Do Catholics believe John 6:53?

[twb1621]

Romans CH 2: 3 Do you suppose, then, you who judge those who engage in such things and yet do them yourself, that you will escape the judgment of God? 4 Or do you hold his priceless kindness, forbearance, and patience in low esteem, unaware that the kindness of God would lead you to repentance? 5 By your stubbornness and impenitent heart, you are storing up wrath for yourself for the day of wrath and revelation of the just judgment of God, 6 who will repay everyone according to his works: 3 7 eternal life to those who seek glory, honor, and immortality through perseverance in good works, 8 but wrath and fury to those who selfishly disobey the truth and obey wickedness.”

You may want to study this one very closely Ralphy.

Matthew CH 25: 31 14 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit upon his glorious throne, 32 and all the nations 15 will be assembled before him. And he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. 34 Then the king will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom repared for you from the foundation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.’ 37 Then the righteous 16 will answer him and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? 39 When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?’ 40 And the king will say to them in reply, ‘Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.’ 41 17 Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, 43 a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.’ 44 18 Then they will answer and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?’ 45 He will answer them, ‘Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.’ 46 And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

---

Originally Posted by ralphy
You used the phrase in your e mail: “in accord with Church teaching”, the only problem with that statement is that the Roman catholic “teaching” is not in accord with the Word of God Ralph

Ralphy, no matter what Bible you pick up it was taken from the CC and Catholic teaching. The only differences are those unauthorized changes made by men and in their own opinions. And this opinion of yours is from a man who never knew he was to continue seeking knowledge of God, didn’t know his faith and blamed the CC because he didn’t seek to gain knowledge of it? You are far from credible and still do not realize you are the one accountable that you didn’t know.

 

[Always_For_Him]

Are you saying that scripture is based on something that agreed with “scared tradition”? Scripture is the word of God, tradition is based on MANS word. Ralph

Scripture is not separate from the oral and sacred tradition of the Church. They are one in the same. It is not this either/or mentality. NT Scripture IS the teachings that the Apostles received from Jesus written down. Not all is written down either. The Bible was never supposed to be the sole authority on Christianity. It is useful as a teaching tool only while being used as the teaching tool by the Church that wrote it. When man takes it and reads his own interpretation into it away from the only Church who knew the context in which it was written, those men teach error because they are not guaranteed infallibility. Only Christ’s Church was promised that to teach His Word.

There is a difference between the Oral and Sacred Tradition that comprises Jesus’ Deposit of Faith and traditions of man outside of Jesus’ Church. Your “tradition” is tradition of man. The Church’s tradition is handed down by the Apostles who HAD THE AUTHORITY to pass it down. There is a huge difference. Luther and everyone else who separated themselves from the Church didn’t have any authority to do anything, pass teaching down or to found their own churches. You are part of those churches.

 

[guanophore]

Ok. Let me ask you a few questions. If the present pope is a successor of Peter as you say, why does he have to ride around in a bulletproof vehicle where ever he goes, I would think that the Lord would protect him or is he possibly scared of death.? Also where has all the power gone that was passed down to him in the line of succession? Ralph

This is a good question. By the time the NT was written, the Church had already been through six successors of Peter. It was (and still is) a very dangerous profession. Speaking the Truth gets a lot of people angry, some of them murderously angry. Also, Jesus said " the servant is not greater than his master", so if they wanted to kill Him, then they will want to kill those that follow Him.

The Pope does not “have” to ride in a bulletproof vehicle. He chooses to do so because it is prudent. Given the assasination attempts on Popes and other very public figures, it seems rather careless not to take precautions. Remember when Satan told Jesus to throw Himself off the pinnacle, and that the angels would bear Him up? Jesus knew this to be true, but did not find it prudent to put God to the test. It is incumbent upon us to use our common sense.

I doubt very much that our Pope has much fear at all. I don’t know him personally, but I do know that, the longer one walks with Christ, the less fear one has. I also know that, growing up under Hitler exposed him to as much fear as one can find anywhere.

What makes you think that the power passed down through the succession has “gone” anywhere? Do you think that the Power includes being invincible to bullets? Was that what you think Jesus was teaching the Apostles?

