Contradiction with Matthew 15:11
This verse suggests that what goes into the mouth does not defile a person, whereas John 6:56 emphasizes the importance of consuming the body and blood of Christ.
Matthew 15:11: Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.
Contradiction with Matthew 26:29
Jesus states that he will not drink from the fruit of the vine until the kingdom comes, implying a different focus from the physical consumption mentioned in John 6:56.
Matthew 26:29: But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.
Contradiction with 1 Corinthians 8:8
This verse asserts that food does not bring us closer to God, contradicting John 6:56’s idea of eating and drinking Christ as essential for abiding in Him.
1 Corinthians 8:8: But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse. [are we the better: or, have we the more] [are we the worse: or, have we the less]
Paradox #1
Some people might see a contradiction in John 6:56 with certain interpretations of Christian practices like communion or the Eucharist. Some Christians believe in a symbolic interpretation, while others see it as literal. This difference in understanding can lead to theological disagreements about the nature of Christ's presence in these practices.
Paradox #2
Some people might see a contradiction or conflict with this verse in relation to different beliefs about the Eucharist or Communion. Some Christian denominations interpret it as symbolic, while others see it as literal, which can lead to disagreements about the nature of Christ's presence in the bread and wine during Communion.
Paradox #3
The contradiction or conflict regarding John 6:56 could stem from differing interpretations among Christian denominations. Some see it as symbolic, relating to faith and spiritual communion, while others interpret it literally, supporting doctrines like transubstantiation in Catholicism, which teaches that the bread and wine become the actual body and blood of Christ during the Eucharist. This has led to theological disagreements throughout history over the nature of the Eucharist.
Paradox #4
John 6:56 can create a moral conflict because it suggests participation in a ritual that involves consuming flesh and blood, which can be interpreted literally or symbolically. For those taking it literally, it might seem contrary to the moral teaching against violence or harm to living beings. However, when taken symbolically, it aligns with Christian practices like Communion. This creates inconsistencies in interpretation and understanding the moral implications.