Does the Bible teach that everything that we believe and practice has to be found in its pages?

A Catholic buddy of mine offered this list as a start...

Hmmm...things non-Catholics believe that are not in the Bible. Lets see.
1. Evangelistic appeals.
2. Vacation Bible School.
3. Youth groups and youth pastors.
4. Church picnics,
5. Praise bands.
6. Bible Colleges.
7. Short hair on men, long hair on women. ( I once knew a preacher who insisted Jesus had a crew cut)

A non-Catholic then asked, "Can you show me where in the Bible it calls tradition God breathed?" to which I replied, Sure...2nd Thessalonians 3:6 And we charge you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly, and not according to the tradition which they have received of us.

So still no one has shown me where the Bible says that everything that we believe and practice has to be found in the pages of the Bible. I need to see this if I'm going to abandon my Catholic faith and return to what you have.

In fact...you need to show it to all of us Catholics because so long as you can't, every Catholic reading this has no chance of converting away from our most holy faith. Worse still...it makes it appear that we are right to reject this and (God help us all!), that would mean that you would be wise to seriously consider converting to the Catholic faith ASAP. 

If it's not in the Bible then it violates the very tenet that virtually every n-C doctrine is based upon, that such things must be found in the pages of the Bible. That's probably the fundamental foundation of most n-C belief and teaching in the last 500 years. 

This is a doctrine is one that many non-Catholics hold very dear and I'm serious...if you can show me this and not be refuted by me and my Catholic brothers and sisters, then you have a chance to really dent our Catholic faith. If you can't....well...that dent might be somewhere else.

I have Bibles all over the place right here and you even get the benefit of the 73 book canon to use. I absolutely need to see this. Seriously. 

This article is about getting some non-Catholic to show me where this idea is found within the pages of the Word of God. That's all I'm asking here.

If you want to shake me as a Catholic loose from my faith then this is what it will take.

I've read the Bible several times and cannot find this taught there, even with 73 books to work with.

I re-converted to the Catholic faith in part because of this very thing. If the Catholic Church is wrong on this...it should be pretty simple to show me.  

which is one of the things that a lot of people on both sides of this issue don't understand. My friend John Martignoni has a kinda neat way of explaining that here.

 A friend of mine said that his church takes the Bible literally, but that the Catholic Church doesn't...is that true?

The Fullness of truth is important. In John 14:6 Jesus tells us that He is "the truth" and I for one want nothing less.

I am trying to get you or any of the other n-Cs here that hold that belief to show us where it is found in the Word of God. 

Again though....where is this scriptural mandate that all that we believe and practice must be found in the pages of the Bible? 

I don't understand how people can believe this idea since St. Paul plainly tells Timothy that he's to withdraw from anyone who doesn't walk according to that tradition. If it wasn't inspired, the why would he make a big deal of it?

2nd Thessalonians 3:6 And we charge you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly, and not according to the tradition which they have received of us.

The following article from my blog points out some other ways in which the apostles showed their thinking on Sacred Tradition.
Infallibility & How The Apostles Taught the Study of Sacred Tradition.

One of the big problems in discussing this topic is that so many different non-Catholics have differing definitions of what this actually means and that makes it really hard.

This is another case where we Catholics have difficulty seeing that often propagated "Unity in essentials" that they speak of.

Perhaps this is also another by product of this very foundational doctrine of post reformation non-Catholic Christianity?

Here are scriptures that one non-Catholic offered me..and my responses.

Quote:

1 Cor 4:6 Now, brothers, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, "Do not go beyond what is written." Then you will not take pride in one man over against another.

Which is a very good point to make about that same interpretation which goes beyond what is written.

Quote:

Luke 1:1-4: Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled[a] among us, 2just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. 3Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.

Here again, this does not say that everything that we believe and practice has to be found in the Bible. In fact....it actually is saying that the purpose of Luke's Gospel is to affirm oral tradition.

Quote:

In Matthew 4:1-11. Three times Jesus was tempted by the Devil and each time Jesus replied exactly the same three dangerous words that defeated the Devil: "IT IS WRITTEN" If any one could have used oral tradition, it was Jesus, yet he chose the only safe and sure way to defeat Satan: Scripture.

Still, this does not tell us what you claim it does. It infers much, such as that scripture is useful for resisting temptation, which certainly agrees with 2nd Timothy 3:16, but being useful is not the same as being the only and ultimate authority, which is something that I have not found in the Word of God.

