garee wrote Let's start with the scriptures the one sure foundation of Christian faith.

Yes lets start with the scriptures shall we.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with GOD; and the Word was GOD." John 1:1
"And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us." John 1:14
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Truth is a person, and that person is one, and that person is Jesus Christ.
"I am the way, and the truth, and the life."
These are the words of Jesus Christ in John 14:6

Therefore, truth is one. There can be only one truth, as there can be only one Jesus Christ.

Whatever Jesus Christ said is true, because He said it.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"He who does not believe the Son, makes Him a liar."
1John 5:10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Holy Eucharist in the Old Testament...

Consuming the Lamb Slain (Rev 5:6), or participating in the Eucharistic Meal, or Supper, is prefigured or "Typed" in the Old Testament. The Lamb of GOD is depicted throughout the Bible as being Jesus Christ...
"Behold, the Lamb of GOD, who takes away the sin of the world."
These are words spoken by John the Baptist in John 1:29 as he saw Jesus coming to him.

In Exodus 12:1-22, the Israelites, in order to avoid the slaying of their firstborn by the "Angel of Death", were commanded by GOD to take an unblemished male lamb (12:5)and slaughter it (12:6), and apply its blood to the two doorposts, and the lintels of every household which did partake of the Lamb (12:7). Now look at verse (12:, and you will clearly see that in order for their firstborn to be saved, they had to eat the Lamb as well. Is this not what we do in the sacrifice of the Mass? Are we not to be saved by consuming the Body and the blood of the Lamb as shown in John Chapter 6:33-58?

In Exodus 16:13-16, is the story of the quail and the manna which fed the Israelites as they proceeded through their desert trek. GOD provided the bodily food for the hundreds of thousands involved. Can you imagine how much food was required for all of these people every day? There were 600,000 men alone, not counting women and children. See Exodus 12:37.
The quail and the manna are "Types" of the Holy Eucharist. See John 6:32.

The prophet Malachi tells us what is to come regarding the Holy Eucharist. Malachi 1:11:
"For from the rising of the sun even to the going down, My name is great among the Gentiles, and in every place there is sacrifice, and there is offered to My name a CLEAN OBLATION."
Malachi has said there will be no more bloody sacrifices to GOD as was done in the Old Testament. The Catholic Church offers the sacrifice of the Mass, and a "clean oblation", the Holy Eucharist, all over the world, and around the clock. This prophecy of Malachi has been fulfilled.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Holy Eucharist in the New Testament...

In Matthew 26:26, He said, "Take and eat; THIS IS MY BODY."
In Matthew 26:27-28 He said, "All of you drink of this; FOR THIS IS MY BLOOD OF THE NEW COVENANT, WHICH IS BEING SHED FOR MANY UNTO THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS."

These words of Jesus Christ, faithfully recorded by St. Matthew, are the First Mention of them in Holy Scripture. His Gospel was written for the Jews, in order to try and convince them that the long awaited Messiah had truly come, just as the Old Testament Prophets had predicted He would. Therefore, Matthew refers to more Old Testament verses than any of the four Gospel writers, since the Jews knew Holy Scripture quite well. This Gospel, therefore, stands alone on its own merit, as do all of the Gospels.

I challenge anyone to show me any hint of symbolism of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ in this Gospel of St. Matthew.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In Mark 14:22-24, are recorded, "Take; THIS IS MY BODY", and "THIS IS MY BLOOD OF THE NEW COVENANT, WHICH IS BEING SHED FOR MANY."
These words recorded by St. Mark are almost identical to those of St. Matthew, and therefore, have the same meaning as those of St. Matthew under the "Law of First Mention". However, Mark wrote his Gospel to a different audience, the Romans. He tries to show them that Jesus Christ is the Divine Savior by including more of His miracles in this Gospel. St. Mark's Gospel stands alone as do all of the Gospels.

