John 6:66 - Why did many disciples stop following Jesus?

[Spurgeon's Girl]

Maybe the Lord had pity on those disciples that didn't have the full story at the time, or maybe not since they stood before the Son of God and rejected Him. He let them walk away due to their lack of faith in His teaching. For you, He might not have pity on since you know the complete story. Many try to convince their minds that they are right, but they don't open their "hearts" to what is the truth. God Bless you on your journey!

Blue bolding mine.

Pure speculation. It doesn't meet the standards for truth. Do you have any other information that makes you say that this is a stumbling block for Protestants. I'm quite willing to look at any other evidence you have for your conclusions. I require Biblical proof or at the very least some scripture that aligns with this idea. You could start by reading the entire chapter of John 6. It gives you a straight forward answer.

God Speed.

 

[Spurgeon's Girl]

Furthermore, what is the actually teaching of the word of God? Your interpretation or the interpretation of the Church that Jesus started? Keep in mind my friend, the Bible was compiled by the Church. Believing in what you want does get you into heaven. Believing in the truth that Jesus taught, does!

Council of Rome - Wikipedia

The Catholic church is good at 'making things up' without any biblical evidence. But I'm sure to say that I believe some Catholics are saved.

I respect that you believe your church, but I would encourage you to search the scriptures to see if it is true. Salvation is not something you earn, it's a gift that cannot be bought despite what the book of Tobit says:

10 For almsgiving delivers from death and saves people from passing down to darkness.

Salvation is not for sale.

 

[Tong2020]

How does one explain transubstantiation at the Last Supper? If Jesus had not yet sacrificed His human nature, how could he offer his body and blood to the Apostles in the form of bread and wine?

The basic answer is that it is not necessary for Jesus to have sacrificed himself on the Cross in order for transubstantiation to occur.

In transubstantiation, two things happen: (1) The substances (i.e., the ultimate, underlying realities) of bread and wine cease to exist, leaving only the properties detectable by our senses and (2) the substance of Christ's body, blood, soul, and divinity become present.

For neither of these things to happen does Christ have to have offered himself on the Cross. God created all matter out of nothing (Latin, ex nihilo), and he can similarly cause it to return to nothing (ad nihilo = where we get "annihiliate").

Similarly, God can make any object he wants present at any location he wants, including multiple locations simultaneously. This phenomenon, known as multilocation, is possible for Christ and for anything else God chooses.

The Last Supper, Good Friday, And Transubstantiation – Jimmy Akin

<<<How does one explain transubstantiation at the Last Supper?>>>
There is nothing to explain about what you refer to as transubstantiation, for that idea is nowhere found in scriptures. So, there is nothing really to say about that subject, more so about those other things used there to explain it, such as multilocation or what.

What scriptures teach concerning the last supper he had with His disciples is this, and is not even found in John 6:

Matthew 26:26 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, “Take, eat; this is My body.”
27 Then He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28 For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Luke 22:14 When the hour had come, He sat down, and the twelve apostles with Him. 15 Then He said to them, “With fervent desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer; 16 for I say to you, I will no longer eat of it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.”
17 Then He took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, “Take this and divide it among yourselves; 18 for I say to you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.”
19 And He took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me.”
20 Likewise He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is shed for you.

Nothing about so-called transubstantiation there. Rather, what we have there is figurative language concerning what was about to happen, that is, His suffering and death on the cross. He asked of His disciples to break bread and eat together as they did in that night, His last supper with them, doing so in remembrance of Him.

Tong
R1179

 

[Spurgeon's Girl]

Was Jesus speaking symbolically in John chapter 6:63? If so, why did the disciples stop following Jesus?

Some say this verse confirms that Jesus was speaking symbolically with regard to the Bread of Life Discourse in John chapter 6. Does this verse confirm that Jesus in fact was speaking symbolically?


Verse 63: “It is the spirit that gives life, while “the” flesh is of no avail. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life.”

• What are the words he just spoke? Several times Jesus spoke, eat my flesh (7) and drink my blood (3) to obtain eternal life.

• What does “no avail” mean? It means “no help or benefit.”

• Did Jesus say “my” flesh is of no avail? No, he said “the” flesh is of no avail.

