[Havoc]

Actually, he does know of what he speaks; but, he isn't going to debate the entire system in one thread just to avoid being tarred. I'm over it lol. When you guys learn to read scripture and understand that a cup of 'my blood' that is still wine isn't actually blood.. you might get somewhere. You also might understand that when he calls the cup the new covenant, either that cup is the new covenent, or the agreement between God and men is. You might also understand, by learning to read, that when Christ institutes a jewish meal of remembrance and says 'this do in remembrance of me' - it is a meal of remembrance using metaphors just as the jewish passover meal..

[dangus]

Like I said, you deny the scriptures.

[Fury]

Havoc writes:

When you guys learn to read scripture and understand that a cup of 'my blood' that is still wine isn't actually blood.. you might get somewhere

When we learn to read Scripture? Hmmm.... Let's just take John 6 for now as this addresses in many ways the flesh and blood in question.

John has two literal uses of "eat my flesh and drink my blood". The first is the Jew's crass literlism - Jesus intends to tear off his flesh and consume as such - cannibalism. The second is sanctified literalism - Jesus speaking about eating and drinking his sacramental flesh and blood. At this point in time, Jesus doesn't expect the disciples, including the Apostles to understand this teaching of the precise form his flesh and blood will take -he does expect them to accept it. The Apostles accept it (although they would not fully understand until they were filled with the Holy Spirit), indeed some disciples did not accept and turned away and no longer followed him - the only time in the NT this occurs.

[Campion]

When you guys learn to read scripture and understand that a cup of 'my blood' that is still wine isn't actually blood.. you might get somewhere.

Yeah, somewhere like ... hell.