What is the salvific effect of the Last Supper?

Have found anyone that disagrees with what was said?
Have you found anyone who thinks symbolic speech needs to be labeled?
The blood of the covenant cannot be symbolic and Jesus called the contents of the cup his blood of the covenant. The Eucharist instituted by Jesus is not symbolic, it is his body and blood.
 
The blood of the covenant cannot be symbolic and Jesus called the contents of the cup his blood of the covenant. The Eucharist instituted by Jesus is not symbolic, it is his body and blood.
I understand your dilemma, you’re forced to choose between what your church tells you is true, and what was actually accomplished on the cross. You chose your church over the cross.
 
I understand your dilemma, you’re forced to choose between what your church tells you is true, and what was actually accomplished on the cross. You chose your church over the cross.

I understand your dilemma, you're forced to choose between what your church tells you is true and what is actually accomplished on the cross and made present to us in the Eucharist.
 
I understand your dilemma, you're forced to choose between what your church tells you is true and what is actually accomplished on the cross and made present to us in the Eucharist.
Unlike your self that thinks it happened at the Last Supper and your personal intepretation is actually saying Jesus had His apostles sin thus making Him no longer spotless.
 
His blood shed on the cross.
Nope, no where does scripture say that Jesus blood shed on the cross is the blood of the covenant. What scripture does say is the blood of the covenant is the contents of the cup. So since the blood of the covenant cannot be symbolic and that Jesus blood shed on the cross is the blood of the covenant, then we have to conclude that the contents of the cup is the blood Jesus said on the cross.
 
Back
Top