I challenge anyone to show me any hint of symbolism of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ in this Gospel of St. Mark.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In Luke 22:19-20, are recorded, "THIS IS MY BODY, WHICH IS BEING GIVEN FOR YOU; DO THIS IN REMEMBRANCE OF ME", and "THIS CUP IS THE NEW COVENANT IN MY BLOOD, WHICH SHALL BE SHED FOR YOU."
These words of Jesus Christ,set down by St. Luke, are very similar and have the same meaning as those of Matthew and Mark, and again follow the "Law of First Mention". St. Luke wrote to yet another audience, the Gentile converts. His Gospel also stands alone on its own merit.

I challenge anyone to show me the symbolism of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ in this Gospel of St. Luke. Some may try to show that the word "remembrance" means it is symbolic. However, if you would look at the original Greek word used here, it is "anamnesis", which means not only to "remember", but more importantly, "to make present". There is no symbolism in these words recorded by St. Luke. To try and show symbolism in St. Luke's Gospel, you would also have to show the symbolism in the Gospels of Matthew and Mark as well. Each Gospel stands alone.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In John Chapter 6, the true presence is demonstrated in a most formidable way. If you have not done so already, please read my file "John, Chapter 6" for a verse by verse explanation. At the beginning of the chapter, Jesus demonstrated the feeding of the body by the multiplication of the loaves and fishes, and the filling of five thousand people. Starting with verse 22 through the end, He told us we need spiritual nourishment for our souls as well.
In verses 26-27 He said, "...you seek Me, not because you have seen signs, but because you have eaten of the loaves and have been filled. Do not labor for the food that perishes, but for that which endures unto life everlasting, which the Son of Man will give you."
How can nothing more than crackers and grape juice fulfill these verses? These two foods feed the body as did the loaves and fishes, but they do absolutely nothing for the soul.
As I have recounted above from John 14:6, Jesus said He is the "Life", and in 6:56, He said, "He who eats My flesh, and drinks My blood, abides in Me and I in him." Abide means to live in.
Verse 53, "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink His blood, YOU SHALL NOT HAVE LIFE WITHIN YOU."
Is consuming crackers and grape juice going to fulfill verses 53 and 56? Where is the symbolism?
Read these two verses again.
Now compare John 6:56 above with John 15:6, "If a man does not abide in me, he is cast forth as a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire and burned."
John 6:56 clearly said that we must eat his flesh and drink his blood.
John 15:6 clearly said that if we do not, then we are lost. How can we be lost by failing to eat a symbolic gesture?

Count the number of times Jesus said, He is the bread, the living bread, that it is His flesh and it is His blood, and that we must eat of His flesh and drink His blood?

In John 6:66 (the 666 connection) who walked away from Jesus and never returned? Was it the Jews who were there? Did GOD give the Ten Commandments to the Hebrews only? You cannot be selective of a single group, as the Gospels were written for all of us. It was all of those, then and now, who refuse to believe His words which He repeated over and over again. Why does a person repeat himself? It is to drive home a point and to make it stick. But stick it did not for many, then as now. All those who refuse to believe in the true presence of Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist, are those imbedded in John 6:66.

Some try to show that verse 63 shows that the whole chapter is symbolic. However, "It is the spirit that quickens; the flesh profits nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life" (63), merely shows that we cannot accept this mystery in too human a way, by having an earthly view of things. See John 3:6, "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." Verse 63 means that we should not have a carnal human understanding of His words, but a spiritual understanding. See John 8:15, Rom 8:1-13,15:27, 1Cor 3:1-4,9:11, and 2Cor 10:4.
He who takes "The flesh profits nothing" as an excuse for denying the "True Presence", denies the incarnation and humanity of Jesus Christ." It is interesting that those who do this are taking one verse and calling it literal by itself, and all the while calling all of the other verses around it figurative, or symbolic.

The word "Amen" is a Greek word (amen) of Hebrew origin which, at the beginning of a discourse means, "certainly", "surely", "truly", "of a truth", "so be it"? When used as a prefix by Jesus Christ , it is to emphasize that it is a Statement of especial solemnity.
Now, what do you suppose He meant when He emphasized twice, by using a double "Amen"?

