I'd like the remainder of that prayer, even during this heat, if you can catch that.
Why don't we just turn off that.
Well, I apologize for the speakers.
We're still trying to fine-tune it, so just be patient with us as we try to fix that up
there.
John chapter 6 verse 54, verse 53, excuse me, says, Then Jesus said unto them, Verily,
verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood,
ye have no life in you.
Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life, and I will raise him up
at the last day.
For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
And the title of the sermon this evening is The Bizarre Doctrine of Transubstantiation.
The Bizarre Doctrine of Transubstantiation.
Now, I mentioned this morning, this morning I preached a sermon entitled The Catholics,
Why Catholics Are Not Christian, and I gave a lot of reasons, and primarily we just basically
compared what they believe, who they are, what they practice, and we basically shed
light on it from the Bible, and we saw how vastly different the Catholic religion is
from the Word of God.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist, it doesn't take a scholar, it doesn't take, it just takes
a shallow, really, understanding of the Bible to even see that Catholicism has nothing to
do with the Bible.
Their beliefs do not match up with the Word of God, in fact it's completely contrary to
it.
Now, transubstantiation was actually a point that I was going to reference in this morning's
sermon, but I didn't have time to go over it, so I just made it its own sermon, and
we're just going to explain what it is.
The reason it's called The Bizarre Doctrine of Transubstantiation is because that's exactly
what it is.
It's a very weird, bizarre, and perverted teaching of the Catholic church.
Now, John chapter 6 is a chapter that the Catholics will use to prove and prop up their
false doctrine of transubstantiation, and really what this is is just an overly literal
interpretation of the scripture.
You see, a lot of times in the Gospels that God will use, Jesus Christ will use a symbolism,
he'll use parables to really shed light on spiritual truths.
And when a saved person looks at the Bible, sees an illustration, sees a parable, we don't
take it at face value just as, hey, that's exactly what he's talking about.
No, in fact, there's an underlying principle, there's an underlying doctrine, there's an
underlying teaching and doctrine that he's trying to get across here, and that's what
we need to learn.
That's what we need to see.
Now, this doctrine that Jesus Christ was teaching was simply, he was just teaching basic salvation,
eternal security.
He was just hitting it from a different angle.
But here's the thing, even his own disciples were offended at this teaching.
His own disciples could not grasp the fact of what he was saying.
In fact, they took an overly literal interpretation of what he was saying, and at that point they
just couldn't no more walk with him.
Look at verse number 60, it says, many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this
said, this is a hard saying, who can hear it?
When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, does this
offend you?
So he's saying, is this causing you to stumble?
Notice that he's not apologetic about it, by the way.
He's gonna say, well, you know, you're just misinterpreting it, you know what I mean?
It's gonna be okay.
No, he just like, hey, if this is offending you, then you know, that's your problem, is
what he's telling them.
What and if you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before.
Now, what he's teaching here is not a literal eating of his flesh.
It's not a literal drinking of his blood, that's cannibalism.
There is a spiritual application, and just a overview and a bird's eye view of this chapter
can show you that that's exactly what he's talking about, why?
Because he compares it to the manna from heaven, which those who ate the manna in the wilderness
lived.
And he's saying, hey, I'm not that manna, or excuse me, he wasn't that physical manna,
he's saying, I'm the bread of life.
That manna was a picture, it was symbolic of him coming down from heaven to give everlasting
life, right?
So it wasn't his literal flesh that he's given for us to consume and eat, and for his blood,
for us to drink, for us to have eternal life.
You say, well, how do you know that?
Look at verse 63, verse 63 basically sums up what he's trying to teach here.
It is the spirit that quickeneth, what does that word quicken me means to bring to life,
right?
The flesh profiteth nothing, the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit and they
are life.
So he's basically explaining, hey, I don't mean my literal flesh for you to eat.
It's the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing, my words that I speak unto
you, they are spirit and they are life.
Now it says here in verse 64, but there are some of you that believe not, for Jesus knew
from the beginning who they were that believed not and who should betray him.
So basically what he's saying is the reason you can't understand this is because you're
not saved.
You see, no safe person when they read this literally thinks that we have to eat the flesh
of Christ and drink his blood and that's how we're going to be saved, right?
No safe person would come to that stupid conclusion because that's exactly what it is.
The only person who would even interpret it that way is someone who's not saved, right?
He says there, verse 65, and he said, therefore said, I am to you that no man can come unto
me except that were given unto him of my father.
From that time, many of his disciples went back and walked no more with him.
So this is a very offensive teaching to those in that day, but it's simply because they
weren't paying attention.
They weren't paying attention to what the principle was, the spiritual application there.
