What is the salvific effect of the Last Supper?

1Thess521

Well-known member
What is the salvific effect of the Last Supper?
I answered that question or rather Jesus answered it: "Drink from it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins."

The forgiveness of sins.

So how can the blood of the covenant be symbolic?

forgiveness of sin.
QUESTION---->When
was the penalty of sins paid for?

1 Corinthians 15:3
Christ died for our sins, according to Scriptures

1 Peter 3:18
Christ died for sins, once for all”

Hebrews 9:15
15 Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant

Isaiah 53:
because he poured out his life unto death,
and was numbered with the transgressors.
For he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors
 

dingoling.

Well-known member
forgiveness of sin.
QUESTION---->When
was the penalty of sins paid for?

1 Corinthians 15:3
Christ died for our sins, according to Scriptures

1 Peter 3:18
Christ died for sins, once for all”

Hebrews 9:15
15 Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant

Isaiah 53:
because he poured out his life unto death,
and was numbered with the transgressors.
For he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors
You didn't answer my question.

Jesus definitely called the contents of the cup his blood of the covenant.

So how can the blood of the covenant be symbolic?
 

1Thess521

Well-known member
You didn't answer my question.

Jesus definitely called the contents of the cup his blood of the covenant.

So how can the blood of the covenant be symbolic?
1) no one denies what Jesus said
2) your error is that you require symbolic language to be labeled as such,

So how can the blood of the covenant be symbolic?
Answer--->BECAUSE His blood was not poured out until the Cross (His death)

Your turn
The New Covenant
QUESTION--->
When did the new covenant go into effect? What is you answer?

Hebrews 9:
15 Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, (diathéké) so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant. 16 For where a will (diathéké) is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established.17For a will (diathéké) takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive."
---------
 

dingoling.

Well-known member
1) no one denies what Jesus said
2) your error is that you require symbolic language to be labeled as such,

So how can the blood of the covenant be symbolic?
Answer--->BECAUSE His blood was not poured out until the Cross (His death)

Your turn
The New Covenant
QUESTION--->
When did the new covenant go into effect? What is you answer?

Hebrews 9:
15 Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, (diathéké) so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant. 16 For where a will (diathéké) is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established.17For a will (diathéké) takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive."
---------

Answer--->BECAUSE His blood was not poured out until the Cross (His death)

That is not really addressing the issue. Jesus was very clear and scripture is very clear on the matter. The contents of the cup that the disciples drank is the blood of the covenant. The blood of the covenant cannot be symbolic.
 

1Thess521

Well-known member
That is not really addressing the issue. Jesus was very clear and scripture is very clear on the matter. The contents of the cup that the disciples drank is the blood of the covenant. The blood of the covenant cannot be symbolic.
it does address the issues that you are avoiding:

ALL of the effects regarding salvation that YOU attribute to the Last Supper actually happened on the Cross.
The Cross is the answer to your questions.
Look at what happened on the Cross and why the death of Christ was required; then the symbolism of the Last Supper will be obvious.

Nothing salvific happened at the Last Supper
it took place on the Cross with the literal death of Christ.

If the Last Supper never happened: there would be ZERO effect on plan of salvation;
but without he Cross there would be no New Covenant, no propitiation, and no fogginess of sins
 
Last edited:

dingoling.

Well-known member
it does address the issues that you are avoiding:

ALL of the effects regarding salvation that YOU attribute to the Last Supper actually happened on the Cross.
The Cross is the answer to your questions.
Look at what happened on the Cross and why the death of Christ was required; then the symbolism of the Last Supper will be obvious.

Nothing salvific happened at the Last Supper
it took place on the Cross with the literal death of Christ.

If the Last Supper never happened: there would be ZERO effect on plan of salvation

You keep steering us down your own line of reasoning but the words of Jesus, that I don't think you have adequately addressed, is that contents of the cup is his blood of the covenant.

A different approach would be to ask ourselves what does scripture say is the blood of the covenant (NC)?

The only thing that scripture refers to as the blood of the covenant is the contents of the cup that the disciples drank. Are you saying that contents of the cup is not Jesus blood of the covenant?
 

1Thess521

Well-known member
You keep steering us down your own line of reasoning but the words of Jesus, that I don't think you have adequately addressed, is that contents of the cup is his blood of the covenant.

A different approach would be to ask ourselves what does scripture say is the blood of the covenant (NC)?
once again Very often (most of time?) Jesus was using figures of speech in His discourses
So it is more important what Jesus meant rather than what He said
The only thing that scripture refers to as the blood of the covenant is the contents of the cup that the disciples drank. Are you saying that contents of the cup is not Jesus blood of the covenant?
I am saying that the contents of the cup is not the literal Jesus blood of the covenant.
I am saying that contents of the cup is represents Jesus blood of the covenant.

i answered your questions
Your turn
The New Covenant
QUESTION--->
When did the new covenant go into effect? What is you answer?

Hebrews 9:
15 Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, (diathéké) so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant. 16 For where a will (diathéké) is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established.17For a will (diathéké) takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive."
---------
 

dingoling.

Well-known member
once again Very often (most of time?) Jesus was using figures of speech in His discourses
So it is more important what Jesus meant rather than what He said

I am saying that the contents of the cup is not the literal Jesus blood of the covenant.
I am saying that contents of the cup is represents Jesus blood of the covenant.

i answered your questions
Your turn
The New Covenant
QUESTION--->
When did the new covenant go into effect? What is you answer?