"Amen, amen, I say to you, Moses did not give you the bread from heaven, but my Father gives you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of GOD is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world."
John 6:32-33
Notice that Jesus used a double emphasis by beginning these verses with 'truly', 'truly'. Do you 'truly' 'truly' believe what He said in this verse? Is there any room for symbolism in these verses whatsoever?

"Amen, amen, I say to you, he who believes in me has life everlasting."
John 6:47
Again, He said 'truly', 'truly', but of course everyone believes His words in this verse, so everyone 'truly', 'truly' believes Him here. But, read on for a possible "snag" for some, regarding this verse.

"Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you."
John 6:53
What? 'Truly', 'truly' again? Another double emphasis? The context for this verse is the same as for the previous examples in this section. Why do you think Jesus used a double emphasis yet again? Again I ask, why do people repeat themselves at all? Again, for emphasis, they do it to drive home a very important point, that is why! Interestingly, Weymouth's Modern Speech New Testament translates the first words of this verse as: "In most solemn truth, I tell you...".

What would Jesus have had to say to make his words any more clear than what He actually said? Then why do some say "Truly, truly, in this verse, He was only speaking symbolically"?
If this verse is to be taken only symbolically, then the previous example, John 6:47, must be treated in the same context, as being only a symbolic gesture also. If that is the case, then we have a domino effect working throughout Scripture. All verses with the same meaning of John 6:47, "believe in Christ and you have life everlasting", must be only symbolic as well.
Some well known, and well used verses with the same, or very similar meaning are,
John 3:15-16,18, 5:24, 6:40, 8:24, and 20:31, Acts 13:48, and 16:31, Romans 10:9-11, 1Timothy 1:16, and 4:10, 2Timothy 1:1, and 1John 5:13.

The Greek word for "life" used in John 6:53, is "zoen" (zoen) which means, "divine life of GOD imparted to us". There are other Greek words for "life" that St. John could have chosen, such as "bios" (bios) which simply means "life". The fact that he chose the word that he did, lends great credibility to the literal meaning of this verse and with not a hint of symbolism.

Again, if you try to show that John Chapter 6 is symbolic, then you have to show the symbolism in the other three Gospels, and the other verses I have presented as well.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

John 20:21, "He therefore said to them again, 'Peace be to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you'."
What did Jesus say here?
The Father sent Him to redeem us, to forgive us our sins, to open the Gates of Heaven, and to bring us his life saving food from Heaven, the manna for our souls, which is now His most precious Body and Blood.
He did redeem us and He did open the Gates of Heaven. On the night of the Last Supper, He established the Priesthood, and commanded them to "Do this in remembrance of Me", thus perpetuating the Holy Eucharist, and fulfilling the prophecy of Malachi 1:11. In John 20:22-23, He breathed upon them and said, "Receive the Holy Spirit; whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained". He thus empowered them to act in His Person, in "Persona Christi", (2Cor 2:10). The priest had become the hands and the voice of Jesus Christ.
Please read Matt 9:8, "But when the crowds saw it, they were struck with fear, and glorified GOD WHO HAD GIVEN SUCH POWER TO MEN."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1Cor 10:16, "The cup of the blessing that we bless, IS IT NOT THE SHARING OF THEBLOODOF CHRIST? And the bread that we break, IS IT NOT THE PARTAKING OF THEBODYOF THE LORD?"
Could St. Paul have said this any clearer than he did here? Where did he say the "symbolic" sharing or the "symbolic" partaking? This verse is absolutely to the point, and there is not a hint of symbolism anywhere.
Did you notice the BLESSING THAT WE BLESS, and the BREAD THAT WE BREAK?
Here, Saint Paul clearly stated that he and the other Apostles have the authority and the power
(Acts 1:8,2:2-4) to call down "THE WORD" with their word, and the cup (of wine) is no longer wine, but the Blood of Christ, and the bread is no longer bread, but the Body of Christ.
This authority and power bestowed upon the Apostles, was passed down to their successors, the Priests and the Bishops, through the "Laying on of Hands", in a process called "Apostolic Succession". This process has been perpetuated to this very day, and can be vividly seen in the unbroken line of the "Bishops of Rome", the "Popes".


