The Holy Grail

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hisalone
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I dont understand the point you make that I ignore other gospels.
Click to expand...
I do.

It is only Luke 22:20 that says “the cup of my blood.” Mark 14:23 and Matthew 26:27 both say “this is my blood.”

Your argument that we take “this is my body” literally and “the cup of my blood” figuratively falls apart when you look at the other two Gospels.

Mark and Matthew’s Gospels also back up Adrift’s reasoning about the use of “cup.” So does Lk 22:17:
And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he said, "Take this, and divide it among yourselves… (RSV)
Click to expand...
is Jesus telling the Apostles to saw the cup into 12 bits and each take a piece? I don’t think so. If we rule that out, then it follows that he’s telling them to share the *contents *of the cup.

Just another reason why proof-texting doesn’t work.

God bless you,

Ruthie
 
elvisman said:
Some of us are waiting for responses from you.
I’m still waiting for a response to my Post #40. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I did not answer #40 because you misunderstood my OP.
I do not believe either is literal. I believe both vss19&20 to be allegory.
It is those that believe one literal and one allegory to start explaining.
 
Hisalone said:
Thwhats going on here. The churches in Revelation are BOTH literal and symbolic.
Is Luke 22 literal or symbolic. Be consistant and be intellectually honest.
Click to expand...
The third cup is the Cup of Redemption or sometimes called called the “cup of blessing” because in the Passover Meal it represents the blood of the Paschal lamb.

Jesus fufills the Passover completely and totally … the Lamb is going to be sacrificed … except this time it is not an unblemished lamb but the unblemished Son of God … the one who John called the “Lamb of God”. It is quite literally the cup of His blood, the sacrifice made for all. It is truly the cup of redemption … we are finally and truly freed from death.

After Calvary the Cup does contain the blood of the Lamb … it is a sacrifice ever present before God and ever represented in His Church in the Eucharist.

I contend it is both symbolic and literal at the same time … who could ask for more.
 
Hisalone said:
I did not answer #40 because you misunderstood my OP.
I do not believe either is literal. I believe both vss19&20 to be allegory.
It is those that believe one literal and one allegory to start explaining.
Click to expand...
Who believes this? No one I know. It is not Catholic teaching. You have set up a straw man. Catholics do not believe one is literal and one is allegory. You have been shown repeatedly that this is false yet you continue to say it. You don’t respond to anything that is said refuting your misstatements.
Ruthie
Quote:
I dont understand the point you make that I ignore other gospels.
I do.
Click to expand...
It is only Luke 22:20 that says “the cup of my blood.” Mark 14:23 and Matthew 26:27 both say “this is my blood.”
Click to expand...
Your argument that we take “this is my body” literally and “the cup of my blood” figuratively falls apart when you look at the other two Gospels.
Click to expand...
Mark and Matthew’s Gospels also back up Adrift’s reasoning about the use of “cup.” So does Lk 22:17:
Click to expand...
Quote:
And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he said, "Take this, and divide it among yourselves… (RSV)
Click to expand...
is Jesus telling the Apostles to saw the cup into 12 bits and each take a piece? I don’t think so. If we rule that out, then it follows that he’s telling them to share the contents of the cup.
Click to expand...
Just another reason why proof-texting doesn’t work.
Click to expand...
God bless you,
Click to expand...
Ruthie
Click to expand...
👍
 
Hisalone said:
I did not answer #40 because you misunderstood my OP.
I do not believe either is literal. I believe both vss19&20 to be allegory.
It is those that believe one literal and one allegory to start explaining.
Click to expand...
Boy - talk about a baiting thread!
This is without a doubt the most ridiculous one of those I’ve seen because it appears to have been written by somebody who knows nothing about biblical context. Not to mention a complete lack of knowledge about the most basic of human finctions such as eating and drinking.

In verse 19, he is speaking to or about the bread.
In verse 20, he is speaking to the contents of the cup.

Matt. 26:27-28 **
Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant****, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins. **

Luke 22:19-20
**Then he took the bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which will be given for you; do this in memory of me.” **
**And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which will be shed for you. **

Mark 14:22-24
**While they were eating, he took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them, and said, “Take it; this is my body.” **
**Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, and they all drank from it. **
**He said to them, "This is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed for many. **

1 Cor. 11:23-29
**For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was handed over, took bread, and, after he had given thanks, broke it and said, “This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” **
**In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” **
**For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes. **
**Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. **
**A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. **
**For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself. **

Q: Do you drink a cup or FROM a cup?
A: FROM a cup.