I am not asking what is not there. I am asking you to produce something on the things you claim “are there” according to the Roman catholic church. Ralph

And PRmerger gave you an excellent example. What we have is a Bible. This is one of the products of Sacred Tradition (though the Church is not “Roman”). There is no table of contents for the Bible. The Catholic Church, using Sacred Tradition, discerned what books belonged in there.

All scripture is inspired according to 2 Tim 3:16. This is what God said in His word. Is the Roman catholic church trying to claim this as “their” statement? Obviously yes, nice try! I have no problem with scripture. I do have a problem with what the Roman catholic church adds to it. Ralph

The Church is not “Roman”, but yes, this statement was written by a Catholic, for Catholics.

You have a problem because you don’t understand that the Catholic Church has “added” the entire New Testament. It was never intended to fully contain all of the Teaching. It is “profitable” for teaching. These actions listed there, teaching, correcting, reproving, training in righteousness are actions accomplished by people. Jesus appointed people for these duties. Scripture is helpful in accomplishing them.

 

[Always_For_Him]

At any rate, questions aside for now, there are additional problems with believing that Jesus was speaking of the Eucharist when He said, “…unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man…”.

This is your belief. There was no problem with it in the early Church by those who were the very first Christians. They believed and practiced it. You are closed to the Truth.

First are the problems I have already stated – If Jesus is speaking literally than He is contradicting Himself and others such as the Apostle Paul…

This again, is your understanding. You just read it differently than the first 1500 years of Christians did. The Apostles and those who were members of the early Church understood and believed completely in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist.

You have never been exposed to the fullness of Christ’s Deposit of Faith, so you are closed to what everyone is trying to explain to you. Your heart is closed to any Truth outside of what you have come to believe. That doesn’t mean that you are right and the Catholic Church is wrong. Please open your heart to Christ’s Church, what He wanted you to know.

 

[guanophore]

At any rate, questions aside for now, there are additional problems with believing that Jesus was speaking of the Eucharist when He said, “…unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man…”

First are the problems I have already stated – If Jesus is speaking literally than He is contradicting Himself and others such as the Apostle Paul.

According to the manner in which you interpret it, yes. However, from a Catholic perspective, there is no contradiction.

But there are other problems with this interpretation as well for the CC refers to protestants as “separated brethren” indicating that even though they are “separated”, they remain “brethren”. However, Jesus said, “Amen, amen…” indicating that His word is unchangeable and irreversible.

Jesus does not hold people responsible for things they have not been taught, or don’t know. If a person understands the Real Presence, then rejects it, they will be held accountable for apostasy. However, the vast majority of Protestants have never received the Apostolic Teaching. They have received teaching from the Reformers, and the generations afterward that continually and progressively move further from the Apostolic Teaching.

Therefore even the CC does not take Jesus’ words literally for if the church truly believed Jesus’ word they would not call those whom Jesus has clearly excluded from His kingdom, “brethren”.

Jesus does not exclude people for ignorance (not knowing), but for disobedience (faithlessness). Our separated brethren are like Apollos, they are fervent about the portion of the Truth they know, even if their understanding is not entirely accurate.

Not only does the CC refer to protestants as “brethren”, but the CC also teaches that even some Muslims and Jews and even pagans are part of the CC even though Jesus clearly excludes them from His kingdom when He loudly proclaims, “Amen, amen…”

This commandment was given to disciples, Russ. Those who have not become His disciples have not had the opportunity to obey Him. It is those who have been taught who are obligated to follow His command. Others, as Scripture states, are judged according to their conscience.

But there is another problem with this theology. This theology is opposed to the love and grace of God.

Why would God allow His Son to suffer humiliation and rejection and crucifixion and shame – all for the purpose of saving whoever calls upon His name – only to reject them from His kingdom because they failed to be part of a religious ritual? God desires all men to be saved and is not willing that any perish.

Indeed, God desires that all be saved. However, “calling upon His name” is not just some sort of magical incantation. It involves a profession of obedient faith - willingness to follow all that He has commanded. We are not at liberty to choose the parts of the gospel that are easy, or comfortable, or to disobey those commands that don’t make sense to us. When we “call upon His name”, we submit ourselves in obedient faith to His Way.