• Is Jesus’ flesh of no avail? No!

• The Lord is perfect and sinless. His flesh is holy and pure. His flesh and spirit rose from the dead. Was his flesh on the cross of no help or benefit? Jesus is referring to “our” sinful flesh. The Lord is saying, it is no help or benefit to feed “our” flesh that dies and withers away. “His” resurrected flesh and blood feeds our spirit (soul), which gives life.

• Consuming his flesh and blood feeds our spirit (soul) which gives life, not our sinful flesh which is of no avail. We transform into the Body of Christ by spiritually being fed, so we too rise from the dead.

https://truthcampaign.org/truth-campaign-2/

If you are going to quote the Bible, do so, but don't add to it.

This is most serious flaw of the RCC. Jesus never said that a human could be 'another Christ'. Jesus did indeed give the keys to the disciples but He never told them they were "another Christ". This is what Paul calls "another gospel" and should be accursed. No human can turn saw dust and red liquid into Jesus Christ. There is only ONE Jesus. He was crucified and shed His blood, died and was resurrected on the third day for the redeemed. No need to crucify Him repeatedly, in fact it trivializes His love for us.

 

[Spurgeon's Girl]

The Cost of Being a disciple of Jesus

When Jesus carried His cross up Golgotha to be crucified, no one was thinking of the cross as symbolic of a burden to carry. To a person in the first-century, the cross meant one thing and one thing only: death by the most painful and humiliating means human beings could develop.

Two thousand years later, Christians view the cross as a cherished symbol of atonement, forgiveness, grace, and love. But in Jesus’ day, the cross represented nothing but torturous death. Because the Romans forced convicted criminals to carry their own crosses to the place of crucifixion, bearing a cross meant carrying their own execution device while facing ridicule along the way to death.

Therefore, “Take up your cross and follow Me” means being willing to die in order to follow Jesus. This is called “dying to self.” It’s a call to absolute surrender. After each time Jesus commanded cross bearing, He said, “For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will save it. What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, and yet lose or forfeit his very self?” (Luke 9:24-25). Although the call is tough, the reward is matchless.

When Jesus began teaching that He was going to die at the hands of the Jewish leaders and their Gentile overlords (Luke 9:22), His popularity sank. Many of the shocked followers rejected Him. Truly, they were not able to put to death their own ideas, plans, and desires, and exchange them for His.

Following Jesus is easy when life runs smoothly; our true commitment to Him is revealed during trials. Jesus assured us that trials will come to His followers (John 16:33). Discipleship demands sacrifice, and Jesus never hid that cost.

In Luke 9:57-62, three people seemed willing to follow Jesus. When Jesus questioned them further, their commitment was half-hearted at best. They failed to count the cost of following Him. None was willing to take up his cross and crucify upon it his own interests.

Therefore, Jesus appeared to dissuade them. How different from the typical Gospel presentation! How many people would respond to an altar call that went, “Come follow Jesus, and you may face the loss of friends, family, reputation, career, and possibly even your life”? The number of false converts would likely decrease! Such a call is what Jesus meant when He said, “Take up your cross and follow Me.”

If you wonder if you are ready to take up your cross, consider these questions:
• Are you willing to follow Jesus if it means losing some of your closest friends?
• Are you willing to follow Jesus if it means alienation from your family?
• Are you willing to follow Jesus if it means the loss of your reputation?
• Are you willing to follow Jesus if it means losing your job?
• Are you willing to follow Jesus if it means losing your life?

In some places of the world, these consequences are reality. But notice the questions are phrased, “Are you willing?” Following Jesus doesn’t necessarily mean all these things will happen to you, but are you willing to take up your cross? If there comes a point in your life where you are faced with a choice—Jesus or the comforts of this life—which will you choose?

Commitment to Christ means taking up your cross daily, giving up your hopes, dreams, possessions, even your very life if need be for the cause of Christ. Only if you willingly take up your cross may you be called His disciple (Luke 14:27). The reward is worth the price. Jesus followed His call of death to self (“Take up your cross and follow Me”) with the gift of life in Christ: “For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it” (Matthew 16:25-26).got ?

hope this helps !!!

