Proof that John 6 and the Last Supper are connected

[slh3016]

In a conversation with my {obstinate, Protestant} brother-in-law last night, he brought up some readings that he’d done concerning the Eucharist and adamantly stated that in his opinion that Jesus’ Bread of Life discourse in John 6 WAS NOT related to the Last Supper. Off hand, we did not have any resources available to us to show him this error, because we had been basing our argument solely from what we are learning from Catholic sources (i.e., Scott Hahn, Brant Pitre, etc.).

Can someone point me to resources that can conclusively show the connection between the two as well as answer the questions of whether or not the Last Supper was a Passover Seder meal. Scott Hahn believes it is, but is that the official teaching of the Church? Are there differing opinions? Do any of the church fathers refer to a) the connection between John 6 and the Eucharist and/or the Last Supper, and b) the Seder meal.

Also, I saw a Journey Home broadcast recently on youtube in which the interviewee talked about Jesus entering Jerusalem on the 10th day of Nisan (the day the lambs were brought in for Passover), Pilate declaring “I find no fault in him” on the day the lambs would have approved or disapproved as a sacrifice, and Jesus being on the cross at the same time the approved lambs were being slaughtered. However, I have been unable to find that exact broadcast again and would like to know where I can read more about this because my husband and I were floored when we heard this.

Thanks so much!

 

[RollTide1987]

Tell your brother-in-law to read St. Ignatius of Antioch (36-108 AD). He was the third bishop of Antioch (where Christians were called Christians for the first time), knew both Paul as well as Peter, and was a disciple of John - the writer of the gospel in question. While on his way to Rome to be executed, St. Ignatius wrote seven letters to the various churches he passed along the route. Here is what he had to say about the Eucharist:

Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God… They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the Flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, Flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes. — Letter to the Smyrnaeans, Ch 6

It sounds like St. Ignatius, a first century Christian, took John 6 quite literally. There is no direct reference to the verse in any of St. Ignatius’s writings, but the man was a follower of John and seemed to have taken a literal interpretation when it came to the Real Presence in the Eucharist.

 

[Kay_Cee]

Besides backing up your position (and I am sure there are a great many folk here more adept at doing that than I am), why don’t you ask your BIL to back up his opinion? After all, if John 6 is not about the Last Supper, it must be about something else.

I’d ask him what that something else is and request he produce evidence to back up his claim. Otherwise, why should you trust his opinion?

 

[PennyinCanada]

Are you familiar with types in the Old Testament that point to Christ in the New Testament?

There are so many of them! One is Moses, coming down the mountain carrying the tablets of the 10 Commandments, his face glowing with the glory of God. That image is a prefigurement of Christ, pointing to him that was to come. Would your bil agree with typology?

If he does, (it’s likely he does) you can share a number of them and have agreement.

When the Israelites were eating manna in the desert, they had heavenly food supplied by God on a daily basis. Now that Christ has come, where do we see what the manna was pointing to? The type is always lesser than the thing it’s pointing to. The type is only a foreshadowing, and here we have heavenly bread! We have this today in the Holy Eucharist with is the body and blood of the Saviour and Redeemer of the world.

 

[johnnyc176]

Besides backing up your position (and I am sure there are a great many folk here more adept at doing that than I am), why don’t you ask your BIL to back up his opinion? After all, if John 6 is not about the Last Supper, it must be about something else.

I’d ask him what that something else is and request he produce evidence to back up his claim. Otherwise, why should you trust his opinion?

I wonder why more Catholics don’t do that. After a protestant tells me what he thinks the Bible says I ask them well where did you get that from? By what authority? A commentary? Did somebody teach you that? Did it come to you without any influence whatsoever? If you were taught that then where did your teacher get it from? Then they usually say well you are being influenced in your beliefs. I then say Amen! I readily admit that my understanding of Scripture is influenced by the Church that Jesus founded, the Catholic Church.

 

[Randy_Carson]

In a conversation with my {obstinate, Protestant} brother-in-law last night, he brought up some readings that he’d done concerning the Eucharist and adamantly stated that in his opinion that Jesus’ Bread of Life discourse in John 6 WAS NOT related to the Last Supper. Off hand, we did not have any resources available to us to show him this error, because we had been basing our argument solely from what we are learning from Catholic sources (i.e., Scott Hahn, Brant Pitre, etc.).

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is available online with a great search utility here: scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

1384 The Lord addresses an invitation to us, urging us to receive him in the sacrament of the Eucharist: "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."217

217 Jn 6:53.

In this paragraph, reception of the Eucharist is tied directly to the teaching of Jesus in John 6.

Can someone point me to resources that can conclusively show the connection between the two as well as answer the questions of whether or not the Last Supper was a Passover Seder meal. Scott Hahn believes it is, but is that the official teaching of the Church? Are there differing opinions? Do any of the church fathers refer to a) the connection between John 6 and the Eucharist and/or the Last Supper, and b) the Seder meal.