Now Catholics have perverted this chapter to literally mean that, that when you, when
they do communion, when they eat the Eucharist, that there are literally, it literally becomes
the bread and the blood literally becomes the flesh of Christ and the blood of Christ
at the time of consuming that substance.
I don't know how that works.
It's insanity.
That's why it's called the bizarre doctrine of transubstantiation.
Now why am I teaching against this?
Well, primarily, obviously, because we want to shed light on this.
We want to be knowledgeable about this subject, but really what this, exposing false doctrines
like this really helps us to reinforce beliefs that we already have, okay?
And that's really what we need to do as Christians is constantly talk about the same things and
reinforce them and use different stories, different parables in the Bible to really
reinforce and get grounded in the doctrine that we already believe.
Now what does this word mean, transubstantiation?
Well, the change by which the substance, though not the appearance, of bread and wine in the
Eucharist become the body and blood of Christ.
Let me read this to you, okay?
This is a, I got this from a Catholic website and basically this, this teaching stems from
the 12th century by the Council of Trent.
And this Council of Trent were basically a body of Catholics who were, who were basically
deputized to basically do this.
They would get some crazy teaching that they had and say, well, we got to label this something
different to make it not sound as crazy because people, any normal person would hear about
this and say, what in the world do you really think you're eating the flesh of Christ?
You really think you're drinking the blood of Christ when you're taking the Eucharist?
So what they did is say, well, let's just name it transubstantiation.
That way we can safeguard it for any criticism from the Protestants or, you know, just normal
people who when they see us do this and when, when we answer them, as far as why do we do
this, we just tell them, well, this is the doctrine of transubstantiation.
This is what we do in communion and this is what we believe.
And they put this theological scholarly term to it in order to basically pull your attention
away from this insanity that they believe, okay?
This insane, bizarre doctrine that they teach.
Now something, they say this, something happened at the last meal that Jesus celebrated with
his disciples, something that had never happened before.
Ordinary bread and wine were transformed into the body and blood of Jesus, the second person
of the Holy Trinity.
I'm sure the disciples didn't fully understand what had just happened, nor what would happen
when they went on to celebrate the last suppers with the early Christian community.
Yet they believed and have faith in the Lord's words, even though they didn't fully understand
them.
So what they're saying is, look, they need to understand that they're eating Jesus and
drinking his blood, but they have faith that that's exactly what they were doing.
That's what he's saying.
For Catholics today, not much has changed.
We believe that at every mass, bread and wine become Jesus.
Jesus' blood, body, soul, and divinity, even though we can't fully understand how it happens,
the miracle of the Eucharist is a mystery.
Something that human reason and intelligence, right?
Can never fully grasp.
Yeah, because it takes a stupid idiot, right?
To actually believe something like this.
However, our Catholic faith is a reasonable one.
We can't simply leave this mystery a complete mystery.
We have to do our best to make sense of it.
Yeah, you got to do your best, man.
Good luck on that one.
We have to do our best to make sense of it, albeit incompletely.
This is why transubstantiation is such an important term for us to understand and explain
to others what we believe about the Eucharist.
Now, what are they referring to when they talk about the Eucharist?
In the Catholic religion, you have what's called the seven sacraments.
Have you ever heard of the seven sacraments?
Okay.
Of course, this is part of Orthodoxy, I'm sure as well.
But today I'm just primarily focusing on the Catholic Church.
Now what do you say?
What is Orthodoxy?
Well, Orthodox Church is the Catholic Church on steroids.
That's basically what it is, okay?
But the seven sacraments is literally these works and deeds that a Catholic has to adhere
to to obtain salvation.
Because remember, they believe that salvation begins at baptism.
And then after that, salvation becomes a process, okay?
And this process is fulfilled by completing and adhering to the seven sacraments.
Now what are the seven sacraments?
Well, I mentioned one, baptism, which the Roman Catholic Church teaches, right, removes
original sin.
So what they believe is that a child when he is born, when he or she is born, they have
this original sin.
Therefore you need to pour water on its head to get rid of that original sin on the forehead
or whatever, and then they're good to go.
They can start the process of salvation, right?
That's what they believe.
Number two is penance, in which one confesses his or her sins to a priest.
We talked about that this morning.
Number three is the Eucharist, considered the reception and consummation of the actual
body and blood of Christ.
Forest confirmation, a formal acceptance into the church along with special anointing of
the Holy Spirit.
Now, confirmation, they literally believe that during confirmation that the priest is
the one who actually seals you with the Holy Ghost, okay?
They don't want to say that, but that's actually what they believe.
Five is the anointing of the sick performed by a priest using oil.
Six is Holy Orders.
Now this is one that no one really talks about.
How many of you have ever heard of the Holy Orders?
Remember, these are seven sacraments that people have to do in order to continue their
process of salvation.
Holy Orders is the process by which men are ordained to the clergy.
So how does that even apply to like ladies?
