#12717 Every Protestant Objection to John 6—Answered - Karlo Broussard

<div class="jsx-baf003ec846595e7 body-half">
<div class="jsx-baf003ec846595e7 body-half">
<p>Do Catholics interpret John 6 consistently, or are Jesus’ words about eating His flesh just symbolic like calling Himself the “gate” or the “vine”? In this episode of <em data-start="268" data-end="291" data-is-only-node="">Catholic Answers Live</em>, Catholic Answers apologists respond to some of the strongest Protestant objections to the Catholic understanding of the Eucharist. The discussion examines whether John 6 should be interpreted metaphorically, how the surrounding context affects Jesus’ teaching, and what Christ meant when He said “the flesh is of no avail.” The episode also explores why many disciples walked away from Jesus in John 6 and whether their reaction supports or undermines the Catholic doctrine of the Real Presence. A deep and biblical defense of the Eucharist rooted in Scripture, theology, and the words of Christ Himself.</p>
<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>
</div>
</div>
<ul>
<li><span data-contrast="auto">06:23 – Catholics aren’t consistent in their interpretation of John 6. They interpret Jesus’ words about eating his flesh and drinking his blood literally in John 6, but they don’t do that when it comes to his words about being the “gate” in John 10:9 or the “vine” in John 15.</span><span data-ccp-props="{}"> </span></li>
<li><span data-contrast="auto">15:52 &#8211; Catholics ignore the preceding context in verse 35 where 3. Jesus uses the metaphors of eating and drinking for coming to and believing in him. If Jesus used those images as metaphors there, then he must have used them as metaphors when he speaks of eating his flesh and drinking his blood.</span><span data-ccp-props="{}"> </span></li>
<li><span data-contrast="auto">30:05 &#8211; Catholics ignore verse 27 where Jesus moves away from a physical mentality and takes things in a spiritual direction.  Here’s what he says, “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.” This distinction between spiritual and physical food serves as the basis for interpreting Jesus’s words about eating his flesh figuratively rather than literally.</span><span data-ccp-props="{}"> </span></li>
<li><span data-contrast="auto">35:50 &#8211; Catholics argue that Jesus never clarified his audience’s literal thoughts. But that’s not true. He does it in John 6:63, where he says, “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.”</span><span data-ccp-props="{}"> </span></li>
<li><span data-contrast="auto">50:20 &#8211; Catholics argue that because Jesus let his disciples leave based on their literal interpretation of his command to eat his flesh and drink his blood that meant Jesus meant the words literally. But the disciples didn’t leave because of Jesus’ teaching. Rather, they left because of Jesus’ teaching in verse 65 that no one comes to him unless the Father draw him.</span><span data-ccp-props="{}"> </span></li>
</ul>