No, it is not a typo.

Yours truly meant what is written, which is: literals (not "liberals").

Words are constantly being invented, but the meaning should be made clear surrounded by synonymns and other logically-related context, so as to neither confuse nor anger those who read such innovations. And in the vain and demonic attempt to legitimatize what is and always will be illegitimate, words for evolution, mild likeability, tasty sweets, divinely extravagant, abortion-homicide, homosexual perversion, and porn are constantly being corrupted into such weaselword satanspeak as science, awesome, decadent, prodigal, choice, gay, and art.

In contrast to mere dual-natured animals which (and not "who") bark, chirp, growl, tweet (and so on) having only bodies and spirits, trinitarian-natured humans (as with who-knows-what-natured angels and their trinitarian-in-Christ Creator) communicate to all the above with words comprised of letters (many times within sentences, paragraphs, etc.) in whatever human languages.

From babyhood, toddlerhood, and childhood, human offspring learn and begin to associate objects and actions with human-spoken words in whatever languages. Useful to those growing humans are dictionaries which frequently assist the young ones with quick-access, compacted, and concise resource for doing such words-with-objects-and-actions associations.

Those young people who successfully live on and continue to exist as viable humans sooner or later perceive that words are almost always to be taken literally with relation to the objects and actions such words are related to. That is the case with regard to highway signs, military commands of both tactical and strategic operations, scientific dissertation and experimentation, police and sheriff and court orders, advertised products and services, plus much more.

One must be careful, many times, to use enough descriptive words to properly qualify the intentions and situation at hand. For instance, for a company to require their employees to not disclose insider information to anyone or post a NO TRESPASSING sign to the general public, could cause criminal liability on grounds of conspiracy to obstruct justice, if an additional exception of restricted access is not specified concerning the excluded (and perhaps non-named) individual (or maybe non-specified group) for at least temporary disclosure or occupation on the premises by order of the FBI or other duly-authorized law-enforcement agents of the United States government for emergency purposes, or understandable temporary use of the restroom lavatory.

Even in philosophy and religion, words become meaningless and even potentially absurd unless usually taken literally.

It is obvious to the honest reader and evaluator that those who take what is clearly meant to be understood literally instead misrepresented as symbolic or an allegory, metaphor, simile, etc. have wicked motives and cravings to be wayward, errant, deviously disobedient, and wickedly irresponsible.

When it comes to reading, comprehending, and declaring words of the Holy Bible and various parts of the entirety of its contents, there have been and continue to be many deceptive and evil-minded heretics who purport alternative meanings and interpretations consisting of what is against pure logic and common sense. It almost goes without saying that there are more than a million ways to say things wrong - but only one way to say things exactly right.

To give some examples, the word day in Genesis chapter one is not only not to be understood as two days, a month, year, whatever....and when delving into the Hebrew behind the English word day, one discovers the Hebrew word for "day" which is: yom (pronounced: yohm), and which, when preceded by an ordinal number (1,2,3,4 etc.) in the immedicate context of "....and there was evening and there was morning...." there is absolutely no other alternative but to reckon that being a period of 24 hours (with or without light created on Day One or sunlight/moonlight/starlight created on Day Four) -- not "ages" or "millennia" nor the mythical-evolutionist's pseudo-"scientific" and imaginary "millions or billions" of years.

Similarly, when one thousand years is used in Scripture, one must be careful to note whether or not the word as is used as a qualifier, and if as is NOT used, the number of years stated by the author is exactly the number of years the author intended (and NOT any other specific number of years):

Psalm 90:4 For a thousand years in thy sight are but AS yesterday when it is past, or as a watch in the night.

Ecclesiastes 6:6 Even though he should live a thousand years twice told, yet enjoy no good--do not all go to the one place?

Second Peter 3:8 But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is AS a thousand years, and a thousand years AS one day.

Sometimes, however, pure common sense and non-avoidable logic require that the precise number "1000" must be taken literally and in no other way:

Revelation 20:2 And he seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years,
3 and threw him into the pit, and shut it and sealed it over him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years were ended. After that he must be loosed for a little while.
4 Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom judgment was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony to Jesus and for the word of God, and who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life, and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy is he who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and they shall reign with him a thousand years.
7 And when the thousand years are ended, Satan will be loosed from his prison....

It goes beyond rationality to presume (and not assume) that the "thousand years" mentioned REPEATEDLY in all the verses above would mean anything other than exactly and precisely one thousand years.

When a highway sign states a certain number for miles-per-hour speed limit, it means exactly the number stated. Against those who would foolishly presume that that number is symbolic, or allegorical, or a metaphor, or a simile, and therefore does not mean exactly what it supposed to be taken as meaning, the flashing blue-and-red strobe lights in the presumtive's rear-view mirror and financial-fine followup irrefutably enforce proper interpretation of that exact meaning.

Many other aspects of human thought and behavior in many different areas of life are just like that, whether the field of endeavor is scientific, military, industrial, commercial, or even (and especially) morality and decency and religion. In all such cases, specific words and their exact LITERAL meaning override and abrogate any devious and irresponsible excursions into diversionary and irrelevant context or interpretation or revisionism involving wrong-headed and inappropriate excuses of substitutionary symbols, allegories, metaphors, or similes.

Numbers 12:8 With him I speak mouth to mouth, clearly, and not in dark speech; and he sees the form of the LORD. Why then were you not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?
Luke 12:56 You hypocrites! You can discern the face of the sky and of the earth, but how is it that you do not discern this time?
John 16:29 His disciples said, "Ah, now you are speaking plainly, not in any figure!
First Corinthians 2:13 These things also we speak, not in the words which human wisdom teachs, but which the Holy Spirit teachs, comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
Second Corinthians 1:13 For we write you nothing but what you can read and understand; I hope you will understand fully,
Hebrews 11:19 He considered that God was able to raise men even from the dead; hence, figuratively speaking, he did receive him back.
Second Peter 3:16 speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures.