You know, obviously there's more members in the Catholic institution than there are priests,
but yet the priests are the only ones fulfilling this sixth sacrament of the seven where they
are literally becoming priests or, you know, these fags and stuff, pedophiles who are fulfilling
this role, this office, okay?
And it's funny because on this website, they actually put that last and it's like faded
away because, you know, they don't want you to see it because that's one of the seven
sacraments that you have to hold to and not everyone's obviously going to do it, right?
You have matrimony which provides special grace to a couple.
They tell you, you got to get married in the Catholic church, you know, that's part of
the salvation process.
I mean, this is ridiculous, right?
But the Eucharist is one of the main ones and it's one of the most important ones to
them, okay?
Transubstantiation is a scholastic term that attempts to explain how bread and wine can
become the body and blood of the Lord without losing their exterior appearance.
So in other words, it's just like, I know it looks like regular bread, but I promise
it turns into flesh as soon as it gets into your system.
While the word was first used in the 11th century, I'm going to skip some of this because
this is irrelevant.
In order to understand what all this means, we need to understand the medieval concepts
of accidents and substance.
Accidents are the exterior, physical parts, or qualities of something like fingers, hair,
feet of a person.
Substance is the eternal, invisible quality of something.
Think of the life of a human person.
Our exterior dimensions are in constant flux.
We all look much different now than when we were born.
What remains unchanged is who we are at our core, a distinct human being.
You say, what does it have to do with anything?
It's a bunch of jargon and vain jangling, smokescreen to get you to not think about
how stupid this is.
That's what it is.
In other words, our accidents change, but our substance remains the same.
With the Eucharist, it's just the opposite.
While the accidents of the brain, excuse me, of the bread and wine do not change, the substance
does change.
It still looks, feels, and tastes like bread and wine, but it has truly become Jesus.
This is what the Catholic Church means by transubstantiation.
This is nonsense.
This is foolishness.
This is jargon.
This is vain jangling.
This is false doctrine.
You say, why do they come up with something like this?
Because of the fact that when you put the Word of God into the hands of unsaved people,
this is the kind of stuff they come up with.
When you put the Bible and Bible principles, deep doctrines, into the hands of unsaved
people, they will pervert the teaching.
They will distort it.
They will pervert it.
They will make it mean something that's completely contrary to the Bible, okay?
Now go with me, if you would, to Matthew 26, Matthew 26.
Now you guys remember the article that I read from this morning, catholicscomhome.org, right?
The second half of that was, it says, 1 Timothy 2.15 says that women will be saved through
bearing children.
If she continues in faith and love and holiness with modesty, John 6.54 says that we will
have eternal life by doing something, dot, dot, dot, dot, dot, eating the flesh and drinking
the blood of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
And then he just doesn't mention anything after that.
So keep in mind that they have to, they believe they have to do this in order to be saved
or to continue that process of salvation, okay?
Now I was a, I was a Roman Catholic, not a, not a strict one.
And in fact, I was never allowed actually to take the, the, the Eucharist.
And maybe it's because I never finished my confirmation or, or, you know, whatever it
may have been.
But I remember being at a Catholic church and seeing that long line of people drinking
wine and eating the bread.
In fact, I remember one time, this is a Catholic church called St. Barnabas in Long Beach,
okay?
This is when I was a teenager.
And I remember the priest, he was doing the, you know, the communion and, you know, he
was serving the wine and all this, getting drunk.
And literally, I kid you not, this is like in the middle of the service.
The service was not over yet.
I mean, we still had like another 45 minutes to go or something.
And he's literally, he, the priest is basically the person who finishes it off, you know?
He gives it to everyone, then he just kills the whole entire thing.
That's what he does, right?
This guy was like a little older.
And I remember literally like, you know, he's, and then he drinks it, grabs the towel, cleans
it up.
And then he just starts walking around, like collecting stuff, like cleaning stuff up.
And then he just walks off the stage and he just leaves.
And everyone in the, in the church was like, what just happened?
Are we done?
He said, what happened?
He's drunk.
He's inebriated.
The dude was drunk.
So when you have this elderly drunk person, you know, drunk, he's just not paying attention
to anything.
He just took off.
Who knows where he went?
So we sat there for like five minutes until we realized, you know what, I think he just
like left.
And everyone just like one by one just started getting up and just walking out.
Okay.
And that's another sermon in and of itself, as far as the alcohol is concerned.
I mean, this is so perverted and so wicked, aside from the fact that they literally use
alcohol in their Lord's supper, communion, whatever you want to call it.
You know, they believe that this is, it turns into blood.
This is sick.
Look at Matthew 26 verse 26.
And again, it stems from this overly just literal interpretation of the Bible.
Look at verse 26.