Bravo brother! I know you

 

[Tong2020]

Do Catholics re-sacrifice Jesus? No!

You can continue to believe that Catholics do re-sacrifice Jesus on the cross so that you feel right in your own mind, or you can watch this quick 5 minute clip that tells you what the Mass is about.

The resources are available on the web for you to educate yourself. Are you going to do that? Or just make stuff up about the Church to make you feel better in your own skin? You will have to face God when you die! At least do some honest research and stop misleading people. The information is readily available for people!

Continue to mislead people, or educate yourself on what the Church believes... It's not about seeking to be right, it's about finding the truth!

Do Catholics re-sacrifice Christ?

Well, I would presume you are of the "catholic church". So, if you say that you are not re-sacrificing Jesus, I have nothing to say about that. I understand it is what you believe. But it does not follow that because it is what you believe, that it is the truth. It is what the scriptures say that is truth.

I am just curious, I have a few questions. In every time in the 'Mass':

1. Is bread broken and shared among the attendees? If not, why not bread when that is the proper element Jesus used to represent His body?
2. Is wine or fruit of the vine shared among the attendees? If not, why not wine or fruit of the vine, when that is the proper element Jesus used to represent His blood?
3. Does one get to drink of the wine or fruit of the vine, those who want to partake of it? To my knowledge, that is not the case, though to my knowledge, it seems that concerning the wafer, everyone who wants to partake of it gets to eat of it.
4. Concerning that part of the Mass, where you get to eat of the wafer and perhaps drink of the wine or fruit of the vine, as it is supposed to be for and in remembrance of Jesus, there is really nothing that happens there, except that perhaps, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes, right?

Tong
R1180

 

[Spurgeon's Girl]

You obviously didn't go to my website!

https://truthcampaign.org/804-2/

I've been there. More speculation, adding to scripture, and not a lick of exegesis. There is however, plenty of eisegesis.

 

[Spurgeon's Girl]

Do Catholics re-sacrifice Jesus? No!

You can continue to believe that Catholics do re-sacrifice Jesus on the cross so that you feel right in your own mind, or you can watch this quick 5 minute clip that tells you what the Mass is about.

The resources are available on the web for you to educate yourself. Are you going to do that? Or just make stuff up about the Church to make you feel better in your own skin? You will have to face God when you die! At least do some honest research and stop misleading people. The information is readily available for people!

Continue to mislead people, or educate yourself on what the Church believes... It's not about seeking to be right, it's about finding the truth!

Do Catholics re-sacrifice Christ?

There is very little truth in the Catholic church. Let's talk about the role models you have for 'truth'.

The Bad Popes - Wikipedia

The Bad Popes is a 1969 book by E. R. Chamberlin documenting the lives of eight of the most controversial popes (papal years in parentheses):

· Pope Stephen VI (896–897), who had his predecessor Pope Formosus exhumed, tried, de-fingered, briefly reburied, and thrown in the Tiber.[1]:19

· Pope John XII (955–964), who gave land to a mistress, murdered several people, and was killed by a man who caught him in bed with his wife.

· Pope Benedict IX (1032–1044, 1045, 1047–1048), who "sold" the Papacy.

· Pope Boniface VIII (1294–1303), who is lampooned in Dante's Divine Comedy.

· Pope Urban VI (1378–1389), who complained that he did not hear enough screaming when Cardinals who had conspired against him were tortured .[1]:153

· Pope Alexander VI (1492–1503), a Borgia, who was guilty of nepotism and whose unattended corpse swelled until it could barely fit in a coffin.[1]:204

· Pope Leo X (1513–1521), a spendthrift member of the Medici family who once spent 1/7 of his predecessors' reserves on a single ceremony.[1]:218

· Pope Clement VII (1523–1534), also a Medici, whose power-politicking with France, Spain, and Germany got Rome sacked.

Jesus has nothing to do with these depraved men, you call PaPa.

 

[Ferris Bueller]

I've come to the conclusion that you and many on this site would rather die believing your theories instead of opening your hearts to the truth.