Quote:

Mark 12:24 24 Jesus replied, "Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God?

We've already discussed that ignorance of scripture is ignorance of Christ, but this also fails to make the claim that would make your belief scriptural.

Quote:

2 Timothy 3:15 and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.

Again...where does that even infer a sole and final authority to the Bible? In point of fact, St. Paul is here referring to the Old Testament, which by the same logic that you have used would eliminate the New Testament from any inspired authority. That's just based upon your own logic and not something that either of us believe.

 Quote:

1 John 5:13 13 I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.

Does not claim the authority asserted. Another case of interpretation going beyond what is written?

Quote:

2 Timothy 3:16-17: 16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Catholics have no problem at all with this verse. We believe that is means exactly what it says and we do not believe it means anything more. This does not claim a final and ultimate authority. Like I said before...it's inspired and useful...

Quote:

Luke 10:26 What is written in the Law?" he replied. "How do you read it?" Jesus expected even his enemies to correctly interpret the Bible by simply reading and studying it.

Again...this refers to the Old Testament and by your own logic would cast aside the New Testament as well as open the door for an interpretation that says we need to read and obey the law to be saved. That won't wok now, will it?

Quote:

Acts 17:11-12 Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. 12Many of the Jews believed, as did also a number of prominent Greek women and many Greek men. Even though the apostles were inspired with genuine oral revelation, they always directed people to the scriptures for the final determination of truth.

They were talking to Jews about the Messiah. What other source would one expect them to use seeing that even Our Lord pointed out, "For many will come in my name saying, I am Christ: and they will seduce many."  Still there is no claim of final and ultimate authority here in this passage.

Quote:

Deuteronomy 4:2 Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you.

But by this logic this verse would deny inspiration and acceptance of the New Testament (again) since it specifically refers to the law. Further (and again) this would mean that we are still to obey the law in order to be saved. I know that that is not what most non-Catholics believe nor are trying to say, but that is where it logically and specifically leads. 

Quote:

I maintain that the Bible is the sole INFALLIBLE authority, to which all other authority is subordinate.

If that is true then I would like to see the Biblical passages that lay claim to that authority. Please show me.

Quote:

Sola Scriptura means that the Bible alone is the SUPREME canon of faith. There are other authorities. I, for instance, consider my pastor an authority, but his words should be measured against the Scriptures. If they collide, he is the one who's in error.

Since this belief requires that any such belief has its basis in the Bible, I would like to see the scriptures where that is taught.

And who is the authority that decides when that happens and where do they derive their authority from?

What I believe we see here is a assertion of conclusion drawn from a fallacious premise not supported by the text of the scriptures quoted.  

The reason why I like this one that it occurred to me one day that I do not feel that I have to logically prove this is true in some debate format in order for me to believe this is true. Maybe some other folks are up to this, but I think I will pass myself..

Certainly your prerogative, however, it is not a matter of feelings, which can mislead us, but of facts. Facts as to what given passages of scripture actually say, or do not say in order to ascertain objective truth. If it is untrue that the Bible lays claim to the infallible authority that your definition ascribes to it, then, even by the errant standard of Sola Scripture (as you have defined it) one would have to reject that interpretation.

Quote:

It occurred to me that it is a fact that today I do not hold to any other infallible rule of faith and conduct So logically unless I am convinced that there is another infallible rule of faith and conduct out there (be it the Book of Mormon, your pope speaking on faith and morals, or David Koresh), the Bible is my only infallible rule of faith and conduct.

Just because you are convinced does not make it correct. One can be sincerely in error and this is one reason I suspect some people ascribe to this belief.

To me it's fairly simply. If you want me to believe that everything that we believe and practice must be found in the Word of God, then you need to show me precisely where the Bible says that. So far I haven't seen anything like that, but have seen a lot of verses and then interpretations of men telling me they mean something other than what they actually say. 

Quote:

Now of course convincing me that there is another infallible rule of faith and conduct is a very difficult sell. Per 1 Thess 5:21 I am to examine everything carefully and hold fast to that which is good. So I don't know how one can convince me that there is another infallible rule of faith and conduct except through the rule of faith and conduct that I know is infallible. And I have not seen anything in the Bible that gives me the license to elevate any other rule of faith to the status of infallible.