1340 By celebrating the Last Supper with his apostles in the course of the Passover meal, Jesus gave the Jewish Passover its definitive meaning. Jesus’ passing over to his father by his death and Resurrection, the new Passover, is anticipated in the Supper and celebrated in the Eucharist, which fulfills the Jewish Passover and anticipates the final Passover of the Church in the glory of the kingdom.

In this paragraph, the Eucharist, which was previously tied to John 6:53, is shown to be fulfilled in the seder meal of the Jewish Passover.

 

[slh3016]

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is available online with a great search utility here: scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

1384 The Lord addresses an invitation to us, urging us to receive him in the sacrament of the Eucharist: "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."217

217 Jn 6:53.

In this paragraph, reception of the Eucharist is tied directly to the teaching of Jesus in John 6.

1340 By celebrating the Last Supper with his apostles in the course of the Passover meal, Jesus gave the Jewish Passover its definitive meaning. Jesus’ passing over to his father by his death and Resurrection, the new Passover, is anticipated in the Supper and celebrated in the Eucharist, which fulfills the Jewish Passover and anticipates the final Passover of the Church in the glory of the kingdom.

In this paragraph, the Eucharist, which was previously tied to John 6:53, is shown to be fulfilled in the seder meal of the Jewish Passover.

Problem is that he is very skeptical. My husband told him to read the church fathers and he doesn’t even trust them. Said he wondered why their writings didn’t make it into the New Testament

He won’t consider the Catholic Catechism as authoritative or proof of anything.

 

[slh3016]

Tell your brother-in-law to read St. Ignatius of Antioch (36-108 AD). He was the third bishop of Antioch (where Christians were called Christians for the first time), knew both Paul as well as Peter, and was a disciple of John - the writer of the gospel in question. While on his way to Rome to be executed, St. Ignatius wrote seven letters to the various churches he passed along the route. Here is what he had to say about the Eucharist:

It sounds like St. Ignatius, a first century Christian, took John 6 quite literally. There is no direct reference to the verse in any of St. Ignatius’s writings, but the man was a follower of John and seemed to have taken a literal interpretation when it came to the Real Presence in the Eucharist.

We have pointed him to that writing before. Again, he is skeptical and doesn’t believe John 6 has anything to do with the Last Supper/Passover.

Was hoping for a more concrete correlation from the early church.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Problem is that he is very skeptical. My husband told him to read the church fathers and he doesn’t even trust them. Said he wondered why their writings didn’t make it into the New Testament

He won’t consider the Catholic Catechism as authoritative or proof of anything.

First, you asked for resources. I just gave you definitive proof from the Catechism.

Second, you write:

In a conversation with my {obstinate, Protestant} brother-in-law last night, he brought up some readings that he’d done concerning the Eucharist and adamantly stated that in his opinion that Jesus’ Bread of Life discourse in John 6 WAS NOT related to the Last Supper.

So, your obstinate Protestant brother in law will accept “some readings” that suit his fancy, but not “some readings” from the Catechism that don’t say what he wants to hear.

Good luck with that.

Finally, there are Protestants who also teach that the Eucharist is the actual Body and Blood of Christ, and I’m sure they would tie their belief into John 6, also: the Anglicans and the Lutherans.

Would “some readings” from these Protestant churches satisfy? :nope:

IOW, now that he has interpreted the Scriptures for himself, NOBODY has the authority to tell him otherwise - not even his own pastor. This is sola scriptura and the absolute right to private judgment at work.

 

[PennyinCanada]

I would ask him, if the Israelites had heavenly manna to eat, provided by God every day, why wouldn’t he rejoice and celebrate that we have something greater? Seriously, why wouldn’t he jump up and down with the good news? Isn’t it the most awesome thing that God feeds us with a heavenly bread? It should move all of us to tears of gratitude.

 

[slh3016]

First, you asked for resources. I just gave you definitive proof from the Catechism.

Second, you write:

So, your obstinate Protestant brother in law will accept “some readings” that suit his fancy, but not “some readings” from the Catechism that don’t say what he wants to hear.

Good luck with that.

Finally, there are Protestants who also teach that the Eucharist is the actual Body and Blood of Christ, and I’m sure they would tie their belief into John 6, also: the Anglicans and the Lutherans.

Would “some readings” from these Protestant churches satisfy? :nope:

IOW, now that he has interpreted the Scriptures for himself, NOBODY has the authority to tell him otherwise - not even his own pastor. This is sola scriptura and the absolute right to private judgment at work.

:banghead: Yes, you’re absolutely correct. He kept say “I don’t…/I believe” to which my husband replied, “So you’re making yourself your own pope.”

Problem is that our pastor is an ex-Catholic and my BIL feels that if this guy would leave the Catholic Church, then something must be very wrong with Catholic doctrine.

I’ve posted about him before, and I probably should just stop.

 

[slh3016]

I would ask him, if the Israelites had heavenly manna to eat, provided by God every day, why wouldn’t he rejoice and celebrate that we have something greater? Seriously, why wouldn’t he jump up and down with the good news? Isn’t it the most awesome thing that God feeds us with a heavenly bread? It should move all of us to tears of gratitude.

