[Alamo-Girl]

John 6:32-71 must be Spiritually discerned. It cannot be understood by the mind alone.

The leaning I have in the Spirit is that Jesus means for us to eat His flesh and drink His blood really - but not literally.

The key is in Jesus' response to His disciples when they were offended by His commandment. He said:

It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, [they] are spirit, and [they] are life. - John 6:63

Compare this to the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. When Adam ate of the fruit of the tree, it became part of himself. God said that if Adam ate of it he would die die (muwth muwth.) Gen 2:17 And he did.

But Jesus is the bread of life sent from heaven. We are to consume Him, the Living Word of God, take Him in, let Him become a part of us, alive in us. He is our food and our drink, our life.

But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. - Matt 4:4

That is the extent of the leaning I have in the Spirit.

[Alamo-Girl]

My bad. I should have pinged y’all to post 15182.

[hosepipe]

[.. But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. - Matt 4:4 ..]

Solo Logosura?..

[.30Carbine]

But Jesus is the bread of life sent from heaven. We are to consume Him, the Living Word of God, take Him in, let Him become a part of us, alive in us. He is our food and our drink, our life.

Thank you. Amen.

[betty boop]

The leaning I have in the Spirit is that Jesus means for us to eat His flesh and drink His blood really - but not literally.

That is my leading as well, dearest sister in Christ. It seems to me we must take care not to be too literal-minded if we wish to grasp the intentions of God's Word. A literal reading tends to be reductionist....

[annalex]

It cannot be understood by the mind alone

There is nothing in that particular discourse that sets it apart from the rest of the scripture. All of it is given us for reproof and faith formation, as St. Paul says in 2 Timothy 3. This particular passage is there for us to know that the Eucharist is not a metaphore but rather is "food indeed": something we physically eat while it really is Jesus' body.

John 6:63 explains the nature of the Eucharist further. It does not negate the preceding discourse. It explains that while His flesh Jesus will give us is "food indeed", it is not there to feed our flesh, that is, our stomach, but rather to feed our spirit. It therefore is the refutation of the charge of cannibalism that opens up the discourse.

[Quix]

Thanks.

Much agree.

My sentiments, too.