What is your view on these verses?

[God_I_Love]

According to whose standard? There are many people today who do not believe what the Apostles taught about sin and hell. Some people are so naive as to think that God will not “send anyone to hell” because “God is love”. Sin is real, Hell is real. Sin separates us from God.

Well the apostles never defined sin or hell. And the definition of separation from God for sin is woefully inadequate. Nothing can separate us from the Love of God, in Jesus Christ Our Lord. Is this Love the Holy Spirit? If not then What was in Jesus Christ? Something other than Love? And if I am attached (not separate from) to the Love in Christ am I not also In Christ? And is not being in Christ, what it means to be a member of the Church?

Sin is as real as nothingness. I’m not saying that actions are not sinful. I am not saying sin does not happen. I’m not saying there is not a sin unto death. I’m saying sin is like the concept of nothingness. It exists within the mind. And when you do something you deem sinful (a violation of what you believe to be what God wishes of you) it blinds you to the presence of God within you. Listen to Paul describe this.

''7What shall we say, then? Is the law sin? God forbid. But I do not know sin, but by the law; for I had not known concupiscence, if the law did not say: Thou shalt not covet. 8But sin taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead. 9And I lived some time without the law. But when the commandment came, sin revived, 10And I died.

God has ordained that holiness shall be separated from evil. This is why nothing unclean can enter heaven, and why nothing in hell can leave there.

Are you not evil? and I? there is only one good, God. Therefore the only thing that cleans us is God, not ourselves. And while not addressed above, I will ask… are we in hell now? If so what is hell? Hell, to me, is any existence temporally in which all things have not been brought into subjection under Christ’s feet.

Actually, I offered no definition of sin, I only stated one of the effects of sin, that it separates us from God. I think defining the nature of sin will need it’s own thread.

addressed above, though perhaps your right we are seeming to get sidetracked from the main issue at hand, namely John 6:63

This passage is addressed to those who are in a covenantal relationship with God. He had already revealed Himself to the Jews in Word and deed.

Sin separates people from God. People who are in sin cannot inherit the kingdom of God.

23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Rom. 6

So you don’t think that “death” here really means separation from eternal life with Christ?

This is describing a future (the New Testament).

We are all dead in Christ. And we have all sinned. So we all die. Wages served. The free gift is Life in Christ by the Indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

 

[fred_conty]

''But Jesus, knowing in himself, that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you? 63 If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? 64 It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life. ‘’ John 6:62-64

The disciples were just murmuring about eating his flesh and blood.

“But Jesus, knowing in himself, that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you?”

Means they are shoke up in their faith about him telling them that they must eat his flesh. Cannibalism comes to mind.

“If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?”

Means suppose you see this flesh of mine float up to heaven from where it came. For he told them he was the real bread that had come down from heaven, and that the Manna, appearing to have come out of heaven, wasn’t really the true heavenly bread as his own flesh was. And this new Manna, his flesh, will go back to where it came from…heaven. That is what will really shake them up. Which was a reference to his bodily ascension which will prove that he is the real heavenly bread that they should eat.

“It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing.”

The word quickeneth means to give life, to vivify, to electrofy, to animate. It means it is the priciple by which something lives. Anything that does not have a spirit is dead. Anything self moving is alive and is quickeneth.

By contrast, the flesh quickeneth nothing by itself. It is dependent on the spirit. So of itself, the flesh is nothing and has no power.

He is saying that it is the spirit that brings about life. The spirit makes it happen, and he will use this idea of spirit in his next sentence.

“The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life.”

Means that his words do have the power to make come true what he had just told them. And then immediately after this, he says that there are some of you who do not believe. Believe what? That what he has said about his flesh being the true bread from heaven, and that his words couldn’t do it. They were incredulous of his power.

In summary, Jesus is giving his dicourse about announcing his flesh to be consumed to feed us. It just seems that all passages should be seen in that light as referring to this in some way, either reinforcing it, explaining it, giving different aspects of it. His whole treatise is centered on one thought, and in that line of thought, each idea in some way explains sequentially what he is teaching on this subject.