It says, and as they were eating, Jesus took bread and blessed it and break it and gave
it to his disciples and said, take, eat.
This is my body.
And he took the cup and gave things and gave it to them saying, drink ye all of it for
this is my blood of the new Testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
Do you really think the disciples thought, wow, this is the body.
This is his body.
This is his blood.
Go to first Corinthians chapter 11.
How do we know that?
They thought, well, cause verse 28 says, for this is my blood of the new Testament, which
is shed for many for the remission of sins.
They were understanding that this was something they had to do in remembrance of Christ.
It was symbolic.
And look, a lot of what the Bible teaches specifically in the old Testament was based
on what symbolism.
Symbolism was part of the culture, right?
It's part of the Bible.
Much of what we see in the old Testament, the Bible refers to as a shadow of things
to come.
Not the literal things.
They were a shadow of things to come.
Therefore they understood, Oh, this is another shadow.
This is another illustration.
This is a parable.
This is something that God is using to help us to understand a spiritual truth.
They're not going to take a literal interpretation of it.
Okay?
First Corinthians 11 23, look what it says, for I have received of the Lord that which
also I've delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed
took bread.
And when he had given thanks, he break it and say, take, eat.
This is my body, which is broken for you.
This do in remembrance of me.
After the same manner also, he took the cup when he had supped saying, this cup is the
new Testament in my blood.
This do ye as often as you drink it in remembrance of me for as often as he eat this bread and
drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come.
So he's not saying you're actually eating the flesh and drinking the blood.
He's saying you're showing the Lord's death.
You're basically remembering what he did for us.
Okay.
Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread and drink this cup of the Lord unworthily shall
be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
Why is that?
Well, because of the fact that the body and the blood represents salvation, right?
Because of the fact that he shed his blood to forgive us of our sins.
He was willing to break his flesh, so to speak, right?
By allowing himself to be lashed, by allowing himself to be beaten and scourged and with
stripes.
He allowed himself to receive the punishment that you and I deserve, which we understand
was for our salvation.
Okay.
So when someone takes it unworthily means they take it and they're not saved.
You understand that?
When they eat the bread and drink the blood and they're not saved, they're taking it unworthily.
Okay.
But let a man examine himself, verse 28, and so let him eat of that bread and drink of
that cup.
Examine himself of what?
Making sure that he's in the faith.
Examine yourselves, prove yourselves.
If you be in the faith, if Christ is in you, except you be reparations, the Bible tells
us, right?
So we need to make sure that obviously when we do the Lord's Supper, when we take communion
at our own houses, okay, here at our church, we believe that you shouldn't take communion
in the house of God.
This is something, this is an ordinance that should be practiced in your own home.
Okay.
And that's another sermon for another day, but first Corinthians 11 is very clear on
that.
But when you do, you need to make sure that you're saved.
Okay.
Cause if not, you will eat the Lord, excuse me, we eat the bread and drink the cup.
And if you're not saved, you're drinking and eating unworthily and you shall be guilty
of the body and the blood of the Lord.
Okay.
The Bible says for this cause, verse 30 verse 29 for he that eateth and drinketh unworthily
eateth and drink in damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
For this cause, many are weak and sickly among you and many sleep for if we would judge ourselves,
we should not be judged.
Go to a chapter prior to that first Corinthians chapter number 10, first Corinthians chapter
number 10.
Here's what's really strange about this concept that they believe they're literally drinking
the blood of Jesus is because the Bible actually tells us that, that the blood of a person
okay, is, is sacred, right?
It's where life comes from according to Leviticus.
And the Bible actually tells us, we're going to look at it a little bit in Leviticus that
the people who would consume blood in the Old Testament were cut off from the, from
the people.
So all of a sudden you think that in the New Testament, God's just going to condone you
drinking blood.
He's just going to condone you just eating raw flesh or having that flesh turned into
having that bread turned into raw flesh.
No, we understand that it's symbolic.
First Corinthians 10, 16 says the cup of blessing, which we bless, is it not the communion of
the blood of Christ, the bread, which we break?
Is it not the communion of the body of Christ for we being many are one bread and one body
for we are all part takers of that one bread.
So what is he saying that when we eat of the, of the bread and drink of the wine, the juice,
we're basically insinuating, we're showing that we're part takers of that salvation.
That's what that's referring to because look at the next verse, verse 18, behold Israel
after the flesh.
This is referring to those who are not saved.
Are not they which eat of the sacrifices part takers of the altar?
Let's say I then that the idol is anything or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols
is anything.
But I say that the things which the Gentile sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils and not
to God.
I would not that you should have fellowship with devils.
So how do you have fellowship with devils when you sacrifice into them, when you drink
of their cup, you eat of their food, you're actually having fellowship with devils and
like manner.
When we eat of the bread and drink of the cup in communion, we're having fellowship
with God.