God created mankind, and it is part of our nature to need ritual. When He revealed rituals to Israel, it was because mankind has a need for these things. Ritual does not equate to “Law” as you are using it here. One can have ritual in grace.

Billy Graham, one of the greatest evangelists of the modern world, had a ritual altar call. He did it the same way every time for 50 years. The fact that it was a ritual did not remove it from grace, on the contrary, it facilitated people receiving saving grace.

Certainly God desires His church to celebrate communion and to remember Him in the breaking of bread but God has redeemed us from the law. Why would God redeem us from one law only to condemn us with a new law? This is an argument against the love and mercy and grace of God.

You are the only one, Russ, who sees the sacrifice of Jesus’ body and blood for the life of the world as a “condemnation”. Catholics see His sacrifice as the greatest liberation imaginable. You are the only one here suggesting that Jesus has to be restricted by the commandments He gives to men. Catholics know that His love, grace, and mercy transcends even the Eucharist. For some reason, you perceive the gifts of God as oppression.

Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”)… [Gal 3:13]

1. If Jesus is speaking literally in John 6:53 He is clearly contradicting both Himself and the teachings of the Apostles whom He inspired to write the NT.
2. Even the CC does not take Jesus’ words literally for the CC clearly teaches that protestants and others are part of the universal church. The CC includes in the universal church those whom Jesus clearly excluded from His kingdom when He said, “Amen, amen…”
3. This interpretation opposes the love and mercy of God. It declares that God is more concerned with ritual then with humility and brokenness and faith for it teaches that God does indeed exclude some, even those who have called upon the name of Jesus, from eternal life for failing to receive the Eucharist in the CC.

For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. [John 3:17]

 

[guanophore]

You comment is offensive. Christ will never pray to any man for to pray to another is to petition them for something or to praise them. It is not for God to praise man. It is for man to praise God. It is not for God to petition man but it is for man to petition God.

I am the LORD, that is My name; And My glory I will not give to another, Nor My praise to carved images. [Is 42:8]

I am not sure why the statement was offensive to you, but I do agree with what you have written here. When Moses and Elijah were speaking with Christ about his imminent departure, he was not “praising” them. He may have asked them to do something - Jesus asks many people for things. Although technically this could be called a petition, we consider them commandments, because of what you have said about the “order”.

While God does not “give” His glory to another, He is glorified in His saints. When we become the persons He has designed us to be, we are a praise to Him. As Mary said “my soul magnifies the Lord”. Mary, by her nature of obedience and humility could magnify the Lord. When we look at her life, she is like a magnifying glass, enabling us to see Christ in her, the hope of glory.

 

[BereanRuss]

It doesn’t say “Salvation is through believing with the hear and confessing with the mouth only”.

Yes it does…

if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. [Rom 10:9]

And the next verse…

For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. [Rom 10:10]

 

[BereanRuss]

Yep. That’s one of the reasons why I forsook Protestantism and became a Catholic in 2001.

Why do you call them brethren when Jesus says they do not have life? If you have life and they do not, why call them brethren?

 

[Always_For_Him]

Why do you call them brethren when Jesus says they do not have life? If you have life and they do not, why call them brethren?

Because they are not fully separated. You are Christian right? You believe in a lot of Truth. You also believe error that has either been taught to you or that you have interpreted wrong. This leads to your own destruction. I am glad that you are here learning the Truth as the Jesus gave it to the Apostles. That is all we have BereanRuss. We have Jesus’ Church which He gave His Teachings and Word to and His Authority to teach and pass it on, or we have churches that came along over 1500 years after the death of Christ founded by man on their own self-appointed authority because their pride and ego told them that they knew better what the Words in the Bible were saying then the Church that brought it to them.