May the God of hope fill you with every joy.

 

[God_I_Love]

Means they are shoke up in their faith about him telling them that they must eat his flesh. Cannibalism comes to mind.

Agreed. Though it is his disciples that are also hearing the complaints the Jews had with this sermon ‘‘this is a hard saying; who can hear it?’’

Means suppose you see this flesh of mine float up to heaven from where it came. For he told them he was the real bread that had come down from heaven, and that the Manna, appearing to have come out of heaven, wasn’t really the true heavenly bread as his own flesh was. And this new Manna, his flesh, will go back to where it came from…heaven. That is what will really shake them up. Which was a reference to his bodily ascension which will prove that he is the real heavenly bread that they should eat.

Correct. This addresses the first of the two complaints by the Jews… ‘‘How can this man be from heaven when his mother and father are Joseph and Mary?’’

Saying ‘‘my ascension will prove to you I am the bread of life’’.

The word quickeneth means to give life, to vivify, to electrofy, to animate. It means it is the priciple by which something lives. Anything that does not have a spirit is dead. Anything self moving is alive and is quickeneth.

By contrast, the flesh quickeneth nothing by itself. It is dependent on the spirit. So of itself, the flesh is nothing and has no power.

He is saying that it is the spirit that brings about life. The spirit makes it happen, and he will use this idea of spirit in his next sentence.

I agree. It is the Spirit within Christ that raised Him from the dead, and it is this same Spirit that will raise us also.

Means that his words do have the power to make come true what he had just told them. And then immediately after this, he says that there are some of you who do not believe. Believe what? That what he has said about his flesh being the true bread from heaven, and that his words couldn’t do it. They were incredulous of his power.

I disagree with your conclusion in so far as it fails to address what this statement has to do with the bread of life sermon. His words ARE (meaning in and of themselves they have the following qualities) Spirit. AND life. So in and of themselves his Words are life. This is as clear cut of a statement logically as one can get. This = this and this.

In summary, Jesus is giving his dicourse about announcing his flesh to be consumed to feed us. It just seems that all passages should be seen in that light as referring to this in some way, either reinforcing it, explaining it, giving different aspects of it. His whole treatise is centered on one thought, and in that line of thought, each idea in some way explains sequentially what he is teaching on this subject.

His whole sermon was meant to show them what they must do to have life everlasting.

1. He who believes in me has everlasting life. (He repeats this so It’s important)
   Followed by
2. Anyone who does NOT eat of my Flesh and Blood (the bread of life) does not have life in them.
3. If, without His Flesh and Blood, I do not have life; and His Spirit gives us life; and His words are Life I can only come up with one explanation.

If His words are NOT his Flesh and Blood then how do they give life? For anyone who does not eat His Flesh and Blood does not have life. The conclusion (and if you read the Chapter in this light it might make more sense to you) is that His words ARE his Flesh and Blood. And eating of words is very biblical.
Jeremiah 15:16 ''Thy words were found, and I did eat them, and thy word (Notice the use of singular ‘‘WORD") was to me a joy and gladness of my heart.’’ This is a reference to Christ’s Spirit descending on Jerimiah through the words he ‘‘ate’’.
Again in Ezekiel 3:1: ''And he said to me: Son of man, eat all that thou shalt find: eat this book, and go speak to the children of Israel. ‘’
And again in Ezekiel 2:8 a direct connection between LISTENING to God’s word and us receiving it through eating
''But thou, O son of man, hear all that I say to thee: and do not thou provoke me, as that house provoketh me: open thy mouth, and eat what I give thee. ‘’
And finally in Revelation 2:9
‘‘9So I went to the angel, telling him to give me the little book. And he said to me, "Take it and eat it…’’ ‘’

May the God of hope fill you with every joy.