We're obeying God's commandments, okay?
Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, the cup of devils, ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's
table and the table of devils.
Go to Ephesians chapter number two.
So what role does the blood and body of Christ play in our salvation?
If it's not turning into literal flesh and literal blood at when we consume it, what
is it picturing?
Why are we doing that?
What is the blood actually picturing there?
Ephesians two.
Now here's what's interesting, as I mentioned this morning, is that the Catholics believe
in a form of limited atonement, just as the Calvinists do.
And who did the Calvinists get it from?
The Catholics, okay?
Calvinists believe in limited atonement.
Catholics believe, also believe in a limited atonement, but their limited atonement basically
means that the blood of Christ only forgives you of past sins.
It doesn't forgive you of future sins, right?
Even though there's a lot of evidence to show, specifically in Romans chapter number
four, that our iniquities, right, will not be imputed unto us, we'll be forgiven of those
things when we trust in Christ.
Look at verse 13, it says, but now in Christ Jesus, ye who sometimes were afar off are
made nigh by the blood of Christ.
For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition
between us, having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained
in ordinances, for to make it himself of twain, one new man, so making peace, and that he
might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby.
So what is the blood, what role does the blood play?
Well, the Bible tells us that we receive redemption through his blood, why?
Because without the shedding of blood, there is no remission.
So blood needs to be shed in order for forgiveness to be imputed, right?
Does it say that blood needs to be consumed in order to receive forgiveness?
No, blood needs to be shed, not consumed, in order for that redemption to take place,
okay?
Go to Hebrews chapter number nine, I'll read to you from Colossians chapter one verse 13,
who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of
his dear son, in whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of
sins.
Hebrews chapter nine verse 11, now look, when Jesus Christ shed his blood, the Bible tells
us that this started off, this basically kick-started the New Testament, the covenant, right?
The new covenant, and when he died, he shed his blood.
But the Bible tells us that he had to spread that blood, sprinkle that blood on the mercy
seat in heaven, right?
So what took place?
He died, was buried, he resurrected.
When he resurrected, at his, excuse me, after his resurrection, but prior to his final ascension,
he actually spread that blood on the mercy seat.
You see that, I believe it's in John chapter 17, where he tells him, you know, don't touch
me, for I have not yet ascended unto my father.
And in that very same chapter, at the latter end, he allows Thomas to handle his hands
and the wounds in his side, to basically prove and validate that he had risen from the grave,
showing that between the time he told Mary, don't touch me, and the time that he told
Thomas, go ahead and feel my hands and my side, he had already ascended up into heaven
and spread the blood on the mercy seat, okay?
Look at Hebrews chapter number nine verse 11, it says, but Christ, being common high
priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with
hands, that is to say, not of this building, neither by the blood of goats and calves,
but by his own blood, he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption
for us.
See up down to verse 13, for if the blood of bulls and of goats and the ashes of an
heifer sprinkling, the unclean sanctified to the purifying of the flesh, how much more
shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal spirit offered himself without spot
to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God.
So what is verse 13 telling us?
It's explained to us that the sacrifices of the Old Testament did not bring salvation,
it was for the purifying of the what?
Blesh.
That's what the Bible says.
Now if the Catholics are right about transubstantiation, wouldn't we see some form, some symbolic form
of that in the Old Testament?
Wouldn't we see some sort of teaching on drinking blood?
Instead, what we see is that in the Old Testament, the blood was shed in order to purify the
flesh, but it was not consumed.
And in fact, when it was spilled, when it was sprinkled upon the mercy seat, the Bible
tells us that they cooked the meat, and what did they do?
They ate it afterwards, right?
Unless you had, for example, the reprobates, Hophni and Phinehas, who actually ate the
flesh raw.
That would be an unliblical way to do that.
God wanted it to be cooked with fire, to symbolize the fact that Jesus Christ went to hell for
three days and three nights.
And yes, that was consumed, but we say, well, there you go.
That's it right there.
That's the illustration.
That's the symbolic teaching.
Well, actually that reinforces what John chapter six is teaching, which what is John chapter
six teaching?
That all we have to do is believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.
All right.
You say, well, no, I think we literally have to consume the flesh.
The consuming of the flesh is symbolic of salvation because of the fact that you think
of water, for example, right?
He uses water as an example of salvation.
It satisfies you when you drink water, but Jesus Christ offers that water where you will
never thirst again.
So what is the principle that's being taught there?
It's teaching that Jesus Christ offers a satisfaction, right?
And eternal satisfaction that no other substance can offer.
You know, you have water out there that could be likened unto a works-based salvation where
they have to keep working, keep going to church, keep repenting of their sins in order to stay
safe.
What does that show?
It shows that that water is not satisfying the thirst.