I see no meaningful significance in believing that when you partake of the elements they are the literal blood and body of Christ. There are things that matter and there are things that don't matter. This is one of those things that does not matter. You don't need to believe that the elements change into the blood and body of Christ in order to be a true Christian. Even if it were true that they change into the actual blood and body of Christ we Protestants when we partake of them are partaking of them nonetheless.

 

[Ferris Bueller]

The ultimate reason really is because it has not been granted to them by the Father. They were not given by the Father to Son for salvation.

In the case of the 12 disciples, Judas included, they did not do as the many who went away, despite the obvious that they too could not understand at the time, the hard saying of Jesus in John 6. Why did they not go away? Because they were chosen. All, except Judas were chosen for salvation. Judas, the son of perdition, was chosen, but unlike the 11 who were chosen for salvation and service, his election was so that scriptures might be fulfilled.

Tong
R1178

The passage is quite clear about why they left Jesus. They could not hear the Father because they did not believe in Jesus. And they did not believe in Jesus because they had not been drawn by the Father. But there's no reason to think that the ones who left would never believe in him at a later time. Acts explains how many of the Jews came to faith in Christ after the resurrection when they were convicted about putting him to death. God called and chose them later.

 

[Tong2020]

The passage is quite clear about why they left Jesus. They could not hear the Father because they did not believe in Jesus. And they did not believe in Jesus because they had not been drawn by the Father. But there's no reason to think that the ones who left would never believe in him at a later time. Acts explains how many of the Jews came to faith in Christ after the resurrection when they were convicted about putting him to death. God called and chose them later.

Yes it is clear that they did not believe or rather could not believe or are not able to believe in what Jesus was telling them of Himself. But as I said, the ultimate reason is that because it has not been granted to them by the Father. Now, as to whether after that, at some other time, some of them came to believe, that is not discussed in John 6. Besides, there is no way in knowing that.

<<<They could not hear the Father because they did not believe in Jesus.>>>

They could not believe Jesus, for even while they hear what Jesus is saying, they do not understand the words of Jesus. To them, Jesus is making no sense. What could that mean concerning them, in that they are not able to understand the the things of the Spirit of God?

<<<God called and chose them later.>>

To me, I would not say that the calling and choosing came later, but that that could be because the time that one who are among the chosen of God actually believe, belongs to God.

Tong
R1181

 

[Eternally Grateful]

I've already showed you that you're theory is wrong, link below. It makes NO sense.

I've come to the conclusion that you and many on this site would rather die believing your theories instead of opening your hearts to the truth. That's the definition of a fake christian.

https://truthcampaign.org/804-2/

It is not a theory, it is Jesus own words

Your promoting a web site, that is obvious, this will be my last post to you. Hopefully the mods do something, because yur not here to discuss anything

 

[Ferris Bueller]

Now, as to whether after that, at some other time, some of them came to believe, that is not discussed in John 6. Besides, there is no way in knowing that.

That's right. We Protestants have to be just as careful about adding meaning to the chapter that isn't there as the Catholics.

They could not believe Jesus, for even while they hear what Jesus is saying, they do not understand the words of Jesus. To them, Jesus is making no sense. What could that mean concerning them, in that they are not able to understand the the things of the Spirit of God?

It means they don't have the Spirit of God. But our friend is sure they properly understood that he was talking about the elements being the literal body of Christ but left anyway. You would think that since they supposedly had the proper Spiritual understanding about what he was saying as our friend claims they would have been the ones that stayed.

To me, I would not say that the calling and choosing came later, but that that could be because the time that one who are among the chosen of God actually believe, belongs to God.

Huh? Could you rephrase that, please?