CASE CLOSED.
NNNNNNEXT!
 
I hate to try and boil this down to the simplest terms, but the cup itself cannot be the new covenant.

As wound up as Hisalone gets about the idea of “idolatry”, Let’s look at it this way:

If we did have the cup, we would then be worshiping the cup, and not our Lord,

We don’t have the tablets from the 10 commandments, but we still follow them, right?

I have to agree with the other posters, the cup itself cannot be the covenant. A cup itself is an object that serves no purpose unless it contains something. i.e the precious blood of our Lord.
 
twopekinguys said:
I hate to try and boil this down to the simplest terms, but the cup itself cannot be the new covenant.

As wound up as Hisalone gets about the idea of “idolatry”, Let’s look at it this way:

If we did have the cup, we would then be worshiping the cup, and not our Lord,

We don’t have the tablets from the 10 commandments, but we still follow them, right?

I have to agree with the other posters, the cup itself cannot be the covenant. A cup itself is an object that serves no purpose unless it contains something. i.e the precious blood of our Lord.
Click to expand...
Personally, if I had the “cup” in my hands, knowing Jesus christ once sipped from it, I would be adoring that cup. Who wouldn’t?
 
Tradition has it that St. Peter took the cup to Rome. When the persecutions started in earnest he entrusted it his deacon (St. Lawrence) and from there it found it’s way to Valencia, Spain, where it remains to this day.

It seems, John Paul II thought it was the real thing.
youtube.com/watch?v=v0o0ZCjut-M&feature=channel_page
 
Correction, it was Pope Sixtus II that entrusted the cup to St. Lawrence.
 
No, I saw it in a bookstore a year ago, but didn’t buy it at the time.
I should have, all the reviews I’ve read are positive. The provenance of the artifact and the archaeological dating narrows it down to the first century AD.

Funny how some of the supposed Grail experts claim it can’t be the real thing because it doesn’t have any magical properties. In fact, at one point the cup was dropped and it broke.

Like all relics, including those from the Passion, they are held in reverence because of their association, not because of any expected magical powers.
 
redhen said:
Tradition has it that St. Peter took the cup to Rome. When the persecutions started in earnest he entrusted it his deacon (St. Lawrence) and from there it found it’s way to Valencia, Spain, where it remains to this day.

It seems, John Paul II thought it was the real thing.
youtube.com/watch?v=v0o0ZCjut-M&feature=channel_page
Click to expand...
This is not correct. The Holy Grail is at the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art as of this day. Like I said in my earlier post, the cup was entrusted to the Kouchakji family where they acquired the cup in 1910 where he placed it in the Louvre 20 years later and showed it again in Chicago in 1933. After visits to other museums in the U.S., the Kouchakji family relinquished responsibility for its safety in New York.
 
OneTrueCathApos said:
Personally, if I had the “cup” in my hands, knowing Jesus christ once sipped from it, I would be adoring that cup. Who wouldn’t?
Click to expand...
True. Interesting that St Helena found the True Cross (along with two others) by the miracle of healing it performed which the others failed to do. Have any similar miracles been claimed for the cup in Valencia?
 
LilyM said:
Furthermore, you’d want it somewhere in the open so that EVERYONE could be adoring (venerating) that cup, no?

The fact that no-one claimed to have it, or put it on display anywhere for veneration, speaks against it having been preserved.
Click to expand...
I said it is at the Metro Museum of Art as of today…🤷
 
OneTrueCathApos said:
I said it is at the Metro Museum of Art as of today…🤷
Click to expand...
Uggh, you were too quick. I withdrew that post.

And somehow I think Christ’s REAL cup would end up somewhere a bit worthier of a sacred relic than the MOMA. A church maybe? Like the one in Valencia?
 
LilyM said:
Uggh, you were too quick. I withdrew that post.

And somehow I think Christ’s REAL cup would end up somewhere a bit worthier of a sacred relic than the MOMA. A church maybe? Like the one in Valencia?
Click to expand...
Yes, I would think so also. My source is from the book titled “Relics” by Joan Carroll Cruz. It has the Nihil Obstat and the Imprimatur from Archbishop Phillip Hannon, which as you know means this book is free of doctrinal or moral error.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top