Are there any scholarly responses by Catholics available in terms of specific exegesis of the John 6 narrative that refutes in depth how Calvinists see this Scriptural text?
I know many Calvinists seem to think that John 6 is irrefutable in terms of proving eternal security and their version of predestination.
26 For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come. 27 Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. 28 But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. 29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.
53 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat? 54 Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. 55 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day.
If the argument goes, that ‘to eat Jesus’ flesh’ simply means to ‘believe in Jesus’; and that by ‘believing in Jesus’ a person in definitely saved. Then What does the first passage [above] mean; restated, it would read ‘For he that believeth in Jesus unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.’
If believing in Jesus = being saved.
And if an unworthy man believes in Jesus he is saved.
What does ‘believing in Jesus unworthily’ mean.
The man either believes and is saved or he does not believe.
How do you believe and be unworthy and be condemned.