Yet I have not seen anything that gives anyone the license to elevate the Bible to that status while I do see the simple statement from St. Paul as to what the pillar and ground of the truth is.

1st Timothy 3:15 "if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth"

Quote:

I approach this based on the presumption that the Word of God, the Bible is indeed God's Word. Your line of questioning does not appear to accept the presumption, therefore no matter how I would answer, it would not make any difference to you. What your view of the Bible is will be the determining factor of how one receives the Word of God. When you cite the church as being the pillar and support of the truth; it simply means that God has chosen to work through His elect to maintain the purity of His word and all that is contained.

Presumption does not work. It comes to a conclusion even before it has looked at the facts. Would anyone want to be the subject of any case where presumption was the basis for conclusion? Very risky.

Where does 1st Timothy 3:15 even infer such a belief as you assert? I'll have to disagree with your interpretation and go with what the Word of God actually says right there.

Quote:

There is no place in the Bible that explicitly states that all Christian teachings MUST BE in the Bible, but a logical and rational thought will lead you to that conclusion; simply put, where else will you find it?

You express a gross fallacy because that may be your own opinion, but even if one accepts the authority ascribed to the Bible by Sola Scriptura, one would have to reject that.

As to your last question...you already answered that when you touched on 1st Timothy 3:15 above. What does that verse literally tell us is the pillar and bulwark of the truth?

Quote:

You have two premises that must be true for what you said above to be true and is a source of major doctrinal error within your church. First you must put your church above the authority of scripture to make the claim that your church interprets the bible.

Which is the only option supported by the New Testament.

Quote:

Second you presume that "scared tradition" were taught by Jesus adn passed down to the apostles and are outside of Scripture. How can you derive this and prove it is of divine authority unless you just make the claim that your church says it is that way; therefore it is.

Not so at all. I examined the evidence in the New Testament and wrote the following article on my blog based upon what I found.Take a look. Infallibility & How The Apostles Taught the Study of Sacred Tradition.

Quote:

The logic make no sense and I don't believe it to be possible to show Jesus taught anything that is not in the written pages of Scripture. Jesus himself said that Man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God; where do all Christians go to find what proceeded out of the mouth of God? the Bible?

So then teachings that the apostles offer in their New Testament writings, (and there are a great many) that Our Lord never spoke about are invalid? Surely you didn't mean that! Yet that is the only logical conclusion to arrive at based upon what you have just said. 

Quote:

I cannot force a reasonable and logical deduction on any person; you either get it and see it or you don't. Jesus said the Man shall not live on bread alone but by every word the proceeds from the mouth of God; where does a Christian go to find what proceeds from the mouth of God? The Bible?

Was the New Testament written at that point when Our Lord said that? Isn't He quoting an Old Testament proverb? (Deuteronomy 8:3 to be exact) In all 3 places recorded, there is no New Testament scriptures...as a result you cannot correctly use that to support a premise that involves the New Testament Christian faith.

Quote:

The antithesis of you question is where does it not say we are to use the Bible for all teaching of moral principle and practices? Where does it say we are to obey "traditions" not written and contradict the teaching God has given. traditions are okay if they don't contradict, but when they do then they need to be done away with otherwise god's word becomes perverted and another gospel will emerge..right?

There are no such contradictory Sacred Traditions, and the link to the article on my blog will refute that idea.

Quote:

All of you keep repeating the same fatal fatal flaw. You are putting the authority of your church above that of scripture;

Not so! The New Testament puts the Church above scripture, as has been shown already, while no one has yet given me a single passage of the Bible that tells us that everything that we believe and practice must be found in its pages.

People can argue all day that we Catholics don't understand, but if you don't have a scripture text that specifically says what you say is true, then even by a Sola Scriptura standard one would have to reject it as a false teaching.   

NOTE: See page 21.

What Was Authentic Early Christian Worship Really Like?

The allegation was made (on Catholic Answers Forums) that the Baptist church is found in the early church. That is completely contrary to the facts of history from the authentic and verifiable writings of the Early Church Fathers. The following documents same.