Hebrews 9:
15 Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, (diathéké) so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant. 16 For where a will (diathéké) is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established.17For a will (diathéké) takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive."
---------

I am not really going down this path of numerous questions. You said that the contents of the cup represents Jesus blood of the covenant and you have your own reasoning as to why you think that. There are very good reasons why I don't accept your view that the contents of the cup represents his blood of the covenant. I can explain a few reasons why the contents of the cup is exactly what Jesus said it was.

One reason, this is besides the actual words of Jesus, is the found in the Tabernacle.
 

balshan

Well-known member
You didn't answer my question.

Jesus definitely called the contents of the cup his blood of the covenant.

So how can the blood of the covenant be symbolic?
You are diverting off the op. This is another thread. We already know that if we follow your logic about the cup, then Peter is Satan.
 

1Thess521

Well-known member
I am not really going down this path of numerous questions. You said that the contents of the cup represents Jesus blood of the covenant and you have your own reasoning as to why you think that. There are very good reasons why I don't accept your view that the contents of the cup represents his blood of the covenant. I can explain a few reasons why the contents of the cup is exactly what Jesus said it was.

One reason, this is besides the actual words of Jesus, is the found in the Tabernacle.
so you have no intention of reasoning through Scripture
you have ZERO answers for any passages that contradicts your views.

ding: "it rained all night long"
thess: " why are there no puddles, why is the morning grass dry?"
ding; "I am not really going down this path of numerous questions. " "it rained all night long"
 

balshan

Well-known member
I am not really going down this path of numerous questions. You said that the contents of the cup represents Jesus blood of the covenant and you have your own reasoning as to why you think that. There are very good reasons why I don't accept your view that the contents of the cup represents his blood of the covenant. I can explain a few reasons why the contents of the cup is exactly what Jesus said it was.

One reason, this is besides the actual words of Jesus, is the found in the Tabernacle.
Dialogue is questions and answers and statements. You have shown that you prefer to divert rather than answer questions. Best ever from you is when you make out someone hasn't answered a question of yours.

But the op was simple:

What is the salvific effect of the Last Supper?

It is clearly one simple question. Not numerous questions, please answer the simple clear question.
 

1Thess521

Well-known member
I am not really going down this path of numerous questions. You said that the contents of the cup represents Jesus blood of the covenant and you have your own reasoning as to why you think that. There are very good reasons why I don't accept your view that the contents of the cup represents his blood of the covenant. I can explain a few reasons why the contents of the cup is exactly what Jesus said it was.

One reason, this is besides the actual words of Jesus, is the found in the Tabernacle.
We all agree on what was said:
the question is; what was meant?
I provided multiple examples (aka evidence) on what did NOT happen at the Last Supper.
It seems too much evidence is overwhelming to you.
To you want to try one at a time?
take a pick:
New Covenant, propitiation or the forgiveness of sin?

did it happened at the Last Supper or with the death of Christ?
 

dingoling.

Well-known member
so you have no intention of reasoning through Scripture
you have ZERO answers for any passages that contradicts your views.

ding: "it rained all night long"
thess: " why are there no puddles, why is the morning grass dry?"
ding; "I am not really going down this path of numerous questions. " "it rained all night long"
I have already reasoned through scripture. I am not accepting your personal interpretation of scripture. I believe what Jesus said and that the contents of the cup is his blood of the covenant.
 

1Thess521

Well-known member
I have already reasoned through scripture. I am not accepting your personal interpretation of scripture. I believe what Jesus said and that the contents of the cup is his blood of the covenant.


telling us what a verse says it not reasoning through Scripture
WE ALL AGREE on what the verse says

show us where you addressed the verses I provided;

re: New Covenant, propitiation or the forgiveness of sin.
did it happened at the Last Supper or with the death of Christ on the Cross?
 

dingoling.

Well-known member
We all agree on what was said:
the question is; what was meant?
I provided multiple examples (aka evidence) on what did NOT happen at the Last Supper.
It seems too much evidence is overwhelming to you.
To you want to try one at a time?
take a pick:
New Covenant, propitiation or the forgiveness of sin?

did it happened at the Last Supper or with the death of Christ?

Since, according to the nCCs, there is no official interpreter of scripture, so I will just accept the words of Jesus.
 

balshan

Well-known member
I have already reasoned through scripture. I am not accepting your personal interpretation of scripture. I believe what Jesus said and that the contents of the cup is his blood of the covenant.
No you have not reasoned through scripture. Your way has Peter Satan. But then your misunderstanding could explain why your institution follows the father of lies and the Roman emperors.
 

dingoling.

Well-known member
telling us what a verse says it not reasoning through Scripture
WE ALL AGREE on what the verse says

show us where you addressed the verses I provided;

re: New Covenant, propitiation or the forgiveness of sin.
did it happened at the Last Supper or with the death of Christ on the Cross?
I have already read your reasoning on the issue. I am not agreeing with your conclusion.

Have you ever read the reasoning of the CC as to why we the that it is not symbolic? I have.
 

balshan

Well-known member
Since, according to the nCCs, there is no official interpreter of scripture, so I will just accept the words of Jesus.
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. Your acceptance has Jesus leading the apostles to sin, which would mean Jesus is no longer spotless. This is the problem you never address.
 
Top