What is the salvific effect of the Last Supper?

But you cannot tell when Jesus is using figurative language. You do not understand when He is speaking spiritual using figurative speech. There is the problem. You understand has Peter as Satan, there is major problems with your acceptance of the words of Jesus. This is the problem you never address.
There is no official interpreter of scripture.
 
There is no official interpreter of scripture.
Can you imagine Paul (or Jesus) avoiding a Scriptural challenge to their teaching?

Acts 17:1-3
Now when they had traveled through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews. And according to Paul’s custom, he went to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and giving evidence that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus whom I am proclaiming to you is the Christ.”
 
why won't you reason through Scripture?
I have.

The construction of the Tabernacle.

We find symbols of the Trinity in the Tabernacle.

The Ark of the covenant - God the Father
The table with the bread and wine - God the Son
The menorah - God the Holy Spirit
(Also the alter of incense - the prayer of the saints)

God the Son is represented in the Tabernacle as bread and wine. It was not ordinary bread and wine. The priest would take the bread out on special occasions are show it to the public and say behold the face of God.
 
It does not say it is literal, then follow that understanding Peter is Satan. Which explains your institution being the bad tree.
You didn't answer my question. Are you saying that the contents of the cup is not Jesus blood of the covenant?
 
I have.

The construction of the Tabernacle.

We find symbols of the Trinity in the Tabernacle.


The Ark of the covenant - God the Father
The table with the bread and wine - God the Son
The menorah - God the Holy Spirit
(Also the alter of incense - the prayer of the saints)

God the Son is represented in the Tabernacle as bread and wine. It was not ordinary bread and wine. The priest would take the bread out on special occasions are show it to the public and say behold the face of God.

that's right: they symbols!!!

Lev 24:
5 “Take the finest flour and bake twelve loaves of bread, using two-tenths of an ephah for each loaf. 6 Arrange them in two stacks, six in each stack, on the table of pure gold before the Lord. 7 By each stack put some pure incense as a memorial portion to represent the bread and to be a food offering presented to the Lord. 8 This bread is to be set out before the Lord regularly, Sabbath after Sabbath, on behalf of the Israelites, as a lasting covenant. 9 It belongs to Aaron and his sons, who are to eat it in the sanctuary area, because it is a most holy part of their perpetual share of the food offerings presented to the Lord.”

The bread represent the children of Israel: it is a symbol
that's why there were 12 loaves

and BTW!!! I thought you believed the The Ark of the covenant represented Mary
 
Last edited:
that's right: they symbols!!!

Lev 24:
5 “Take the finest flour and bake twelve loaves of bread, using two-tenths of an ephah for each loaf. 6 Arrange them in two stacks, six in each stack, on the table of pure gold before the Lord. 7 By each stack put some pure incense as a memorial portion to represent the bread and to be a food offering presented to the Lord. 8 This bread is to be set out before the Lord regularly, Sabbath after Sabbath, on behalf of the Israelites, as a lasting covenant. 9 It belongs to Aaron and his sons, who are to eat it in the sanctuary area, because it is a most holy part of their perpetual share of the food offerings presented to the Lord.”

The bread represent the children of Israel: it is a symbol
that's why there were 12 loaves

and BTW!!! I thought you believed the The Ark of the covenant represented Mary
It is just a Bible study and not a debate. I gave one reason as to why I think that Jesus wasn't using a figure of speech.

Another reason is that it represents the manna of the NC. The manna of the OC was special, it was called the bread of angels and a urn containing the manna was keep in the Ark of the Covenant.

Since everything about the NC is far superior than that of the OC, then the manna of NC has to be far superior than that of the OC.
 
It is just a Bible study and not a debate. I gave one reason as to why I think that Jesus wasn't using a figure of speech.

Another reason is that it represents the manna of the NC. The manna of the OC was special, it was called the bread of angels and a urn containing the manna was keep in the Ark of the Covenant.

Since everything about the NC is far superior than that of the OC, then the manna of NC has to be far superior than that of the OC.
but did you note that I addressed your verses?
Can you do the same?
 
no, you actually haven't;
quoting Jesus at the LS is not addressing those verses
Yes I have. God is outside of time. So just because Jesus death on the cross hadn't happened doesn't mean that he was speaking symbolically.

Also in Hebrews 9 it indicates that eternal redemption hadn't happened until Jesus entered the Holy of Holies in the heavenly tabernacle with his own blood. It could be argued that Jesus death on the cross didn't complete our eternal redemption. Just like in the OC the bull was sacrificed outside and it blood was brought into the Holy of Holies by the high priest to complete the Day of Atonement.
 
Yes I have. God is outside of time. So just because Jesus death on the cross hadn't happened doesn't mean that he was speaking symbolically.
but God Incarnate entered into our time:
The Resurrections was not before the Crucifixion

and there is a crystal clear on when the NC went into effect:
the NC was not effect prior to a death

and as the OP asked:

What is the salvific effect of the Last Supper?​

Can you give a clear answer?
 
Yes I have. God is outside of time. So just because Jesus death on the cross hadn't happened doesn't mean that he was speaking symbolically.

Also in Hebrews 9 it indicates that eternal redemption hadn't happened until Jesus entered the Holy of Holies in the heavenly tabernacle with his own blood. It could be argued that Jesus death on the cross didn't complete our eternal redemption. Just like in the OC the bull was sacrificed outside and it blood was brought into the Holy of Holies by the high priest to complete the Day of Atonement.
That is just mystic mumbo and jumbo and does not answer anything at all. It is just a cope out, according to that type of thinking Jesus is still hanging on the cross, suffering.
 
Back
Top