#12718 More Protestant Objections to John 6—Answered - Karlo Broussard

<p data-start="63" data-end="969">Does John 6 really teach the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, or are Catholics reading too much into the passage? In this episode of <em data-start="243" data-end="266" data-is-only-node="">Catholic Answers Live</em>, Catholic Answers apologists continue responding to major Protestant objections to the Catholic interpretation of Jesus’ Bread of Life discourse. The discussion examines whether Jesus’ failure to clarify misunderstandings proves literal intent, how Catholics answer the Old Testament prohibition against drinking blood, and whether John 6 is truly connected to the Eucharist despite John not including the Last Supper narrative. Additional questions address figurative language about never hungering or thirsting, what Jesus meant by promising eternal life, and where the Gospel of John fits among the four Gospels. A detailed biblical defense of the Eucharist and the Catholic understanding of John 6.</p>
<div class="jsx-baf003ec846595e7 body-half">
<div class="jsx-baf003ec846595e7 body-half">
<p><a href="https://wvw.catholic.com/radioclub?email">Join the Catholic Answers Live Club Newsletter</a></p>
<p>Invite our apologists to speak at your parish! Visit <a href="https://www.catholic.com/speakers">Catholicanswersspeakers.com</a></p>
</div>
</div>
<div class="jsx-baf003ec846595e7 body-half">
<div class="jsx-baf003ec846595e7 body-half">
<p><strong>Questions Covered:</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><span data-contrast="auto">10:01 &#8211; Catholics argue that since Jesus didn’t clarify the literal thoughts of his listeners then he must have intended his words to be taken literally. But Jesus’ lack of clarification for misunderstandings is nothing new under the sun. He did it in John 2:15-17 concerning his teaching about destroying the temple of his body.</span><span data-ccp-props="{}"> </span></li>
<li><span data-contrast="auto">16:37 &#8211; Jesus can’t intend us to literally drink his blood because the Bible prohibits the partaking of blood in Leviticus 17:10-12.”</span><span data-ccp-props="{}"> </span></li>
<li><span data-contrast="auto">21:22 &#8211; Catholics appeal to John 6 to prove Christ’s Real Presence in the Eucharist. But John 6 has nothing to do with the Eucharist at the Last Supper.</span><span data-ccp-props="{}"> </span></li>
<li><span data-contrast="auto">30:15 &#8211; Where does John Fall among the gospels since John does not contain the last supper?</span><span data-ccp-props="{}"> </span></li>
<li><span data-contrast="auto">35:04 &#8211; If Catholics take Jesus’ words to eat his flesh literally, then would also have to take his words literally in verse 35 when he speaks of never hungering when we come to him and never thirsting when we believe in him.</span><span data-ccp-props="{}"> </span></li>
<li><span data-contrast="auto">45:57 &#8211; If Jesus meant his words literally—and intended us to engage in a physical act to eat his flesh, then we’d have to take him literally when he says that we will never die.</span><span data-ccp-props="{}"> </span></li>
</ul>
</div>
</div>