baptist will provide (name removed by moderator)ut. I started this Thread for that very purpose.

Anna

 

[Rightlydivide]

Your questions are based upon presuppositons that I do not share.
However I shall attempt. I will say I do not need to justify my beliefs to you of course. I was saved from every form of addiction and sin known to anyone. My justification is to God alone who saved me a disgusting sinner.

When Christ said, “For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink” (John 6:55); is this literal?

The statement before answers it

Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day

Do Catholics believe that someone must eat the host in the Eucharist to go to heaven? You know they do not. No the feeding on his flesh is believing in him. Those who believe will “abide” in him. That reflects our permanent state with Christ when we abide. Now Catholics and I would not disagree on that but we would disagree with how that occurs.

What does it mean to eat the flesh of Christ?

To believe in him.

How do we fulfill the requirement to “eat the flesh of Christ,” if not through the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist

By believing in him. If the Eucharist does it,** then it does it. ** Case closed.
But IS that what is actually believed?

This verse says that whoever eats the Eucharist will live forever. But Catholics do not believe that. It says that without this you cannot have eternal life. But Catholics do not believe that either. They do believe that people can go to heaven and live forever that have not taken the Eucharist.
Its a theme. Not different from the rest of John of course.

John 5 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.

Jhn 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Jhn 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
Jhn 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Jhn 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

Look it up in John. Its all over the place.

 

[dsears]

No, it does not mean “believing in him” he is speaking literally in John 6. I had trouble with this when I was growing up as a Baptist. I always wandered how a church that would take the scriptures so literally would not take these passages literally. These seemed to me the only passages they would not take literally. I think that is one thing that led me to the UMC (which there is no statement we were taught regarding communion) and then home to the Catholic Church.

 

[Rightlydivide]

No, it does not mean “believing in him” he is speaking literally in John 6. I had trouble with this when I was growing up as a Baptist. I always wandered how a church that would take the scriptures so literally would not take these passages literally. These seemed to me the only passages they would not take literally. I think that is one thing that led me to the UMC (which there is no statement we were taught regarding communion) and then home to the Catholic Church.

Great! I would need to partake of communion and that would suffice if Christ is to be believed the way you state?
Or not…?

 

[benidict]

Great! I would need to partake of communion and that would suffice if Christ is to be believed the way you state?
Or not…?

the people Jesus was speaking to took him literally. and many left him. He did not call them back saying " wait! you mis undrstood me!" they knew exactly what he was saying. peace