 

[guanophore]

If Ignatius believed that the actual “Body and Blood” of Christ was present in Lords table, he was duped along with every other Roman catholic from that time to the present, and I am sure that John and Peter did not believe it, nor did they teach it. If such an important event was as “you” say it was, don’t you think there would have been more said about it throughout scripture . Jesus was talking in a spiritual manner. Ralph

Well, Ralph, it is the case that Ignatius believed in the actual Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist. However, the Church was not, and is not “Roman”. In fact, at the time Ignatius wrote, there was no separate “Roman Rite”. All Catholics held this belief, from Antioch of Syria to Egypt all over the known world. This is because all the Churches planted by Apostles and their successors were given what Jesus taught “this is my Body…”

John and Peter most certainly did believe it, practice it, and teach it. Indeed, we see it in scripture because we have received the Apostles’ teaching. Those who “see” something else do so because they received teaching from elsewhere.

By the way, you never did explain how one can profane the Body and Blood when it is not really present.

Is that like stepping on a flag that isn’t really there?

Since you believe they were “duped”, though I am curious to know why it is you think that Jesus was too weak and ineffectual to preserve what He taught them, as He promised. How come the Risen Lord in Revelation looks so powerful and knowledgeable, but within a few years of appearing to John, He suddenly became puny and unable to correct error in the Church?

Are you saying that scripture is based on something that agreed with “scared tradition”? Scripture is the word of God, tradition is based on MANS word. Ralph

Yes. The whole NT is comprised of Sacred Tradition (the Teachings of the Apostles) committed to writing. Scripture is the Word of God, and so is the preaching of the Apostles. If you believe the preaching came from"man", then you have no reason to have a NT, since everything in it was Sacred Tradition before it was Sacred Scripture.

1 Thess 2:13

13 And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers.

The preached Word of God (sacred tradition) that is at work in the Church is not the word of men. One of the reasons that you are unable to receive it is because you do not have faith in the Source. Both the Sacred Scripture and the Sacred Tradition come from God.

I was hoping that you would give me some “scripture” to show me where the priest gets this power to turn the bread and wine into the body and blood of Jesus Christ. Maybe it is very hard to find scripture for this “power” is it ?. Ralph

We are looking at the same scriptures, Ralph. We just understand them differently. When Catholics read that Jesus breathed upon the Apostles, and told them “all authority is given…go therefore”, we understand that He empowered them to go in His name, fuflilling the duties He committed unto them. One of those duties is “do this in memory of me” with the Bread and the Wine. When people are obedient to His commands, the HS acts to fuflill the promises He gave. For example, “if we repent…he forgives”. If the priest fufills the command “do this”, then He will manifest Himself as He promised. This is not at all hard to find for us in scripture. But then, we are looking at it from the point of view of those who wrote it, and you are not.

 

[fbl9]

(Copied from a previous post…)

If Jesus is speaking literally in this passage then He is contradicting MANY other scriptures…

…that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. [Rom 10:9…]

Notice that it is not what goes into the mouth that saves a man but what comes out of the mouth saves. If you confess with your mouth…

Jesus said, “Do you not yet understand that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and is eliminated?”

Nothing you eat can save you. Only what you believe in your heart and confess with your mouth can save you.

You need a list ,not just one passage, to create MANY:shrug:
As others have pionted a verbal confession is not the only thing required , for if all that was need we have Jesus condtidicting scrioture when He said not every one who calls me Lord Lord will enter the kindom…St.Matthew 7:21

 

[BereanRuss]

That’s right. Believe and confess an you will be saved. In other words, its not salvation through faith alone, but through faith and confession. Because as you have stated, it is “what comes out of the mouth that saves.”

Jesus says that it is what goes into the mouth that gives life. Paul says it is what comes out of the mouth that saves.

Jesus says, “whoever comes to me I will no way cast out”. Then He says, “Amen, amen, unless you eat…”

CC theology demands that Jesus contradicts Himself in these verses. It is the addition of the priesthood demands that John 6:53 is literal. The theology of the CC demands that Jesus contradicts Himself.

By interpreting John 6:53 literally and equating Jesus’ word to taking communion ONLY in the CC the CC denies the following…

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life.

And Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger, and he who believes in Me shall never thirst.

And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day."

Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life.

He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water."

Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die.

For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.

But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.

If you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart you will be saved.

In Him you also [trusted], after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise…

 

[PRmerger]

Why do you call them brethren when Jesus says they do not have life? If you have life and they do not, why call them brethren?

You are my separated brother in Christ, Russ.