He has and will! I wish the same for you

 

[Ignatius]

''But Jesus, knowing

Any time you take the text out of the context you only have a pretext. So, let’s look at the immediate context around those passages to see what was going on:
John 6:26-67
26 Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves. 27 Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of man will give to you; for on him has God the Father 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; my Father gives you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is that which comes down from heaven, and gives life to the world.” 34 They said to him, “Lord, give us this bread always.” 35 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. 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 him who comes to me I will not 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 at the last day. 40 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.”
41 The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, “I am the bread which 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 murmur among yourselves. 44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day. 45 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. 46 Not that any one has seen the Father except him who is from God; he has seen the Father. 47 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who 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 which comes down from heaven, that a man may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living breadc] 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.”
52 The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”d] 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 he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. 56 He who eats 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 he who eats me will live because of me. 58 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.” 59 This he said in the synagogue, as he taught at Caper′na-um.
The Words of Eternal Life

60 Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” 61 But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at it, said to them, “Do you take offense at this? 62 Then what if you were to see the Son of man ascending where he was before? 63 It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. 64 But there are some of you that do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the first who those were that did not believe, and who it was that should betray him. 65 And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”
66 After this many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him. 67 Jesus said to the twelve, “Will you also go away?”

If you’ll notice, When they doubted, he stated even more strongly " “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 he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. 56 He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. "

After all of this many turned away and followed him no more, he said “Wait, I was only speaking symbolically” - No, he said to to those few who remained “Will you also go away?”
The meaning is very clear, He was not speaking symbolically, He said it more emphatically each time they questioned.“unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you”

So the question is, will you believe that He can give you His Body and Blood or will you also go away?

 

[God_I_Love]

Any time you take the text out of the context you only have a pretext. So, let’s look at the immediate context around those passages to see what was going on:

The Words of Eternal Life

60 Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” 61 But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at it, said to them, “Do you take offense at this? 62 Then what if you were to see the Son of man ascending where he was before? 63 It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. 64 But there are some of you that do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the first who those were that did not believe, and who it was that should betray him. 65 And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”
66 After this many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him. 67 Jesus said to the twelve, “Will you also go away?”

If you’ll notice, When they doubted, he stated even more strongly " “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 he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. 56 He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. "

After all of this many turned away and followed him no more, he said “Wait, I was only speaking symbolically” - No, he said to to those few who remained “Will you also go away?”
The meaning is very clear, He was not speaking symbolically, He said it more emphatically each time they questioned.“unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you”

*[Shortened the text above as it exceeded (with the following) the 6000 character limit]

So your saying that I am only viewing Jesus’s Flesh and Blood symbolically. I am not. That is your assumption based on what I am saying. I am saying something entirely different.

His Words ARE His Flesh and Blood. That is what I am saying. His words are how the Spirit comes to dwell within us (which is that which GIVES us life). If His Words are life (and He tells us they are in and of themselves) then by eating of His words in the manner which Jeremiah and Ezekiel did I have life in me. Yes or No? If yes then they MUST be His Flesh and Blood, otherwise you call Jesus a liar when He states "Unless you eat of the flesh of the Son of man, and drink His blood you have NO life in you’’.

So the question is, will you believe that He can give you His Body and Blood or will you also go away?

The better question is, will you go away if the Eucharist is not the proper application of this doctrine? I do not deny the Eucharist is his Transubstantiated Flesh and Blood. I maintain though that I can consume His Flesh and Blood through His words (as they are one and the same) and the indwelling of the Spirit within me.

 

[jerome_ky]

G_I_L

Does a body require breath only, or also flesh and blood? If breath only, then only Spirit is necessary. But if we are to be resurrected in our bodies, then we need the flesh and blood of Christ. Christ makes it easy on us, so to speak, by turning bread and wine into Himself so we can comply with His directive, which He says 7 times in a row. If Christ tells me 7 times in a row that I need to consume Him, and He associates Himself with bread, and His Church has a means of providing me with that bread, through Her priesthood, which is a logical continuation of the Israelite priesthood (or why did God need a priesthood and a Temple if He is just Spirit and air and wind and requires nothing tangible), then I am going to do what Christ tells me most obviously, availing myself of the Church which is a visible and time-honored institution, and I’m not going to quibble myself out of the strongest possibility I know of to please Him and hopefully get into Heaven. And of course add to that embracing a life of charity and love and comply with all that Paul said, and all that Christ said, to the best of my ability, and when my failings are too great, I also make use of the sacrament of Reconciliation. (And posting on Catholic Answers forums, of course.)