That is exactly the feeling that my husband and I are beginning to have. The more we learn about the correlations between the Old and New Testaments, the more beauty I see in Christ. I’m not sure how anyone who does any amount of research into the Catholic faith can say that it is sacrilegious or blasphemous.

 

[slh3016]

Besides backing up your position (and I am sure there are a great many folk here more adept at doing that than I am), why don’t you ask your BIL to back up his opinion? After all, if John 6 is not about the Last Supper, it must be about something else.

I’d ask him what that something else is and request he produce evidence to back up his claim. Otherwise, why should you trust his opinion?

That’s exactly his point. He says it is about something else: faith in Christ

I think that is the standard Protestant answer, though.

 

[Randy_Carson]

:banghead: Yes, you’re absolutely correct. He kept say “I don’t…/I believe” to which my husband replied, “So you’re making yourself your own pope.”

Problem is that our pastor is an ex-Catholic and my BIL feels that if this guy would leave the Catholic Church, then something must be very wrong with Catholic doctrine.

I’ve posted about him before, and I probably should just stop.

I don’t think many people the Catholic Church after carefully studying scripture, the writings of the Early Church Fathers and the teachings of the Church because there is simply NO disconnect between them. Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium of the Church are in perfect, seamless harmony.

MOST people leave due to moral issues such as contraception or divorce or because they were offended or hurt by someone in the Church.

 

[eazyduzit]

Really, the Last Supper, really, really!
The whole point of the discource is to answer the question posed in v. 28 . Jesus wants them to understand why they need to believe on Him. He is the way to life. St. John says this to lead to and relate everything to ch. 14:6 . Of course if you look at it thru Roman colored glasses you will see much differently.
God bless

 

[slh3016]

I don’t think many people the Catholic Church after carefully studying scripture, the writings of the Early Church Fathers and the teachings of the Church because there is simply NO disconnect between them. Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium of the Church are in perfect, seamless harmony.

MOST people leave due to moral issues such as contraception or divorce or because they were offended or hurt by someone in the Church.

This is exactly what my husband and I think about the current pastor. He truly is a brilliant man and very intellectual in his approach to Scripture. He went to Dallas Theological Seminary, which, from what I understand, is pretty heavily biased against the Catholic Church. He was also president of Moody Bible Institute for a period of time. I went to him several months ago seeking an alternative prospective to all the Catholic stuff I was learning and, at the time, was hoping for some credible ammunition against what I was reading. I was sorely disappointed in that (a) he didn’t take the time to even talk about his own experience and beliefs and (b) he recommended a book that could easily be picked apart called Reasoning from the Scriptures with Catholics by Ron Rhodes.

From what we can gather based upon tidbits he has revealed, he fell away from the faith during a wild and rebellious time in his teenage years (drugs involved) and was led back to the faith by a Protestant in his life. I do believe he had some issues with his parents, particularly his dad and I believe that they may have been very rigid in their spiritual life and that grace may not have been present in their family.

Another friend of mine left the Catholic Church because her parents divorced and a Protestant neighbor and others fed her misinformation such as her mother would not be able to receive the Eucharist, that she and her sister would be considered “illegitimate children” if her mom sought an annulment, etc. I’ve questioned her recently and when she told me those things, I was like, “That’s not true!” to which she replied, “Well, that’s what I was told!” I’m hoping to talk more about this with her soon, but I think she is so heavily entrenched in our church that she’d never revert.

 

[rfournier103]

He won’t consider the Catholic Catechism as authoritative or proof of anything.

Obviously, the Catechism is binding on us; but I never use it when debating Protestants because if I were Protestant, I would reject it too.

If the Bible is the only common ground, so be it.

 

[slh3016]

Really, the Last Supper, really, really!
The whole point of the discource is to answer the question posed in v. 28 . Jesus wants them to understand why they need to believe on Him. He is the way to life. St. John says this to lead to and relate everything to ch. 14:6 . Of course if you look at it thru Roman colored glasses you will see much differently.
God bless

John 6:4 says that “The Jewish Passover Feast was near.” Immediately following this, Jesus feeds the five thousand, walks on water, and gives the bread of life discourse.

A year later, Jesus becomes the Passover Lamb. If you’re truly interested in learning, I suggest you listen to Scott Hahn’s “The Fourth Cup” which you can listen to on youtube.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Really, the Last Supper, really, really!
The whole point of the discource is to answer the question posed in v. 28 . Jesus wants them to understand why they need to believe on Him. He is the way to life. St. John says this to lead to and relate everything to ch. 14:6 . **Of course if you look at it thru Roman colored glasses you will see much differently. **
God bless

Referring to the bread and wine which became His body and blood, Jesus said, “This is…”.

It would be 1,500 years before anyone dared to say “This is NOT…”

 

[God_I_Love]

I would ask him, since he sees himself as having the ability to interpret scripture, what he thinks Jesus means in Jn 6. Have him go through and read it and then break down what Jesus was teaching. Once you isolate what he truly believes it to mean isolate at which verse does he base that conclusion on and why. From there you will have narrowed down his beliefs into something you can address.