When I was a Catholic I heard the “bread of life” gospel many times, and this was always omitted: “It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.” Those words are absolutely critical and essential to that whole passage.
I’ll just say this too, from a logical standpoint, if eating bread was such an absolutely critical and fundamental concept to entering the Kingdom of God, why is it that only John writes about it. Matthew, Mark, and Luke do not even broach the subject.
Anyway, good post daniel1212. I learned from it.
Thus while RCs have continually and unequivocally affirmed Jn. 6:53,54 as literal and thus literally denying having spiritual life apart from believing in the Real Presence (which term itself as i understand it, was first employed by Anglicans), they continually refuse to affirm that implication, as that would set them in contradiction to their own church.
Likewise on Jn. 3:5. Baptism is either is necessary for regeneration or it is not. But unlike the deified wafer, the recipient of baptism does not even have to personally believe in every case, so powerful is the ritual itself. And even Trinitarian Prot baptism is usually recognized as valid, if the baptizer intends to do what Rome intends, which few actually do, but this is interpreted to sanction Prot baptism anyway. I responded to Staples himself on his blog. Let's see if he responds to it.