 

[fred_conty]

God I Love,

I believe what we disagree about is the meaning of the statement of his words being spirit and life, and how this is to be applied.

I understand that you see this verse as making his words the same as his own flesh, which you see as meaning that either or both may be eaten with the same effect. I would agree that they both bring grace in their own special way.

But why? Why would he bring that up now when the whole section he has been talking about is Manna which came down from heaven, and his flesh which came down from heaven and will go back to heaven. Everything is centered on this new food he is presenting to them and not on anything else.

Why would he now bring up the fact that eating his words, which contain life, in a one liner in the midst of this lengthy composition on bread and flesh? It just seems out of place.

I understand you aren’t denying the body of Christ, but why affirm some other idea, in one line, in the middle of this focused discourse? Up to now he is teaching one thing because the revelation is about one thing.

May God our Father give you grace and peace.

 

[God_I_Love]

G_I_L

Does a body require breath only, or also flesh and blood?
If breath only, then only Spirit is necessary.
But if we are to be resurrected in our bodies, then we need the flesh and blood of Christ.

A body’s flesh and blood is animated by the breath (breath and spirit are interchangeable concepts within the Gospel).
We are Spirit only in so far as that is what makes up who we are (the only part that matters). While flesh and blood are utilities for the Spirit in and of themselves they do not constitute who you are. if you suddenly had another’s flesh in you (lets say a heart and liver and lung transplant) do you become another? If I have a complete blood transfusion do I suddenly change? No. The only thing that changes who we are fundamentally is an infusion of another Spirit into ours. When the Spirit of Christ dwells within us and begins sanctifying (conforming our spirit to Christ’s) us we at the very moment of His Spirit entering us become ‘‘new creations’’ in Christ.

So our flesh and blood becomes Christ’s Flesh and Blood at the resurrection? How does the Eucharist help this process of transforming our flesh into His flesh? and our blood into His blood? Does this happen incrementally every time I receive the Eucharist?

Christ makes it easy on us, so to speak, by turning bread and wine into Himself so we can comply with His directive, which He says 7 times in a row.

Is this something I can do whenever I have bread and wine? If not, why?

If Christ tells me 7 times in a row that I need to consume Him, and He associates Himself with bread,

He tells you that life can only be in you by consuming His Flesh and Blood. I agree.

and His Church has a means of providing me with that bread,

I do not deny the Eucharist is bread that is Transubstantiated into Christ’s Flesh and Blood.

through Her priesthood, which is a logical continuation of the Israelite priesthood (or why did God need a priesthood and a Temple if He is just Spirit and air and wind and requires nothing tangible),

The priesthood in the OT was a forerunner to Christ. Christ is the only priest, the High Priest, whom offers propitiation and sacrifice. And if you are a Christian you no longer worship in temples. You are the Temple. And You worship the Father in Spirit and Truth.

then I am going to do what Christ tells me most obviously, availing myself of the Church which is a visible and time-honored institution, and I’m not going to quibble myself out of the strongest possibility I know of to please Him and hopefully get into Heaven.

And of course add to that embracing a life of charity and love and comply with all that Paul said, and all that Christ said, to the best of my ability, and when my failings are too great, I also make use of the sacrament of Reconciliation. (And posting on Catholic Answers forums, of course.)

And my brother in Christ I do not recommend you do anything other than what you stated above. Worshipping the Father in Truth, you must do that which you hold to be true. I do the same. However in the perusal of understanding I hold the positions I have highlighted above to be true, until I am shown otherwise.