It's not quenching the thirst.
Whereas the water that Jesus Christ gives satisfies the soul.
It's enough.
We'll never thirst again.
In other words, it's eternal.
So it's speaking to the eternality of salvation, that it can never be lost.
You'll never thirst again.
And in like manner, the bread is also symbolic of that because it's basically saying that
you'll never hunger again.
So once you consume it in a spiritual sense, once you consume it, once you take salvation,
you'll never hunger again.
That's what's being pictured there, okay?
Not the literal consummation of that.
Look at verse 19 of Hebrews 9, for when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people
according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats with water and scarlet
wool and hyssop and drank it.
No, he sprinkled it, both the book and all the people.
So even then Moses took the blood and he sprinkled it, right?
Meaning this is the blood of the New Testament, which God has enjoined unto you.
Moreover, he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry.
And almost all things are by the law purged with blood and without shedding of blood is
no remission.
It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heaven should be purified
with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
For Christ is not enter into the holy place made with hands, which are the figures of
the true, but into heaven itself now to appear in the presence of God for us.
Go to Leviticus chapter 17.
So we see there that what would they do with the blood?
Sprinkle it, sprinkle it on the mercy seat, sprinkle it on the people when they began
the Old Testament, because the Old Testament began when he sprinkled the people, he sprinkled
the book, that's when the Old Testament began.
And it was a figure of how the New Testament would be established, which is Jesus Christ
shedding his own blood and sprinkling it on the mercy seat, which is in heaven.
Look at Leviticus chapter 17, verse 11, it says for the life of the flesh is in the blood
and I've given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls.
For it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.
Therefore I said it to the children of Israel, no soul of you shall eat blood.
Don't eat blood, right?
Neither shall any stranger that sojourneth among you eat blood.
He's condemning.
And by the way, this is still condemned in the New Testament, right?
Eating blood.
This is an unclean thing, right?
Verse 13, and whatsoever man there be of the children of Israel or of the strangers that
sojourn among you, which hunteth and catcheth any beast or fowl that may be eaten, he shall
even pour out the blood thereof and cover it with dust.
For it is the life of all flesh, the blood of it for the life thereof.
Therefore I said unto the children of Israel, ye shall eat the blood, no manner of flesh
for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof, whosoever eateth it shall be cut off.
Why?
Because you're basically destroying the symbolic nature of that blood.
You're not giving it its due respect and reverence when you consume it.
Why is that?
Because blood was never meant to be consumed, it was meant to be sprinkled, it was meant
to be shed, okay?
Now go back to John chapter six, if you would.
So let's shed some light on John chapter six.
So we see here that at the end of the day, you know, just a casual reading of the Bible
shows you that this is a foolish teaching, a bizarre teaching for people to say that
once you take that Eucharist and once you get that alcohol, it literally turns into
blood and it literally turns into your flesh.
But you know, this is what happens, again, when you put the word of God into the hands
of unsafe people, they come up with these strange teachings because what?
They're trying to work their way to heaven.
So they have to take these teachings and make some sort of sense out of them because they
don't have the spirit of God living within them, right?
I'm gonna read to you from 1 Peter 1, 2 says, elect according to the foreknowledge of God
the Father through sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood
of Jesus Christ, grace unto you and peace be multiplied.
Now let's look at John chapter six here.
Look at verse number 31.
So let's look at the context because look, what he says here is a bit strange at face
value, right?
He said, you got a drink of my blood, eat of my flesh.
I mean, the disciples even said, this is a hard saying, but you know what?
It's not a hard saying if you just read it in its context.
And that's where a lot of false doctrine it stems from, right?
When you take things out of context, when you take one verse and say, there you go,
transubstantiation.
You know, when you take one verse, you don't compare scripture with scripture.
You don't look at it in its full context.
Look at verse number 31, it says, our fathers did eat manna in the desert, as it is written,
he gave them bread from heaven to eat.
Then Jesus said unto them, verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread
from heaven, but my father giveth you the true bread from heaven.
So even the manna in the Old Testament was symbolic of who?
Jesus, right?
For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven and giveth life unto the world.
Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore, give us this bread.
And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life.
He that cometh to me shall never hunger.
And he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
Now let me ask you something, does that literally mean that once you come to Jesus, you're just
never going to want to eat in and out, you're never going to need another drink of water,
you're never going to go to arts, you're never going to be hungry again?
No, but you know what?
This is the kind of interpretation they're applying to the rest of the verses.
Because they're saying that literally, well, literally then, are you still hungry?
So why do you have to do, you know, why do you have to consume the Eucharist every single
week then?
It's good.
You ever thought about that?
You know, if you're taking such a literal interpretation of this passage, then you got
a problem because you're still hungry.
You still want something to drink, you're still hungry, therefore, hey, what's the problem
here?