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1Cor 11:23, St Paul was not present at the Last Supper, but in this verse he said that he had received the following recount of it, and of the True Presence from the Lord. Why did he not receive the teaching from the Apostles? Is it because the Lord knew it was so important to give the teaching of His True Presence in the Holy Eucharist to him directly since he missed it the first time around?
1Cor 11:23-26, St. Paul repeats the words of consecration of Jesus Christ at the last supper.
1Cor 11:27-29, St. Paul lays it on the line, "Therefore, whoever eats this bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily, will be guilty of the Body and the Blood of the Lord (27). But let a man prove himself, and so let him eat of that bread and drink of the cup; (28) FOR HE WHO EATS AND DRINKS UNWORTHILY, WITHOUT DISTINGUISHING THE BODY, EATS AND DRINKS JUDGMENT (the word is 'damnation' in the King James Bible) TO HIMSELF." (29)
Wow! Just what is going on here? When Catholics receive Holy Communion, the priest holds up the Sacred Host and says "The Body of Christ". The communicant responds with "Amen". The word "Amen" means "so be it". It is an affirmation that we believe what the priest has just said. Since each receptor is a member of the Body of Christ, then he or she is in communion with the other members of the Body of Christ in the Catholic Church. It is an affirmation that we believe and accept the teachings of the Catholic Church. This is what St. Paul is telling us in those three verses. This is also precisely the reason why Protestants should not receive Holy Communion in the Catholic Church. They do not believe it is the true Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, therefore they are not in communion with the Catholic Church, and they are not believers of Catholic teachings. If they were, then why would they still be Protestant?
CCC-1355 (Catechism of the Catholic Church)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On the road to Emmaus...
In Luke 24:13-35, we have the story of two of the disciples walking on the road to Emmaus shortly after the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Jesus joined them in their walk, but they did not recognize Him (16). He interpreted all the Scriptures for them that referred to Himself (27) and yet they still failed to recognize Him. It was toward evening and they invited Him to dine with them (29). Then something very dramatic happened as they reclined (30-31).Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and broke it, and gave it to them. And their eyes were opened and with that, they immediately recognized
His true presence in the Breaking of Bread, the Holy Eucharist.
"And they themselves began to relate what had happened on the journey, AND HOW THEY RECOGNIZED HIM IN THE BREAKING OF THE BREAD." (35)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Catholics are correct when they say "it is only a symbol", because for them, it IS only a symbol. You see, they have no valid "Priestly Orders". They have no Apostolic Succession and therefore, no valid Orders for the priesthood. They cannot consecrate a host. They cannot call down "The Word" with their word, as the Catholic priest can. However, they have no right or authority whatsoever, to say that the Holy Eucharist, as consecrated by Catholic priests, is only a symbolic gesture.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Council of Trent...
Convened on December 4, 1545 and closed on December 4, 1563.
About 25 years after the Protestant reformation, the Catholic Church convened the Council of Trent as a counter to the reformation, and for the refutation of the heresies created by it. Here are the decrees of this council regarding the True Presence of Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist...

The Thirteenth Session: Decreed on March 8, 1547.
ON THE MOST HOLY SACRAMENT OF THE EUCHARIST...


CANON I.-If any one denieth, that, in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, are contained truly, really, and substantially, the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the whole Christ; but saith that He is only therein as in a sign, or in figure, or virtue; let him be anathema*.

* Anathema means, accursed, (let him be) cursed, excluded from the Kingdom of GOD, banned, or excommunicated. The phrase "Let him be Anathema", is used many times in Church Council decrees, and in so doing, makes that statement in which it is contained an "Infallible Statement".
See 1Chron 2:7, Judith 16:23, Isa 65:20, Rom 9:3, 1Cor 12:3,16:22, and especially Gal 1:8-9.

CANON lI.-If any one saith, that, in the sacred and holy sacrament of the Eucharist, the substance of the bread and wine remains conjointly with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and denieth that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the Body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood-the species Only of the bread and wine remaining-which conversion indeed the Catholic Church most aptly calls Transubstantiation; let him be anathema.

CANON III.-If any one denieth, that, in the venerable sacrament of the Eucharist, the whole Christ is contained under each species, and under every part of each species, when separated; let him be anathema.