If the Catholic Mass is not in line with how the early church worshiped (and supposedly the Baptist church is?) then please explain to me that why St. Justin Martyr describes their sacraments and worship as follows and why Baptist services are nowhere anything like this.
CHAP. LXV.--ADMINISTRATION OF THE SACRAMENTS. But we, after we have thus washed him who has been convinced and has assented to our teaching, bring him to the place where those who are called brethren are assembled, in order that we may offer hearty prayers in common for ourselves and for the baptized [illuminated] person, and for all others in every place, that we may be counted worthy, now that we have learned the truth, by our works also to be found good citizens and keepers of the commandments, so that we may be saved with an everlasting salvation. Having ended the prayers, we salute one another with a kiss.(3) There is then brought to the president of the brethren(4) bread and a cup of wine mixed with water; and he taking them, gives praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and offers thanks at considerable length for our being counted worthy to receive these things at His hands. And when he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all the people present express their assent by saying Amen. This word Amen answers in the Hebrew language to genoito [so be it]. And when the president has given thanks, and all the people have expressed their assent, those who are called by us deacons give to each of those present to partake of the bread and wine mixed with water over which the thanksgiving was pronounced, and to those who are absent they carry away a portion.

CHAP. LXVI.--OF THE EUCHARIST. And this food is called among us Eukaristia(5) [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.(6) For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, "This do ye in remembrance of Me,(7) this is My body;" and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, "This is My blood;" and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn.

CHAP. LXVII.--WEEKLY WORSHIP OF THE CHRISTIANS. And we afterwards continually remind each other of these things. And the wealthy among us help the needy; and we always keep together; and for all things wherewith we are supplied, we bless the Maker of all through His Son Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Ghost. And on the day called Sunday,(1) all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability,(2) and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given,(3) and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succours the orphans and widows and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need. But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples, He taught them these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration.

JUSTIN MARTYR, FIRST APOLOGY Ch 65 Sacraments & Mass

All of this was written by a man who paid with his life for the faith and nothing he writes remotely looks like modern Baptists...nor ancient Baptists for that matter. They simply did not exist in the 2nd century Christian Church.

Infallibility & How The Apostles Taught the Study of Sacred Tradition.

Quote:

Originally Asserted by a Non-Catholic: Any church arrogant enough to claim infallibility is elevating it's self above God and is blasphemy! There are other "churches" that claim to be infallible, how shall I know which one is lying and which one is telling the truth? I will answer this for you, by reading the bible for myself and letting the Holy Ghost interpret it for me as He does. BTW any church claiming infallability is a false church.

A rant without any support from the Word of God.

And yet Christ Himself promised that assurance of infallibility to His church when He said. 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.Matthew 16.

So then you claim this infallibility for yourself? That is precisely what this statement does, while denying what Our Lord promised to His church and actually attempting to usurp that authority and promise of assurance for yourself. I wouldn't do that. So then you are telling us that you are never wrong? Yet I have already proved you wrong several times in this discussion alone.

By this statement you have logically condemned yourself.

Quote:

Originally Asserted by non-Catholic 2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

I love this verse! I don't suppose that you've noticed here that St. Paul does not say to St. Timothy. "Study the Bible", or "Study the scriptures", and so based on what this verse says (and the context nowhere changes this...) then sacred Tradition is included in what Paul is telling Timothy to study. In this he would be following the apostles.

Example: (I asked you to look all this up and apparently you dismissed my request, so now I'm going to show you why that was so important.)

Look at these verses from the letter of St. Jude, the next to last book in the New Testament. (You do accept Jude as inspired canon of scripture, right?)

Jude Chapter 1:9: But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, disputed about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a reviling judgment upon him, but said, "The Lord rebuke you."

Where is that found in the Old Testament? Please show me chapter and verse.

Jude Chapter 1:14: It was of these also that Enoch in the seventh generation from Adam prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord came with his holy myriads, 15: to execute judgment on all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness which they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."

Where is that in the Old Testament please? Again, I need chapter and verse?

Jude Chapter 1:9: But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, disputed about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a reviling judgment upon him, but said, "The Lord rebuke you."....Jude Chapter 1:14: It was of these also that Enoch in the seventh generation from Adam prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord came with his holy myriads, 15: to execute judgment on all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness which they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."

2nd Timothy Chapter 3:8: As Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men of corrupt mind and counterfeit faith;

The first 1st is quoting The Assumption of Moses. Not the Old Testament, yet the apostle Jude quotes it as a fact of belief.

The 2nd is quoting The Book of Enoch. Not the Old Testament, yet the apostle Jude quotes it as a fact of belief.