 

[God_I_Love]

God I Love,

I believe what we disagree about is the meaning of the statement of his words being spirit and life, and how this is to be applied.

I understand that you see this verse as making his words the same as his own flesh, which you see as meaning that either or both may be eaten with the same effect. I would agree that they both bring grace in their own special way.

You have what I am saying for the most part. But a better way of understanding this is:
Words = life
Flesh and blood =life
''Unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood, you have no life in you"
Therefore words = flesh and blood otherwise his words could not be life

But why? Why would he bring that up now when the whole section he has been talking about is Manna which came down from heaven, and his flesh which came down from heaven and will go back to heaven. Everything is centered on this new food he is presenting to them and not on anything else.

Why would he now bring up the fact that eating his words, which contain life, in a one liner in the midst of this lengthy composition on bread and flesh? It just seems out of place.

I understand you aren’t denying the body of Christ, but why affirm some other idea, in one line, in the middle of this focused discourse? Up to now he is teaching one thing because the revelation is about one thing.

May God our Father give you grace and peace.

He is explaining the doctrine to His disciples. That’s why those verses are so important. If we are his disciples then we should also focus in here as Our Teacher explains the doctrine through overcoming the objections. Now why would he use the terms he did? Because the Jews understood life as being from the spirit, but the only way to get that spirit was through consumption of the flesh of the animal. This is why they did not eat pork. Pork was viewed as having an unclean spirit. So he was explaining with a ''by your reasoning, the only way to have life in you through me (instead of by belief ''he who believes in me…) is by eating my flesh and drinking my blood. So when the disciples wanted an explanation for this he gave it to them. It is not by the flesh that you receive life but by the Spirit which is in my words. These are my Flesh and Blood. This is what you must eat of if you wish life in yourself. And that was too simplistic. It couldn’t be that simple. so many walked away. Peter got the message though. ''you have the words of eternal life" not ‘‘you have the flesh and blood of eternal life’’ (even though He does)

 

[Ignatius]

So when the disciples wanted an explanation for this he gave it to them. … is in my words.

And what were the very words that Jesus had spoken just the instant before? Here they are: " 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.”, “Unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood, you have no life in you.” “Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood lives in me and I in him and I will raise him up on the last day”

His words at the very moment say it all. This bread of life is His flesh. He instituted the Eucharist which is His body and blood so that we could do what He said that we must do to have life in us and so that He lives in us and we in Him and He will raise us up on the last day.

But they would not believe and many left and followed him no more.

 

[jerome_ky]

I do not deny the Eucharist is bread that is Transubstantiated into Christ’s Flesh and Blood.

This statement of belief is at odds with everything else you’ve said. If you believe the Eucharist on the altar to be the Flesh and Blood of Christ, and you accept that He told us with Authority to eat His Flesh and drink His Blood or we Have No Life in us, then it only follows that you must go up to the altar and eat the Eucharist, otherwise you Have No Life in you.

 

[fred_conty]

God I Love,

He is explaining the doctrine to His disciples. That’s why those verses are so important.

If we are his disciples then we should also focus in here as Our Teacher explains the doctrine through overcoming the objections.

I agree with this.

Now why would he use the terms he did?
Because the Jews understood life as being from the spirit,…

My knowledge is a bit rusty on this.

but the only way to get that spirit was through consumption of the flesh of the animal. This is why they did not eat pork. Pork was viewed as having an unclean spirit. So he was explaining with a ''by your reasoning, the only way to have life in you through me (instead of by belief ''he who believes in me…) is by eating my flesh and drinking my blood.

The Jewish rule on eating flesh was that they had to drain all blood from the meat … Kosher food. But they could eat flesh, just not the animals that were declared unclean like the pig. I believe it had to do with 3 hooved animals. But they never consumed the blood. That was the idea of draining it.

So when the disciples wanted an explanation for this he gave it to them.

ok

It is not by the flesh that you receive life…

He says the opposite, “unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood you will not have life in you”.

… but by the Spirit which is in my words.

