>>17941952
I know what the Bible says in Ephesians chapter 2.

"Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;" (Ephesians 2:19)

>>17823678
>If there's no insertion of an external tradition, is that how this would be interpreted?
NTA, but the answer is no: it's very clear that the bread and wine were meant to signify the upcoming crucifixion, where Jesus would be killed on the cross and His blood would literally be shed. In direct anticipation of that, He directs our focus to both His body (signified by the bread in the supper) and His blood (signified by the wine).

In Luke 22:19 He says to do these things in remembrance of Him, and that is the only command or imperative statement we take from this passage.

I would also note that Peter, over in the book of 1 Peter chapter 3, also called baptism a "figure" (Gr. ἀντίτυπον). Since it represents what saves us, which is the resurrection of Christ. In water baptism, a person is submerged in water and then brought back above the surface, signifying the burial and resurrection of Christ. Paul in Colossians 2:12 connects these actions directly together. Meanwhile the Lord's supper also signifies the death of Christ. It makes perfect sense.

So the answer then is simply no. You really would have to have some kind of manmade false tradition to say otherwise, at the end of the day.

>>17800415
Not following the Bible.

>>17772998
"For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died."
- Romans 7:9

Also, it's strange that you guys are going with this as your big objection to Christianity all of a sudden. Most people spread heresies about hell not existing, but I guess you guys at least admit it exists so that's a start. I definitely see like ten times more people spreading lies about hell than about this.

>>17764306
>The Spirit leads the Church into truth, not every individual reader into their personal infallible theology.
There are no personal theologies, that's the whole point. That is why I quoted 2 Peter 1:20 and you agreed. The Holy Spirit shall guide us into all truth, according to John 16:13. And in 1 John 2:27 it says, "But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him."

>Otherwise, you end up with 40,000 denominations, all claiming the Spirit.
To claim something is not equal to actually receiving it. The Holy Spirit is real, hence all those who are guided by Him – as God, the Person who inspired the Scriptures – arrive at the same truth. It all works because God is actually and literally real, anon.

>That’s the same Church that warned against spurious writings and defined the limits of Scripture in the 4th century.
You know that Scripture was already inspired long before the 500s AD, right? A group of people who could not tell the difference between apocrypha and inspired truth obviously makes no difference to this, as I mentioned before.
>The early Church had no KJV.
They had the original language manuscripts that it was based on.

Because they have consistently safeguarded Scripture, the church is rightfully called the pillar and ground of the truth, according to 1 Timothy 3:15. That's what they were entrusted with, according to Jude 1:3. It's called, "the faith which was once delivered unto the saints." And Christ confirms that the gates of hell will never prevail against His church (Matthew 16:18, Matthew 28:20).