CANON IV.-If any one saith, that, after the consecration is completed, the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ are not in the admirable sacrament of the Eucharist, but (are there) only during the use, whilst it is being taken, and not either before or after; and that, in the hosts, or consecrated particles, which are reserved or which remain after communion, the true Body of the Lord remaineth not; let him be anathema.

CANON V.-If any one saith, either that the principal fruit of the most holy Eucharist is the remission of sins, or, that other effects do not result therefrom; let him be anathema.

CANON VI.-If any one saith, that, in the holy sacrament of the Eucharist, Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, is not to be adored with the worship, even external of latria; and is, consequently, neither to be venerated with a special festive solemnity, nor to be solemnly borne about in processions, according to the laudable and universal rite and custom of holy church; or, is not to be proposed publicly to the people to be adored, and that the adorers thereof are idolators; let him be anathema.

CANON VII.-If any one saith, that it is not lawful for the sacred Eucharist to be reserved in the sacrarium, but that, immediately after consecration, it must necessarily be distributed amongst those present; or, that it is not lawful that it be carried with honour to the sick; let him be anathema.

CANON VIII.-lf any one saith, that Christ, given in the Eucharist, is eaten spiritually only, and not also sacramentally and really; let him be anathema.

CANON IX.-If any one denieth, that all and each of Christ's faithful of both sexes are bound, when they have attained to years of discretion, to communicate every year, at least at Easter, in accordance with the precept of holy Mother Church; let him be anathema.

CANON X.-If any one saith, that it is not lawful for the celebrating priest to communicate himself; let him be anathema.

CANON XI.-lf any one saith, that faith alone is a sufficient preparation for receiving the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist; let him be anathema. And for fear lest so great a sacrament may be received unworthily, and so unto death and condemnation, this holy Synod ordains and declares, that sacramental confession, when a confessor may be had, is of necessity to be made beforehand, by those whose conscience is burthened with mortal sin, how contrite even soever they may think themselves. But if any one shall presume to teach, preach, or obstinately to assert, or even in public disputation to defend the contrary, he shall be thereupon excommunicated.

http://home.inreach.com/bstanley/true.htm


Saint John, New Testament, Chapter Six...

This chapter is so important in explaining the "true presence" of Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist. Following is a verse by verse explanation. If you will read the whole chapter, you will not find any verse to indicate Jesus was speaking figuratively, or in parables. He was speaking literally as the context of the chapter plainly shows.
One of the basic rules of Bible interpretation is, if something is said only once in Scripture, it might be taken figuratively, but if it is repeated three times, it is to be taken literally. Jesus repeated His message in John Chapter six, nine different ways, or nine times.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The key verses are indicated here...

Vs 1-15, Jesus demonstrated the need to feed the body, by the multiplication of the loaves and fishes. In later verses He will show the need to feed the spiritual soul as well, with His very own Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity. Just as the life of the body is in the blood, Lev 11:17, so the life of the spiritual soul is in the body and blood of Jesus Christ, John 6:54.

Vs 24-25, These verses show that Jesus was speaking to all of the people, who represent all of us and not just to the Jews, or His disciples.

Vs 32-33, Jesus said, "Amen, amen, I say to you, Moses did not give you the bread from heaven, but my Father gives you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of GOD is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world."

Note! Moses and the bread in this verse, refer to the manna in the desert as shown in Exodus 16:14-31. The manna is a "type" of the "antitype" of the "true bread from heaven" which is the true Body of Christ. You can read about "types" and "typology" in 1Corinthians 10:1-11, Hebrews 9:9,11:19.
Never does an Old Testament "type" point to a New Testament symbol, but always to a vastly superior reality.

The word "Amen" is a Greek word (amen) of Hebrew origin, which, at the beginning of a discourse means, "certainly", "surely", "truly", "of a truth", "so be it"? When used as a prefix by Jesus Christ , it is to emphasize that it is a solemn statement, and is of utmost importance. Now, what do you suppose He meant when He emphasized twice, by using a double "Amen", a "Truly, truly"?
Do you "truly, truly" believe what He said in this verse? Is there any room for symbolism in these verses whatsoever?