I would agree that his words do contain Spirit and life, and the bread is changed into his body by his words. Which means that the bread is a living bread, Jesus, which is life. And the Spirit given in baptism.

In Jn 3;6 “…unless a man be born through water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God; what is born of the flesh is flesh; what is born of the Spirit is spirit.” I cite this verse to throw some light on flesh and spirit meanings.

Jesus is saying the flesh, born of this world, avails nothing, but it is the Spirit that gives birth…life of the Spirit, born into the next world. His flesh is his own life and is life for the next world for those in the Spirit.

These are my Flesh and Blood. This is what you must eat of if you wish life in yourself. And that was too simplistic. It couldn’t be that simple. so many walked away. Peter got the message though. ''you have the words of eternal life" not ‘‘you have the flesh and blood of eternal life’’ (even though He does)

I took it to mean that Peter was affirming his belief in Jesus for anything and everything, and therefore would not just single out just one thing that he affirms. But by his generic belief in Jesus, he is also affirming his belief in the real body and blood.

May God bless and keep you. May God’s face shine on you. May God be kind to you and give you peace.

 

[God_I_Love]

And what were the very words that Jesus had spoken just the instant before? Here they are: " 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.”, “Unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood, you have no life in you.” “Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood lives in me and I in him and I will raise him up on the last day”

His words at the very moment say it all. This bread of life is His flesh. He instituted the Eucharist which is His body and blood so that we could do what He said that we must do to have life in us and so that He lives in us and we in Him and He will raise us up on the last day.

But they would not believe and many left and followed him no more.

He gave his flesh on the cross for the life of the world, did he not? So here He is prophesying about that. And every other reference to eating His flesh and blood gets explained in 6:63. I have two questions for you.

1. If I partake of the Eucharist once and then never again will THEN I have life in me?
2. If Words are Life (and understanding I can eat these words and have them abide in me) and all I eat of is Jesus’s words, and NOT the Eucharist, do I have life in me?

 

[God_I_Love]

This statement of belief is at odds with everything else you’ve said. If you believe the Eucharist on the altar to be the Flesh and Blood of Christ, and you accept that He told us with Authority to eat His Flesh and drink His Blood or we Have No Life in us, then it only follows that you must go up to the altar and eat the Eucharist, otherwise you Have No Life in you.

Ok so I go and partake of the Eucharist once. Will then I have life in me?
What happens if I never do, but Christ’s Spirit dwells within me? Will it NOT quicken my mortal bones on the last day?

 

[God_I_Love]

God I Love,

If we are his disciples then we should also focus in here as Our Teacher explains the doctrine through overcoming the objections.

I agree with this.

My knowledge is a bit rusty on this.

The Jewish rule on eating flesh was that they had to drain all blood from the meat … Kosher food. But they could eat flesh, just not the animals that were declared unclean like the pig. I believe it had to do with 3 hooved animals. But they never consumed the blood. That was the idea of draining it.

ok

He says the opposite, “unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood you will not have life in you”.

Take a look at your last quote from Christ. ‘‘unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood you will not have life in you’’

So if one has the Spirit of Christ in them, without having received the Eucharist, they do NOT have life in them. That’s the point you are trying to assert?

I would agree that his words do contain Spirit and life, and the bread is changed into his body by his words. Which means that the bread is a living bread, Jesus, which is life. And the Spirit given in baptism.

You would agree they contain spirit and life… we are a little closer now, but I say that they ARE spirit and life. Not what they contain but what they are by nature.
And when he said, ‘‘this is my body’’ did he change all bread in the world to His Flesh? And when He said ‘‘this is my blood’’, did he change all wine in the world into His Blood?
Why not? and How does one know?

In Jn 3;6 “…unless a man be born through water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God; what is born of the flesh is flesh; what is born of the Spirit is spirit.” I cite this verse to throw some light on flesh and spirit meanings.

Jesus is saying the flesh, born of this world, avails nothing, but it is the Spirit that gives birth…life of the Spirit, born into the next world. His flesh is his own life and is life for the next world for those in the Spirit.