Well, the problem is, is that it's a spiritual application, okay?
We will never hunger, we will never thirst because we're saved.
We'll never hunger because of the fact that once we get saved, we have that true bread
of life where we don't have to work for our salvation.
We have the true water, we'll never thirst again because we've been, that thirst has
been quenched by the rivers of living water, right?
Verse 36, but I say unto you that ye also have seen me, and look what it says, and believe
not.
So he explains what he's talking about here.
In verse number 36, when he says that ye also have seen me and believe not, he's not talking
about something completely different.
This is in context of eating and drinking, not thirsting, not hungering.
He's basically saying, look, you've seen me, but you still don't believe.
What does that mean?
You're still hungry.
Hey, you're not believing, you know what that means?
You're still thirsty.
You've seen me and you still don't believe is showing you that you're still hungry.
You're still thirsting because you have not consumed that spiritual bread and drinking
that spiritual water, you have not believed on the Lord Jesus Christ is what he's saying
right there.
Look at verse 37, all that my father giveth me shall come to me and him that cometh to
me I will in no wise cast out.
This is further emphasizing the doctrine of eternal security.
For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
And this is the father's will, which had sent me that of all which he had given me, I should
lose nothing, but should raise him up again at the last day.
Now look at verse number 47, verily, verily, I say to you, he that believeth on me hath
everlasting life.
Now have we changed subjects here?
No, right?
Verse 48, I am the bread of life.
So what is he trying to do?
He's trying to connect the pieces for them.
He says, look, he that believeth on me hath everlasting life, newsflash, I'm the bread
of life.
So what is he insinuating?
Hey, salvation comes to me.
You have to believe on me.
I'm the bread of life.
If you really want, look, the people in the wilderness ate bread and they died.
Whosoever eats of this bread shall never die.
It's very kind of the Lord to use these illustrations because it really broadens our understanding.
It's like, okay, I get it.
I get it.
He could have just said, just believe on me, but he uses all these illustrations and pictures
in order to help us to really connect the dots, spiritually speaking, okay?
This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, excuse me, verse 49, your fathers did eat
manna in the wilderness and are dead.
So just look, that bread was good, but you know what?
Those guys died.
This is the bread which cometh down from heaven that a man may eat thereof and not die.
I am the living bread which came down from heaven.
And look, you know how many Catholics throughout the ages have eaten the bread and drinking
the wine?
They're dead.
They died.
Not only did they thirst again, not only did they hunger again, they're dead.
Not just in the most physical sense, guess what?
They're dead in hell too.
They are dead in hell.
And in fact, they're probably just as the rich man in Luke chapter 16 are still asking
for a drop of water.
One drop of water, right?
Because they didn't take of that living water where they will never thirst again.
Verse 51, I am the living bread which came down from heaven.
If any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever.
And the bread that I will give is my flesh which I will give for the life of the world.
So let me ask you something, oh faggoty priest.
Every time you consume bread, every time you drink the wine, are you still hungry afterwards?
Do you still go have lunch?
Because if that's the case, why are you taking such a literal interpretation of the bread
and of the wine of his blood, but you're still hungry?
There should be no hunger evermore, right?
I mean, not only do you believe you're eating the bread, the bread turns, excuse me, not
only do you understand that you're eating the bread, you believe it's turning into flesh.
That should fill you up, right?
Me?
The Jews therefore strove among themselves saying, how can this man give us his flesh
to eat?
Then Jesus said unto them, verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye eat the flesh of
the Son of Man and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
So he just slaps it on the Pharisees right there.
He's like, let me just confuse you even more.
Good, good, you know.
Whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life, and I will raise him up
at the last day.
Look at verse 39.
And this is the Father's will, which has sent me that of all which he hath given me, I should
lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day.
And this is the will of him that sent me that everyone would see it the Son and believe
it on him, may have everlasting life, and I will raise him up at the last day.
Verse 54, whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life, and I will raise
him up at the last day.
So what is the result of eating the flesh and drinking the blood?
He will raise him up at the last day, which is exactly what he said versus prior, he says,
if you believe on me, I will raise you up at the last day.
See anybody with any common sense will say, oh, that's what he means by that.
So eating and drinking, eating his flesh and drinking his blood basically means to
believe on him, because the end result of both is what?
That he will raise us up at the last day, making a correlation, helping us to broaden
our understanding of what he's teaching here.
Verse 55, for my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him, as the living
Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father.
So he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.
This is that bread, which came down from heaven, not as your fathers did eat manna
and are dead.
I mean, he just keeps emphasizing that.
He that eateth of this bread shall live forever.
And again, verse number 63, it is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing.
The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit and they are life.
So he just concludes it and says, look, obviously I'm not referring to my flesh.