Vs 35*, Jesus said, "...I am the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall not hunger, and he who believes in Me shall never thirst."
This is the first of two verses that non-Catholics use to "prove" that Jesus was speaking figuratively for the whole chapter. "He who believes in Me shall never thirst", means to believe in what He said. If anyone denies what He said, he does not believe in Him. In order to support this belief, then they have to show that Jesus also spoke figuratively in Mt 26:26-28, Mk 14:22-24, and Lk 22:19-20, where He said "This is my Body." Also St. Paul must have spoken figuratively in 1Cor 10:16, and 1Cor 11:23-30. Yet in none of these verses is there a shred of evidence to support their belief in figurative speech. Apparently they close their eyes to 1Cor 11:29, "...for he who eats and drinks unworthily, without distinguishing the body, eats and drinks judgment to himself." How could anyone bring judgment upon himself if it is only a symbol?



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vs 41, already the Jews have begun to doubt Him.

Vs 43, Jesus knew they were doubting when He said, "Murmur not among yourselves."

Vs 47, Jesus said, "Amen, amen, I say to you, he who believes in Me has life everlasting."
He told them that the ones who believe what He is saying, have everlasting life. Do you want everlasting life? Then you have to believe Him because He said it. He is truth, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life", John 14:6.
If you do not believe His words here, then you are guilty of 1John 5:10...
"He who believes in the Son of GOD has the testimony of GOD in himself. He who does not believe the Son, makes him a liar; because he does not believe the witness that GOD has borne concerning his Son.".

Vs 48, A second time Jesus said, "I am that bread of life."

Vs 49, "Your fathers ate manna in the wilderness and they are dead."
This is because the manna was only a type, the symbol of the reality which was to come.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vs 50, "This is the bread which comes down from Heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die."
We know that all of us will die physically, but Jesus meant the eternal life of the spiritual soul.

Vs 51, Jesus said, "I am the living bread that came down from Heaven, if any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever. And the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world."
Did He say the bread is a "symbol" of His flesh, or did He say it is my flesh?

Vs 52, the Jews doubt even more as they said, "How can this man give us His flesh to eat?"
Isn't this what non-believers in the "True Presence" say today?

Vs 53, Jesus said, "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood, you do not have life within you."
The very next verse 54 says that those who eat the flesh of the Son of Man, do have everlasting life. How then, can these verses be symbolic?
Interestingly, Weymouth's Modern Speech New Testament translates the first words of this verse as:
"In most solemn truth, I tell you...".
The context for this verse is the same as for the previous examples in this chapter. Here we have yet another "Truly, truly". Why do people repeat themselves at all? They do it for a purpose, in order to drive home a very important point, that is why!
What would Jesus have had to say to make his words any more clear than what He actually said? Then why do some say "Truly, truly, in this verse, He was only speaking symbolically"? If this verse is to be taken only symbolically, then the previous verses, John 6:32-33 and 6:47, must be treated in the same context, as being only a symbolic gesture also. If that is the case, then we have a domino effect working throughout Scripture. All verses with the same meaning of John 6:47, "believe in Christ and you have life everlasting", must be only symbolic as well. Some well known, and well used verses with the same, or very similar meaning are, John 3:15-16,18, 5:24, 6:40, 8:24, and 20:31, Acts 13:48, and 16:31, Romans 10:9-11,
1Timothy 1:16, and 4:10, 2Timothy 1:1, and 1John 5:13.

It is to be noted that some Protestant Bibles use the word "Verily", instead of "Amen", in the verses shown above. Verily means, "in truth", or "with confidence". However, in the Greek text the word used is Amen.

Not only do we have the double "amen" for solemn emphasis in this verse, but we also have the keyword "unless".
Have you ever noticed that when Jesus used the word "unless", it was accompanied by a dire warning that His word must be obeyed, "Or you shall not enter the Kingdom of Heaven", or similar wording?
Matthew 5:20, "...Unless your justice exceeds that of the Scribes and the Pharisees...."
Matthew 18:3, "...Unless you turn and become like little children...."
Luke 13:3,5, "...Unless you repent...." (you will all perish).
John 3:3, "...Unless a man be born again...."
John 3:5, "...Unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit...."
John 6:53, "...Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you shall not have life in you, (implied, "no life everlasting", as shown by the very next verse, John 6:54), "He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has life everlasting and I will raise him up on the last day".

