[NotTallTex]

It is not private interpretation but THE interpretation of the 1st, and 2nd and 3rd Century Christians who were much closer to the source than we are. It was THE interpretation for 1500 years.

[daniel1212]

If not, and the RC literalism is true, then you MUST conclude that one must believe (in the Real Presence) and receive the Eucharist in order to have life in them, and eternal life,as perr Jn. 6:53,54. But which is another example of RC private interpretation in trying to support a tradition of men. You need more study in exegesis.

It is not private interpretation but THE interpretation of the 1st, and 2nd and 3rd Century Christians who were much closer to the source than we are. It was THE interpretation for 1500 years

I see. Seeing then that one must believe in the Real Presence and receive the Eucharist in order to have life in them, and eternal life, then V2 changed that, as it now allows baptized Prots as part of the body of Christ, possessing the Holy Spirit of God. No wonder no RC was so brave or honest as to answer my question.