The 3rd is quoting the Book of Jannes and Jambres and not the Old Testament. (Go ahead and look...their names are nowhere found in the OT!), yet here again...St. Paul refers to something as fact that is not stated in the inspired canon. So then... he is clearly telling Timothy to study both scripture and traditional sources, since that is clearly shown here as apostolic practice.

So much for the idea that the apostles taught Sola Scriptura.

Quote:

Originally Asserted by non-Catholic You see it all the time. People don't agree on everything, even within any church, including your catholic church. At the same time, if you go to the same source of truth (the bible) and study it though the Holy Spirit, you can understand no matter who you are.

If this were actually true then all faithful believers would hold the exact same doctrines and beliefs...but that is not so among n-Cs, though with in the Catholic Church one single authority is acknowledged and there is indeed one authoritative and knowledgeable source of doctrinal interpretation.

Your comments that some Catholics might dissent or disagree does not indict that infallible authority in faith and morals but instead indicts the consciences of those who dissent or oppose those teachings.

Tradition? No way!

I love those who come along and make statements like this. As if tradition has no place in Christianity. Which is simply not true.

Here's a really good example. Jude 9: But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, disputed about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a reviling judgment upon him, but said, "The Lord rebuke you."

Find this for me in the Old Testament.

Also, Jude 14: It was of these also that Enoch in the seventh generation from Adam prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord came with his holy myriads,
15: to execute judgment on all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness which they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."

Find this for me in the Old Testament.

Remember that this is an apostle writing this and we know that this is inspired by the Holy Spirit. If what he is quoting is from God then where is it in the Old Testament?

If it's from a source other than the Old Testament, then what does the fact that the apostle quoted it into scripture tell you about that source?

Verse 9 is from The Assumption of Moses.
Verses 14 & 15 are from The Book of Enoch.

Both are traditional Jewish writings.

Tradition is bad? Better tell St. Jude.

Ask your average n-C where they can get the names of the two guys who resisted Moses in the Old Testament. St. Paul names them in 2nd Timothy 3:8. "Now as Jannes and Mambres resisted Moses, so these also resist the truth, men corrupted in mind, reprobate concerning the faith."

Just where exactly did the Jewish scholar St. Paul get those names from to include in his Holy Spirit inspired epistle? They're not named in the canonical books of the OT.

Looks to me like another apostle used Jewish traditional non-canonical sources to teach.
From another Protestant commentator, Matthew Henry:

Quote:

In one sense we must all be ever learning, that is, growing in knowledge, following on to know the Lord, pressing forward; but these were skeptics, giddy and unstable, who were forward to imbibe every new notion, under pretense of advancement in knowledge, but never came to a right understanding of the truth as it is in Jesus. 3. He foretells the certain stop that should be put to their progress (2Ti_3:8, 2Ti_3:9), comparing them to the Egyptian magicians who withstood Moses, and who are here named, Jannes and Jambres; though the names are not to be met with in the story of the Old Testament, yet they are found in some old Jewish writers.

In fact,
Just having a set list of what books are canonical for scripture is a tradition in itself.

The Eucharist IS Scriptural

I offer as evidence the following passages of Scripture:

John 6:31-70

"31 Our fathers did eat manna in the desert, as it is written: He gave them bread from heaven to eat. 32 Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say to you; Moses gave you not bread from heaven, but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is that which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life to the world. 34 They said therefore unto him: Lord, give us always this bread. 35 And Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall not hunger: and he that believeth in me shall never thirst.

36 But I said unto you, that you also have seen me, and you believe not. 37 All that the Father giveth to me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me, I will not cast out. 38 Because I came down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him that sent me. 39 Now this is the will of the Father who sent me: that of all that he hath given me, I should lose nothing; but should raise it up again in the last day. 40 And this is the will of my Father that sent me: that every one who seeth the Son, and believeth in him, may have life everlasting, and I will raise him up in the last day.

41 The Jews therefore murmured at him, because he had said: I am the living bread which came down from heaven. 42 And they said: Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How then saith he, I came down from heaven? 43 Jesus therefore answered, and said to them: Murmur not among yourselves. 44 No man can come to me, except the Father, who hath sent me, draw him; and I will raise him up in the last day. 45 It is written in the prophets: And they shall all be taught of God. Every one that hath heard of the Father, and hath learned, cometh to me.