The Greek word for "life" used in John 6:53, is "zoen" (zoen) which means,
"divine life of GOD imparted to us".
There are other Greek words for "life" that St. John could have chosen, such as "bios" (bios).
Why then did he choose "zoen" instead, other than to emphasize the fact that it really is the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ?

I have shown you three powerful words in this one verse, amen, unless, and the Greek zoen for life. Each word by itself is sufficient to show the literal sense of this verse and without so much as a hint of symbolism. All three of these words collectively, in one verse, show that there is not the slightest possibility of symbolism whatsoever in John 6:53.

Vs 54, "Whoever eats My flesh, and drinks My blood, has eternal life; and I will raise him up on the last day." Did He say to eat the symbol of His flesh?

Vs 55, Jesus said, "For My flesh is meat indeed, and My blood is drink indeed."



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vs 56, Jesus said, "He that eats My flesh and drinks My blood dwells in Me, and I in him."
Did He say, 'He that eats a symbol of My flesh...'. How can a mere symbol fulfill this promise?
Does only a symbol of Christ dwell in us? I thought GOD Himself dwelt within us, 1John 4:12-13.

Vs 59, This verse shows that Jesus taught this discourse to all the people.

Vs 60, They doubt a third time when many disciples said, "This is a hard saying, who can hear it"?
The Jews were instilled by many Old Testament verses, admonishing them not to consume blood.
See Deut 12:23, Lev 17:11and 14. They must have thought this was something akin to cannibalism.
Is this what you think too?
At any point did Jesus back down? Explain to me, if this chapter is symbolic, why did He not explain the symbolism to them?

Vs 61, Jesus did not back down, for He said, "Does this offend you?"
He knew their thoughts and He certainly knew the Old Testament verses about the consumption of blood.
In the next verse, He separated spiritual things from earthly things.

Vs 63*, Jesus said, "It is the spirit that quickens; the flesh profits nothing. The words I speak to you, they are spirit, and they are life."
Did He say He was speaking figuratively or in parables? This is the second verse detractors use to try to "prove" that Jesus spoke figuratively for the whole chapter. Did Jesus say "My" flesh? No, He said "the" flesh. What Jesus had said was, that we cannot accept this mystery if we accept it in too human a way, by having an earthly view of things. Those who can only think of cannibalism, are they not having an earthly view?
See John 3:6, "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." Verse 63 means that we should not have a carnal human understanding of His words, but a spiritual understanding.

Romans 8:1-13 explains what "the flesh" means very nicely...
"There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set me free from the law of sin and death. For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do: sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the just requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. To set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God�s law, indeed it cannot; and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
But you are not in the flesh, you are in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Any one who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. But if Christ is in you, although your bodies are dead because of sin, your spirits are alive because of righteousness. If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies also through his Spirit which dwells in you. So then, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh � for if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body you will live."

I count that the term, "the flesh" is used twelve times in those verses of Romans 8.

Mark 14:38, "Watch and pray that you may not enter into temptation; the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak."

More on the Spirit and the flesh:

1Corinthians 2:10 to 1Corinthians 3:3, "God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. For what person knows a man's thoughts except the spirit of the man which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is from God, that we might understand the gifts bestowed on us by God. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit. The unspiritual man does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual man judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one. For who has known the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ. But I, brethren, could not address you as spiritual men, but as men of the flesh, as babes in Christ. I fed you with milk, not solid food; for you were not ready for it; and even yet you are not ready, for you are still of the flesh. For while there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not of the flesh, and behaving like ordinary men?"