Ok what Jesus is saying here is that we need two things in order to get to know the Father and enter the Kingdom of God. We need water, and we need Spirit.

1. what water? physical water? H2O?
2. What Spirit? Christ’s Spirit?

I took it to mean that Peter was affirming his belief in Jesus for anything and everything, and therefore would not just single out just one thing that he affirms. But by his generic belief in Jesus, he is also affirming his belief in the real body and blood.

May God bless and keep you. May God’s face shine on you. May God be kind to you and give you peace.

So you do not see a connection between Peter’s response and the sermon highlighted above, besides a general affirmation of belief in it?
I think the only thing Peter understood was that Christ’s words are eternal life. “words of eternal life” Why not focus on the flesh and blood?

 

[fred_conty]

God I Love,

Take a look at your last quote from Christ. ‘‘unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood you will not have life in you’’

So if one has the Spirit of Christ in them, without having received the Eucharist, they do NOT have life in them. That’s the point you are trying to assert?

Yes. If they understand what he is saying, yes. the catholic church made the mandate that a catholic must receive the body of Jesus at least once a year. Because it was at the directon of Jesus that all should receive his body. What kind of faith does a person have that wouldn’t receive at least once a year if they really believe it is Jesus’ own body? It is important that the life given to them from the Holy Spirit be nourished by the very life of grace, Jesus himself. How could they say that they love Jesus, when they ignore his desire to be one with them?

Note, I am talking about Catholics, not others. Others may be ignorant in an innocent way of his desire. But Catholic means they know that this changed bread is the body of Jesus and that his statements are important about his very own body.

Jesus is the new Pashcal lamb to be eaten at the new table from the new sacrifice. Whose blood was sprinkled on the lintel of the cross so that the angel of death(soul) will not take us. The people of old ate of the old Passover lamb at the old family table from the the old sacrifice. Whose blood was sprinkled on the lintel of the door so that death(body) might not enter their home.

This Jewish Passover meal was to be celebrated by every Jewish family once a year.
This Catholic Paschal meal is to be celebrated by every Catholic at least once a year.
By the sacrificial lamb both the old and new people were spared, but with with different lambs, and different deaths. The old signifying the new. So to be spared, “Unless you eat…”

You would agree they contain spirit and life… we are a little closer now, but I say that they ARE spirit and life. Not what they contain but what they are by nature.

I’m unsure just exactly how to understand this. But one thing for sure,…Jesus is God, and what he says is going to happen. His words do make things happen, just like at Cana when his words turned water into wine. But we wouldn’t say in that miracle that his words are spirit and life because it just wouldn’t fit.

Or when he said “peace” to the waves on lake Genesereth, we could say the same thing. So I would see what his words mean by what he intends them to do. And by his words “this is my body” he intends to make his words spirit and life by changing the bread into his own spirit and living body. In the Eucharist, we believe that Jesus is there in his body, blood, soul, and divinity, which is his spirit and life.

And when he said, ‘‘this is my body’’ did he change all bread in the world to His Flesh? And when He said ‘‘this is my blood’’, did he change all wine in the world into His Blood? Why not? and How does one know?

Mt 26;26 Now as they were eating Jesus took some bread, and when he had said the blessing, he broke it and gave it to the disciples. “Take and eat” he said, “this is my body.”

Jesus took some bread at the supper table, and that is what he changed into his body for them to eat.

Mt 26;27 Then he took the cup, and when he had returned thanks, he gave it to them. “Drink all of you from this”, he said, “for this is my blood…”.

Again he took a cup at the supper table and changed the wine in this cup into his blood.

Ok what Jesus is saying here is that we need two things in order to get to know the Father and enter the Kingdom of God. We need water, and we need Spirit.

1. what water? physical water? H2O?
2. What Spirit? Christ’s Spirit?