46 Not that any man hath seen the Father; but he who is of God, he hath seen the Father. 47 Amen, amen I say unto you: He that believeth in me, hath everlasting life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your fathers did eat manna in the desert, and are dead. 50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven; that if any man eat of it, he may not die.

51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven. 52 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. 53 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat? 54 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. 55 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day.

56 For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. 57 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him. 58 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father; so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me. 59 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that eateth this bread, shall live for ever. 60 These things he said, teaching in the synagogue, in Capharnaum.

61 Many therefore of his disciples, hearing it, said: This saying is hard, and who can hear it? 62 But Jesus, knowing in himself, that his disciples murmured at this, said to them: Doth this scandalize you? 63 If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? 64 It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life. 65 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning, who they were that did not believe, and who he was, that would betray him.

66 And he said: Therefore did I say to you, that no man can come to me, unless it be given him by my Father. 67 After this many of his disciples went back; and walked no more with him. 68 Then Jesus said to the twelve: Will you also go away? 69 And Simon Peter answered him: Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life. 70 And we have believed and have known, that thou art the Christ, the Son of God. "

Matthew 26:26-28

"26 And whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke: and gave to his disciples, and said: Take ye, and eat. This is my body. 27 And taking the chalice, he gave thanks, and gave to them, saying: Drink ye all of this. 28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins. "

Mark 14:22-24

"22 And whilst they were eating, Jesus took bread; and blessing, broke, and gave to them, and said: Take ye. This is my body. 23 And having taken the chalice, giving thanks, he gave it to them. And they all drank of it. 24 And he said to them: This is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many."

Luke 22:17-20

"17 And having taken the chalice, he gave thanks, and said: Take, and divide it among you: 18 For I say to you, that I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, till the kingdom of God come. 19 And taking bread, he gave thanks, and brake; and gave to them, saying: This is my body, which is given for you. Do this for a commemoration of me. 20 In like manner the chalice also, after he had supped, saying: This is the chalice, the new testament in my blood, which shall be shed for you."

Luke 24:30-35

"30 And it came to pass, whilst he was at table with them, he took bread, and blessed, and brake, and gave to them.

31 And their eyes were opened, and they knew him: and he vanished out of their sight. 32 And they said one to the other: Was not our heart burning within us, whilst he spoke in this way, and opened to us the scriptures? 33 And rising up, the same hour, they went back to Jerusalem: and they found the eleven gathered together, and those that were staying with them, 34 Saying: The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon.
35 And they told what things were done in the way; and how they knew him in the breaking of the bread. "

1st Corinthians 10:16-17

"16 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? 17 For we, being many, are one bread, one body, all that partake of one bread."

1st Corinthians 11:23-30

"23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread. 24 And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me. 25 In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me.

26 For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come. 27 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. 28 But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. 29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. 30 Therefore are there many infirm and weak among you, and many sleep. "

If there is no real presence in the Eucharist, then how can St.Paul warn us not to take it unworthily lest we become guilty of the body and blood of the Lord? That "spiritualization" makes complete nonsense not only of the 6th chapter of John, but of 1st Corinthians 10:16-17 "16 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? 17 For we, being many, are one bread, one body, all that partake of one bread."

Now, how can one become guilty of the body and blood of the Lord IF THAT BODY AND BLOOD OF THE LORD IS NOT REALLY THERE? Now if I make a symbol of a person and then I decide to do bad things to that symbol. I may indeed be guilty of abusing that symbol of the person, but am I guilty of his body and blood? Silly question...of course not! Why? BECAUSE THAT PERSON IS NOT REALLY PRESENT IN THAT SYMBOL is he?
There is the the whole case for why the Eucharist really is the presence of Our Lord Jesus Christ...body and blood, soul and divinity.

Catholics! You have the greatest miracle of all at every Mass that you participate in. BE THERE!
Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum,

In addition to these passages of the New Testament I would also like to add this very clear quote from St. Ignatius of Antioch, who was a close friend and disciple of St. John the evangelist , the bishop of Antioch and a martyr for the faith.

CHAP. VII.--LET US STAND ALOOF FROM SUCH HERETICS.

They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer,(7) because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death(11) in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect,(13) that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that ye should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of(15) them either in private or in public, but to give heed to the prophets, and above all, to the Gospel, in which the passion[of Christ] has been revealed to us, and the resurrection has been fully proved.(16) But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils.
The Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans
Blackie