What if Jesus comes tomorrow and it turns out these scriptures mean exactly as they read?

Valletta said:

John 6:53-56
Jesus said to them, "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. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him."

Click to expand...

62 What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?
63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

Click to expand...

BobRyan said:

No he did not. John 6 is not a communion service.

And also in John 6 Jesus did not say "some day in the future you will have to eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood"

In addition -- if the followers of Jesus began literally biting him in John 6 - there would not be "the Cross" at all. He would have died then and there.

Matt 16 - Jesus hammers the disciples for taking the symbol of bread too literally

6 And Jesus said to them, “Watch out and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” 7 They began to discuss this among themselves, saying, “He said that because we did not bring any bread.” 8 But Jesus, aware of this, said, “You men of little faith, why are you discussing among yourselves the fact that you have no bread? 9 Do you not yet understand nor remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets you picked up? 10 Nor the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many large baskets you picked up? 11 How is it that you do not understand that I did not speak to you about bread? But beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” 12 Then they understood that He did not say to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees.

Click to expand...

Jamdoc said:

Yes I'm aware of the verses you take hyperliterally.
But go back to John 3 and John 4.
You're acting like Nicodemus, being hyperliteral about "born again" when Jesus explains that the 2nd birth is born again in spirit. (when you're born again in spirit you are born into God's family)
It's also acting like the woman, who when Jesus offers her water, she notes He has nothing to draw water with so how can He literally give her water? In this case, Jesus is talking about the Holy Spirit, filling her like water but never leaving her thirsty again. It quenches something that is like a thirst in every human, a need for a relationship with God that every human has
in John 6 the point was not to literally eat Jesus' physical flesh and drink His physical blood as a mean to commune with Him (I actually find it quite amusing that the wafers are still crisp wafers that taste, sound, and feel like bread and don't chew like flesh after the hocus pocus performed over them (yes, hocus pocus... which is derived from "hoc est corpus meum") and I've never heard of a Catholic talk about how their communion wine tastes salty and metallic). The point was like manna from Heaven, which represents the Word of God which we are to use like daily bread, consuming it for nourishment. Physical bread to nourish our bodies, the Word of God to nourish our spirit... Jesus came down from Heaven. Jesus is the Word of God made flesh. We weren't to eat Him we were to listen to Him and follow Him. We were to live by every word that proceedeth from God's mouth.

John gave 3 stories in those chapters about people taking what Jesus said literally and Jesus had to correct them to explain the spiritual nature of what He was telling them

and yes.. the disciples couldn't understand why Jesus seemed to be telling them to eat His flesh and drink His blood because they were taking it carnally and literally, and Jesus corrected them in John 6:62-63


Believe on Him
Listen to Him
Follow Him
Live by His words
every day.

THAT is the point of the entire Gospel of John.

Click to expand...

Root of Jesse said:

Well never said we are the only true Christians. Only that we have the entire faith, others have subsets.

Click to expand...

Valletta said:

“We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the washing which is for the remission of sins and for regeneration [i.e., has received baptism] and is thereby living as Christ enjoined. For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nurtured, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus” (First Apology 66 [A.D. 151]). Justin Martyr

Click to expand...

Valletta said:

“We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the washing which is for the remission of sins and for regeneration [i.e., has received baptism] and is thereby living as Christ enjoined. For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nurtured, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus” (First Apology 66 [A.D. 151]). Justin Martyr

Click to expand...

parousia70 said:

So blind people are going to miss out on salvation?

Click to expand...

Root of Jesse said:

I see him every time the Eucharist is confected at Mass. Therefore I have salvation. As long as I keep persevering.

Click to expand...

Jamdoc said:

That respect has to go both ways and the OP's thread is not showing the kind of respect you demand for non catholic denominations.
If he can be honest how he feels about the other denominations, I can be honest about how I feel about Catholicism.

and like I said, many Catholics also find that the church has been warped since at least Vatican II.

and let's be clear.
the official stance of the Roman Catholic Church is that nobody outside of the Catholic Church can be saved. Francis is kind of going against the grain personally but as far as I know, that's a core belief.

Baptists don't do that. if you go back, I say there are saved Catholics.
Respect needs to go both ways. I'll meet you halfway there, but do not not expect one sided respect towards you while OP denigrates every other denomination.

Click to expand...

Aussie Pete said:

"What if's" are not sound doctrine. The so-called apostolic succession is simply wrong. The pope supports Marxism, an antichrist system that is responsible for 100 million deaths and counting. And if Protestants
are wrong? Jesus still returns for those who are His, who are born again, washed in His blood and saved by His grace.

Click to expand...

East of Eden said:

We need apostolic succession to the truth of the Apostle's teachings, not to an institution. And yes, this pope is a disgrace, pushing socialism, silent on abortion, and soft on homosexuality. No wonder, the un-Biblical priestly celibacy doctrine draws gays/child molesters to the priesthood. The Bible says it is not good for man to be alone, and that he who finds a wife finds a good thing, and that in the Last Days men will wrongly forbid marriage. The supposed first Pope, Peter, was married.

Click to expand...