 

[Hidden In Him]

The brainwashing is what makes me hate, it’s not the people, I love them, but sometimes they do make you want to scream

Yes, well the people can start to grate on you as well, and not just you but the Lord. I don't think He has a great deal of sympathy for those who are peddling both themselves and their false doctrines, and utterly refuse to even hear anyone else. It means they are virtually beyond correction, and once they reach that point, He starts to wash His hands of them.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Holy smokes HIH, maybe I haven't been reading enough of your posts, but I've never, ever, heard you speak so vehemently and disdainfully before, that is, it's indicatively the opposite (at least what I've seen)?
Now, I get it, a few too many radicals and once patience will quickly deteriorate into contempt. I agree, I believe Catholicism is an anti-christ development. But, not all the adherents are to blame, nor are as unsound and verging on offensive (like Ozpen), I believe. Some are extremely astute, disciplined and reasonable, but I do still feel that they are indoctrinated. For their does come a point where one just really has to stop and consider their Mariology, Transubstantiation, Original Sin, Vicar of Christ, intercession of the saints, indulgences, ex-cathedra, the merit of tradition, inquisition, the wealth, etc... I do believe that it's the devil's denomination (amongst others).
If I may HIH, try not to let a few bad apples undermine your composure or distort your view on many of the tolerable ones?

LoL. I appreciate the concern. I haven't had my normal "composure" for the better part of a month now, so my patience is thin. But I don't know that my response would be any different, actually. This isn't just about our guest. My responses are directed more at the attack the enemy has been waging on this site for the last 4-5 weeks or so. We have survived these things in the past, but also lost some good quality members when it turned into nothing but petty backbiting 24 hours a day. The enemy has been working overtime since Behold got deceived into thinking he was "serving God" to wage all out war night and day against Catholicism here, when in fact all he did was stir a hornets nest and now the enemy is having his way with us. Now we've got people just like him on the other side of the fence increasingly coming in. It will not stop now until it has brought spiritual destruction in numerous forms, because it draws more and more of the spiritually naive and gullible to "get involved." You will see more and more spiritually immature people joining now just so they can join in the fun.

I've been around forums for a long time now, so I am not ignorant of our enemy's devices. But let the winds blow again. We will lose some good people, and other good ones that might have joined will pass us by, and instead we will get more who are all too willing to serve the enemy because they know no better than to think they are "serving God" by petty and worthless debate.

So be it. But I'll be fine. Getting more into prayer now. The weather is cooler.

God bless, and thanks again for the concern.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Blue bolding mine.

Pure speculation. It doesn't meet the standards for truth. Do you have any other information that makes you say that this is a stumbling block for Protestants. I'm quite willing to look at any other evidence you have for your conclusions. I require Biblical proof or at the very least some scripture that aligns with this idea. You could start by reading the entire chapter of John 6. It gives you a straight forward answer.

God Speed.

Amen. You can’t pull a few verses out of a passage without taking into account context. Otherwise you can make the Bible day whatever you want.

sadly that’s what people do. If no flaw
That came with the verse Numbering system

 

[Tong2020]

Tong2020 said:
To me, I would not say that the calling and choosing came later, but that that could be because the time that one who are among the chosen of God actually believe, belongs to God.

Huh? Could you rephrase that, please?

Ephesians 1:4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love,

2 Thessalonians 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks to God always for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God from the beginning chose you for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth,

Consider what the passages above says about the time of election by God. That does not at all say it is in any later time than "from before the foundation of the world" and "from the beginning". So, if there were those among the chosen people, who did not come to believe in Jesus Christ before His death on the cross, but believed much after it, it does not mean that their election was made by God only after the cross and not before. It does not mean that they were not elected before the cross and were elected only after. To me, in consideration of the passages I cited above, it only means that, those who are among those chosen by God for salvation, will at some point in their life, come to believe in Jesus Christ. And as to when is that point in time in their life, that belongs to God and would happen in God's time.

Tong
R1182

 

[Philip James]

there is really nothing that happens there, except that perhaps, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes, right?

Hello Tong,

For this reason a man shall leave (his) father and (his) mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh."

This is a great mystery, but I speak in reference to Christ and the church.

You too! Are welcome to come to the wedding feast of the Lamb of God!

Peace be with you!

 

[Tong2020]

Hello Tong,

For this reason a man shall leave (his) father and (his) mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh."

This is a great mystery, but I speak in reference to Christ and the church.

You too! Are welcome to come to the wedding feast of the Lamb of God!

Peace be with you!

??????

Tong
R1183

 

[Philip James]

??????

Tong
R1183

Hello.

You asked what else happens when receiving communion besides 'proclaiming His death till He comes'..

The intimate union of the Groom and His bride!

Peace!