Pro
#1
Thank you for accepting this debate. Feel free to explain what your views are on it. There's the simple literal interpretation. It doesn't need an explanation because it's a miracle. There are many non-literal interpretations, and none of these have any physical supernatural event. Explain your views on the matter.
Let's dive in:
I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world. (John 6:51)
What is the "bread"? It is His flesh. The Jews asked how this is possible and Jesus only doubled down, not only commanding it but declaring it necessary for eternal life and adding His blood to the mix:
Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. (John 6:53)
Jesus says His body and blood are real food:
“For My Flesh is food indeed, and My Blood is drink indeed.” (John 6:55)
In verse 56, He uses a new word trógó to describe the eating. It is a different word than the normal.
Even the Protestant BibleHub admits:
While more common Greek verbs for eating can be polite or neutral, this term evokes the audible, deliberate action of chewing.
Eating flesh and drinking blood are never used to mean something good when used in a metaphorical sense. (See Psalm 27:2; Isa. 9:20; 49:26; Mic. 3:3; 2 Sam. 23:17; Rev. 16:6; 17:6, 16 )
If Jesus meant it in a non-literal way, He would be obligated by divine law to correct any misunderstanding because God is not the author of confusion. (1 Corinthians 14:33) Every time there is a misunderstanding,
Jesus corrects them.
Jesus calls the Eucharist His body and blood. (Matt. 26:26-28; Mark. 14:22,24; Luke 22;19-20; 1 Cor. 11:24-25.) He doesn't call it a symbol or say it only represents it.
In Exodus 24:8, Moses says, "This is the blood of the covenant," and it's actual blood, not a symbol. Why would it be fake blood in the New Covenant? In the Old Covenant, the lamb was eaten. We should eat Jesus' flesh, which is from the Lamb of God in the New Covenant.
Now let's see the language Paul uses in his letter to the Corinthians:
The chalice of benediction, which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ ? And the bread, which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord ? (1 Corinthians 10:16)
It's actual communion and participation. It's not a spiritual presence, otherwise it wouldn't be the body and blood, only the spirit of Christ.
Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. (1 Corinthians 11:27)
Eating or drinking the Eucharist unworthily is sinning against the Lord's body and blood. It's not symbolic or spiritual. It's not just sinning against the Lord but also His body and blood.
