Amazon.com Widgets

Do you think the Last Supper of Jesus should be taken literally?

  • If you're asking if it actually happened that way,

    Then most likely yes.
    1. Jesus is an historical figure. He more than likely did exist, whether you think he was the Messiah or not.
    2. If he did exist, then the events that took place would make sense. He knew he was going to die, whether by supernatural means, or he knew Judas well enough to know he would betray him (talk of killing Jesus had been going around for a long time, Judas was a thief, Judas went away from the disciples in the middle of the night to go to the Temple and talk to the religious leaders that wanted Jesus dead and weren't particularly fond of his disciples either...)

    If you're asking if Jesus really meant that the bread and wine actually turned into his body and blood, that's a theological idea that varies from denomination to denomination. One thing that remains constant is that Jesus meant that he forgives us of our sins when we accept him into our hearts, and that eating the bread and drinking the wine is a symbol of rembrance of that.
    (At least in the denominations that I'm familiar with. And I'm not at all familiar with the Muslim view of Jesus. If anyone knows anything about either of those, please clarify in a reply.)

  • No, it is impossible to take the Bible literally


    Nothing in the Bible should be taken literally. This amazing
    book is so full of incident and opinion that a reader can find anything in it
    he seeks. Jesus (if he existed) may have been encouraging his disciples to remember
    him and celebrate their fellowship when he spoke at the Last Supper. He may
    have been describing a mystery in which bread and wine become Christ’s
    body and blood, in a spiritual sense. He may have been communicating
    something beyond our comprehension. Let believers take it as they will, but
    please, not literally.


  • Otherwise, Christians are Cannibals

    The Last Supper of Jesus Christ shouldn't be taken literally. Otherwise, every Christian who partakes of the body and blood of Christ are cannibals! Like the parables of Jesus, the Last Supper was symbolic in every way. Jesus was trying to have camaraderie with his fellows, so he suggested breaking bread and sipping wine as a way to share in his passion.

  • It could be

    As far as I'm aware, the supernatural elements of the bible were kept at a fairly low level during the last supper, but its very doutable that the bible, a book written over a hundred years after the fact, actually included a perfect recollection of the events at the time.

  • No, I think the Last Supper should not be taken literally.

    Religions have great power now and they have had through the ages. There are a great many meaningful events that have taken place in the realm of religion. I do not think there are many, if any, of these events that should be taken literally. I understand that it's all about faith - but there is a wide difference between true faith and blind faith.

  • No I don't

    I do not think that the Last Supper painting of Jesus should be taken literally. First of all, there is no one who would all sit on the same side of the table to eat like that. They would sit on both sides of the table like normal people. It's not literal.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.