He who takes, "The flesh; profits nothing" (meaning the flesh of Jesus), as an excuse for denying the "True Presence", has denied the incarnation and humanity of Jesus Christ." It is interesting that those who take John Chapter six as being figurative, also take this one verse by itself and call it literal, and all the while calling all of the other verses around it figurative, or symbolic. If "The flesh profits nothing" taken figuratively, meaning the "symbolism" of the flesh of Jesus, then Jesus died for nothing. Anyone who says what Jesus Christ said in these verses is figurative, is also breaking at least three basic rules of Bible interpretation.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vs 64, Jesus said, "But there are some of you who believe not."
Jesus knew from the beginning who they were, and who should betray Him. This is the first time Jesus alludes to Judas, as the betrayer.

Vs 66, and now look what happens in John 6:66...
"From that time many of His disciples went back, and walked no more with Him."
Did He call them back and say, "Hey I was just kidding, it is only a parable"? No He did not, for in the next verse, He did just the opposite. He would have let them all go. Are you one of those who walked away because His teaching is too hard? Interestingly, the Jews knew exactly what He was saying. If they thought it was only a symbol, then why would they walk away? If they thought He had spoken only symbolically, then why did they not ask Him to explain it to them as they had done many times before? This verse does not apply to the Jews only. It applies to all of us to this day who reject the True Presence of Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist. Did you see the connection to the verse number of John 666?

Vs 67, Jesus said to the twelve, "Will you also go away?"
Right here, He would have let them ALL go for not believing what He had said, and He did not offer any further explanation.

Vs 68, interestingly it was Simon Peter who answered, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life". Have you ever wondered why Simon Peter is usually the spokesman for the Apostles?

Vs 69, Simon Peter continued, "We believe and are sure that you are that Christ, the Son of the living GOD." The Apostles believed Him. They did not walk away from Him as the Jews had done. Why do so many non-Catholics follow in the footsteps of the Jews in verse 66, and not follow the Apostles in verse 69?

Vs 70-71, Jesus named Judas Iscariot as the one who would betray Him.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There you have it. In verses 33,35,47,48,50,51,53,55, and 56, Jesus said it is literal what I am telling you. In verses 41,43,52,60, and 64, the Jews doubt, and grumble, and murmur, and in verse 66, they, and many others to this day, walked away from Him and never came back. Did He call them back to say this was only a parable, and explain the meaning of it to them, as he had explained many other parables? No, for in verse 67, He would have let them ALL go, had they all not believed.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet Simon Peter, in verse 69 said, "We believe...". I believe. The Catholic Church believes. Why don't you believe? Show me, in John chapter six, where it says Jesus did not speak literally, but figuratively, or in parables?
Show me another group of verses in Scripture in which the whole context is figurative, and yet one verse in the middle (as in vs 63 in John 6) is to be taken literally?
Doing that goes against the rules of proper Bible interpretation. We do not attempt to 'twist' the Bible to conform to our teaching, but rather, we conform our teaching to the correct interpretation of the Bible.
Are you one of those in John 6:66, who walked away from Him because you refused to believe what He had said, or are you with Simon Peter when he said in verse 69, "We believe..."?



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why do non-Catholics take almost the whole Bible literally, but when it comes to John chapter 6, they insist it is figurative, when it does not say that it is?



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remember, when non-Catholics say John 6 is figurative, then they have to show that Mt 26:26, Mk 14:22,
and Lk 22:19, are also, where Jesus again said, "This IS My Body."
Then show them 1Cor 11:24, where Paul repeated the words of Christ.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, when non-Catholics say, "It is only a symbol", that is true, that is, for them it is true. For you see, they have no valid priesthood to call down "the Word" with their word.
Catholics have the valid priesthood which has been handed down through the ages by the"laying on of hands" in an unbroken line, for almost 2000 years from generation to generation, and dating to the Last Supper when Jesus Christ said, "This IS my body which is being given for you; do this in remembrance of me".
Luke 22:19


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Supporting verses: Ex 24:8, Psa 78:20,27, Ez 39:17-18, Mt 26:26-28, Mk 14:22-24, Lk 22:19-20, Jn 6:all,
1Cor 5:8,10:16,11:23-30, Heb 10:20.







     

Inside Every Liberal is a Totalitarian Screaming to Get Out!