You have to eat my flesh.
It is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing.
So a bunch of people get offended and who are the only ones that stay, the ones who
understand what he's saying?
Because look down at verse number 67, then said Jesus unto the 12th, will you also go
away?
Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go?
Thou has the words of eternal life.
And we believe and are sure that thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
Hey, Peter, you got it.
You understood what he was teaching here.
Peter's probably like, I know what do you mean?
I know what he meant by that.
Look, any even babe in Christ will understand this.
That's why it's in the book of John, amen?
So just the casual reading of this, we can simply understand that this is not referring
to the blood, the literal blood of Christ.
This is not a manual.
John chapter six is not a manual on how to do communion.
It's not a manual on how to do the Lord's supper.
And what are the intricacies of the Lord's supper?
In fact, John chapter six has zero to do with communion.
John chapter six has zero to do with communion and has zero to do with the Lord's supper
has nothing to do with it.
It has to do with believing on the Lord Jesus Christ.
He's just using a different illustration, a different parable, a different example to
shed light on it, to help us to really just understand in a deeper way what that everlasting
life really is.
Okay.
Cause obviously it's hard for us to understand everlasting, right?
Something that never ends.
And one thing that helps us to understand according to John chapter six, it's like never
being hungry again.
It's like never being thirsty again.
It's something that basically satisfied the longing for that need is what that is.
Okay.
And it comes through Jesus Christ.
So he said, well, what is, what's the takeaway though?
I need to, I need to take something away from this other than transubstantiation is stupid.
Okay.
Well look, if that's all you get, that's good.
Okay.
If that's all you get from this sermon, you've profited from this sermon.
Okay.
Because look, we need to, we can be tossed to and fro, carried about with every wind
of doctrine by the slat of men and kind of craftiness whereby they lie in wait to deceive.
But one thing we could understand, a takeaway from this sermon is that sometimes in the
Bible or even through the preaching, some things are cryptic, aren't they?
But we should never take the cryptic scriptures and just try to fit some sort of literal interpretation
of it right off the bat, unless he tells us it's literal.
This should help us to basically study the Bible in its entirety.
And when you find something in the Bible that seems a little hard, it seems like a dark
saying, you know, we need to make sure that we compare it with the entire chapter.
And look, that's what it means to study, to show thyself approved unto God, a workman
in the need not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
You run into a scripture and you read it from beginning to end, from the beginning of the
chapter to the end of the chapter, because really God has given us the answers right
then and there.
He said, well, what if I still don't understand that it's probably a scripture that God doesn't
want you to understand.
It's probably something that it's meant to be cryptic.
You know, the angels, that's why the women have angels on their head because of the power
or whatever.
That's probably something you're not supposed to understand.
Don't rack your brain with things that God probably doesn't want you to understand.
You know what we should rack our brains with?
Things that God plainly tells us is true, has gone through the effort of having these
holy men of God, writing these things down as they're inspired by the Holy Ghost.
These are the things that we should study and try to understand more clearly.
But the things that are cryptic, the things that are dark sayings, and thankfully, many
of those dark sayings, they're not essential doctrines, right?
The essential doctrines are those things which God has clarified.
That which is cryptic and that which is dark is something that He really doesn't want us
to understand at this moment.
It's not pertinent to this time and place.
We don't have to worry about that, okay?
So that's the takeaway is this, hey, make sure we study the Bible.
And don't let Catholics, okay, as I mentioned this morning, just try to just overwhelm you
with the parentheses filled with all these scripture references.
This is why we believe in purgatory and then they just put all these references.
Check those references.
More often than not, it has nothing to do with what they're talking about, right?
They're trying to basically intimidate you by placing a bunch of scriptures right then
and there, you know?
And that's not the way you study the Bible.
We need to make sure we look at it, we examine it, we prove all things, hold fast to that
which is good, amen?
Yeah.
Let's bow our heads and have a word of prayer.
Father, we thank you for your word.
Thank you for the blood of Christ, Lord, wherewith we have received the forgiveness of sins.
And Lord, thank you so much for even the illustrations and the parables.
I love John chapter 6.
I'm thankful for it because it sheds light on the truth of salvation.
And what a coincidence that the people who believe that John chapter 6 literally has
to do with the consuming of blood and the eating of flesh are the same exact people
who can't understand that salvation is by faith alone.
So just as this passage of scripture is cryptic to them and they pervert it, they've also
perverted the way of salvation.
They can't understand something simple as just believing in order to be saved, believing
on Christ.
We thank you, God, that you help us to continue to grow in these areas and not to be fearful
of anyone who may bring some bizarre doctrine to us, Lord.
Help us to fully trust in the Holy Ghost that dwells within us to teach us all things and
bring all things into remembrance.
And in Jesus' name we pray.
Amen.