 

[BereanRuss]

You are my separated brother in Christ, Russ.

If I do not take communion in the CC then I do not have life according to the CC’s understanding of John 6:53. How can I be your brother if you have life (heaven) and I do not (hell)?

 

[BereanRuss]

He said not every one who calls me Lord Lord will enter the kindom…St.Matthew 7:21

That is correct. But He DID say that whoever believes does have life (see post 1225 for a list)

 

[guanophore]

(Copied from a previous post…)

If Jesus is speaking literally in this passage then He is contradicting MANY other scriptures…

…that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. [Rom 10:9…]

Notice that it is not what goes into the mouth that saves a man but what comes out of the mouth saves. If you confess with your mouth…

Jesus said, “Do you not yet understand that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and is eliminated?”

Nothing you eat can save you. Only what you believe in your heart and confess with your mouth can save you.

We are saved by grace, through faith. Not by eating and drinking. Consumption of the Eucharist is an act of faith. We make this act of faith while we are confessing our faith in Him. This is why we recite the Apostles’ creed prior to Eucharist. The Apostles taught an “obedience of faith”. That means that one just does not give lip service to their faith, but when they come to Christ, are willing to embrace all that He taught.

Rom 1:5-7
we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations, 6 including yourselves who are called to belong to Jesus Christ;

When we profess our faith in Him, we are consenting to submit to His commandments:

1 John 5:2-3
2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and obey his commandments. 3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome.

It is amazing to me that so many Protestants accept baptism as an “ordinance” and will cooperate with it (even though many find it a form of godliness without the power thereof), yet are unable to follow Jesus’ commandment to take and eat His Body and Blood.

 

[BereanRuss]

Because they are not fully separated. You are Christian right? You believe in a lot of Truth…

If the CC’s interpretation of John 6:53 is correct then I CANNOT be a Christian for I do not have LIFE unless I eat of His flesh…

Otherwise the words of Jesus (Amen, amen…) are meaningless! If we cannot trust Him when He says Amen then we cannot trust Him at all.

 

[fbl9]

Jesus says that it is what goes into the mouth that gives life. Paul says it is what comes out of the mouth that saves.

Jesus says, “whoever comes to me I will no way cast out”. Then He says, “Amen, amen, unless you eat…”

CC theology demands that Jesus contradicts Himself in these verses. It is the addition of the priesthood demands that John 6:53 is literal. The theology of the CC demands that Jesus contradicts Himself.

By interpreting John 6:53 literally and equating Jesus’ word to taking communion ONLY in the CC the CC denies the following…

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life.

And Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger, and he who believes in Me shall never thirst.

And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day."

Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life.

He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water."

Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die.

For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.

But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.

If you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart you will be saved.

In Him you also [trusted], after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise…

Catholics beleive in Christ and do as He says “take and eat”

If i didn’t truly beleive the words of Christ it would be easy to be one of your church.But i beleive what He said so that is why i am a member of the one church that Christ Himself founded.
Christ promised us a church that would not fail,something that could be found,not a mish mash of varied beleifs and confusion.

 

[PRmerger]

CC theology demands that Jesus contradicts Himself in these verses. It is the addition of the priesthood demands that John 6:53 is literal. The theology of the CC demands that Jesus contradicts Himsel

I’ll give you an answer that you gave me, Russ:

…it is impossible for God to lie… [Heb 6:18]

 

[guanophore]

I am surprised that you would mentioned “man made traditions”, the Roman catholic church is full of them, I have been there and I am familiar with most of them. The catechism is full of man made rules. Ralph

Ralph, the only thing that is clear is that whatever contact you had with Catholicism left you very confused and uninformed. I grew up in the Roman Catholic Church also, and I was the same way. Having “been there” does not mean you understand.

Actually, the catechism has very few “man made rules” in it. It is primarily Sacred Tradition (From God). However you are correct that the Catholic Church is also full of man made rules. Most of these can be found in canon law, and the disciplines of the Church. Since these do come from man, they can be changed. The Sacred Tradition is from God, and cannot be changed. The NT comes from the Sacred Tradition. The table of contents was revealed to the Church by God. Since Sacred Tradition is inspired by God, it cannot err.