The water that Jesus talks about with Nichodemous is the water of baptism, which gives birth(life) into the kingdom of the next world. The spirit that this water gives is the Holy Spirit whereby our soul becomes the temple of the Holy Spirit. After baptism of water, the Spirit resides within that person in grace.

So you do not see a connection between Peter’s response and the sermon highlighted above, besides a general affirmation of belief in it?
I think the only thing Peter understood was that Christ’s words are eternal life. “words of eternal life” Why not focus on the flesh and blood?

At this point in Jesus’ teachings, Jesus never said “how” he was going to give them his body to eat. So Peter doesn’t know yet what form this eating will be…under the form of bread. So Peter says, whatever you say Lord…100%. He had pure blind faith. So Peter agrees.

It could be as you say in the sense of focusing on accepting this new food. If I remember correctly, it seems that Peter did say those very words elsewhere in the gospels, “words of eternal life.”

“There are millions in this world who are craving the pleasure earthly things afford,
but none can match the wonderous treasure that I find in the Bread from heaven, JESUS THE LORD.” Hymn

May you always experience Christ’s peace.

 

[jerome_ky]

Ok so I go and partake of the Eucharist once. Will then I have life in me?
What happens if I never do, but Christ’s Spirit dwells within me? Will it NOT quicken my mortal bones on the last day?

If you believe in the Eucharist and never partake, then you have no life in you. Those are Christ’s words, not mine. If you partake once, out of sincere belief, then you believe in the Church providing you that Eucharist, so you believe in Her teaching that you must partake every Sunday and Holy Day of Obligation.

Checkmate, my friend. Catholic up and go to Mass.Try the Latin, the music is beautiful.

 

[Darryl_B]

Salvation by memorizing the Bible is what GIL is preaching. How good is your memory? You stand accountable at that time and the question of entrance is posed “What does John 3:5 say?”. You hesitate, on the spot, in the spotlight you blank, … “Out of here”.

If His Words are life (and He tells us they are in and of themselves) then by eating of His words in the manner which Jeremiah and Ezekiel did I have life in me. Yes or No?

The answer is No. I have only ever met one cult who claimed the words of Jesus Christ are by themselves “life”. I have not seen that in any main-stream denomination.

 

[GaryTaylor]

''But Jesus, knowing in himself, that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you? 63 If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? 64 It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life. ‘’ John 6:62-64

The disciples were just murmuring about eating his flesh and blood.

John 2:21…Jesus was speaking about the temple of his body.

I think its incarnate now on earth and historically called the Catholic Church, so the temple of His body is understood in reality as the Church and everlasting covenant. Jesus Christ can and does convict whomever He wills through the Holy Spirit and the Church He established agrees per Council. However we would have to synthesis the Divinity of Christs nature in content/context not pretext and the redemptive act of Himself as Divinity. Through the Hypostatic Union the Nature of Christ, He established an Everlasting Covenant with the temple of His body. So I guess what I am saying is His body though mortal too, was not corruptible. And according to my reading neither is His everlasting covenant, His Church and a good deal of His Saints, and historically. Physical mortality/immortality in relation. Sin is in relation to mortality. Which is the why He states “Do this in memory of Me”. He made His flesh divine and then offered it for our salvation.

 

[God_I_Love]

There are some excellent points made above and I will respond to them when I have more time. Thank you for being willing to discuss such an important and essential piece of doctrine. I will respond to Darryl B. I am not preaching salvation. That is done by the Gospel of Christ. And knowledge of the Bible I didn’t think was a bad thing. If my scriptural references offend you then please refrain from reading them. If you disagree with them, or my interpretation of them, please feel free to let me know and why.

As for your response
‘‘The answer is No. I have only ever met one cult who claimed the words of Jesus Christ are by themselves “life”. I have not seen that in any main-stream denomination.’’
First what cult is this? I didn’t know such an organization existed. Secondly any cult that says Jesus’s words are life is telling you a Truth. Jesus said: ‘‘My WORDS are … LIFE.’’ Tell me is it illogical to assume that when Jesus says my words are life, that His words are life?