What often gets overlooked in the disagreements over the John 6 “Bread of Life” discourse is that this happened several YEARS before the actual Last Supper and crucifixion. All throughout the gospels we read of people coming to faith in Jesus Christ, believing in Him as Savior and Lord but no mention of any actual rite or ceremony of bread and wine being changed into flesh and blood for someone to physically consume before they were saved. It’s pretty clear that it is by faith/belief how we eat and drink our Savior. Metaphors that were not at all unheard of in Jewish teachings.
What about the Wedding at Cana?
Or the miracles of feeding thousands with 5 loaves and 3 fish?
Aren’t these miracles?
I realize these don’t have the actual transubstantiation in them, nevertheless, they are miracles involving both bread and wine.
Which confirms that John 6 is AT BEST a foreshadowing of the Lords Table ... not the institution of it.
Then there is the unanswerable question of why John did not mention the institution in the Upper Room Discourse in John 13-17. John is the only gospel that does not mention it ... but does mention lesser events like the Triumphal Entry.
I have been waiting for any RC to take that question on ... and provide any cogent explanation beyond the typical 'all the others mentioned it, John didn't need to ...'
It is simply not believable that John, having mentioned such a critical doctrine in John 6, fails to complete the institution of that doctrine in John 13-17.