So primarily, THE PRECISE words (if necessary with reference to the inerrant ben-Asher Hebrew Masoretic Old-Testament Text and the Scrivener-Trinitarian Greek New-Testament Text) and only secondarily any assumed varieties of context, interpretations, and applications, are generally to be taken LITERALLY - unless reasonably specified or inferred to be taken as symbols, allegories, metaphors, or similes.

That gets us to the subject of eucharist, now dealt with because although it is of rather insignificant importance as a vital evangelical social issue and necessity of moral Christian living, thought, and action.....the lamentable over-emphasis on it in liturgy and practice among the near-"christian"-cultic borderlines on being depicably deplorable, to say the least.

As a preparatory overview concerning (and not regarding) the problem, consider carefully the following sometimes-literal/sometimes-figurative-wording backround - and can you, the reader, distinguish what should obviously be taken literally in contrast to what clearly should be taken figuratively?

First Corinthians 10:1 I want you to know, brethren (literal), that our fathers (literal) were all under the cloud (literal), and all passed through the sea (literal),
2 and all were baptized (figurative) into Moses in the cloud and in the sea,
3 and all ate the same supernatural food
4 and all drank the same supernatural drink. For they drank from the supernatural Rock (figurative) which followed them, and the Rock was Christ.

Now Saint Paul gets off the previously-mentioned allusion to eucharist, and gets down to things far more crucial:

First Corinthians 10:6 Now these things are warnings for us, not to desire evil as they did.
7 Do not be idolaters as some of them were; as it is written, "The people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to dance (probably not like David, but instead for touch-touchy heterosexual and/or homosexual immorality among those startng to commit - and not "perform" - lurid 'let-their-hair-down' and "kick-their-shoes-off" orgies, then following through to lewd climax)."
8 We must not indulge in immorality as some of them did, and twenty-three thousand fell in a single day.
9 We must not put the Lord to the test, as some of them did and were destroyed by serpents;
10 nor grumble, as some of them did and were destroyed by the Destroyer.
11 Now these things happened to them as a warning, but they were written down for our instruction, upon whom the end of the ages has come.
13 No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your strength, but with the temptation will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it.
14 Therefore, my beloved, shun the worship of idols.

Then Paul goes back to sometimes-literal/sometimes figurative allusion to eucharist again:

First Corinthians 10:16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood (figurative) of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body (figurative) of Christ?
First Corinthians 10:17 Because there is one bread (figurative), we who are many are one body (figurative), for we all partake of the one bread.
First Corinthians 10:18 Consider the people of Israel (literal); are not those who eat the sacrifices partners in the altar?
First Corinthians 10:19 What do I imply then? That food offered to idols is anything (figurative), or that an idol is anything (figurative)?
First Corinthians 10:20 No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be partners with demons.
First Corinthians 10:21 You cannot drink the cup of the Lord ("drink a cup" being figurative as to drinking solid and not liquid alabaster or earthen cups themselves) and the cup of demons (figurative as to drinking alabaster or earthen cups themselves). You cannot partake of the table (figurative) of the Lord and the table (figurative) of demons.

Let's analyze some other sometimes-figurative/sometimes-literal passages:

John 6:56 He who [cannibalistically?] eats My flesh and drinks My blood (and chalk one up for Dracula?) abides in Me, and I in him.
Leviticus 17:14 "For the life of every creature is the blood of it; therefore I have said to the people of Israel, You shall not eat the blood of any creature, for the life of every creature is its blood; whoever eats it shall be cut off.
Deuteronomy 12:16 Only you shall not eat the blood; you shall pour it out upon the earth like water.
Deuteronomy 12:23 Only be sure that you do not eat the blood; for the blood is the life, and you shall not eat the life with the flesh.
Acts 15:20 but should write to them to abstain from the pollutions of [porn and other] idols and from unchastity and from what is strangled [applicable for stockyard personnel] and from [raw not-welldone meat, and even drinking Christ's human] blood.
Acts 15:29 that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from unchastity [said in skewed order here, but it'll work]. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell."
Acts 21:25 But as for the Gentiles who have believed, we have sent a letter with our judgment that they should abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from [drinking Christ's human] blood and from what is strangled and from unchastity [skewed order again, so I guess its the preferable sequence to proclaim]."
John 6:55 For My flesh is food indeed, and My blood is drink indeed [and God bless all vampires?].
John 6:57 As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me will live because of me.
John 6:58 This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread [better than 5 loaves and 2 fish for 4000 to 5000 men?] will live for ever."
John 6:59 This He said in the synagogue, as He taught at Capernaum.
John 6:60 Many of His [Roman-Health-Department?] disciples [who neither wanted to bite into and chow on human flesh nor drink DNA-chromosomed human blood?], when they heard it, said, "This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?"
John 6:61 But Jesus, knowing in Himself that His [Roman-Health-Department?] disciples [who neither wanted to bite into and chow on human flesh nor drink DNA-chromosomed human blood?], murmured at it, said to them, "Do you take offense at this [Guess? Yuck! Is it not obvious? Ish!]?
John 6:62 Then what if you were to see the Son of man ascending where He was before [whatever that has to do with flesh and [yucky and ishy] blood ingestation]?
63 It is the spirit that ["that" and not "who"?] gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you [about purported eucharistic cannibalism mandatory for salvation] are spirit [thank God that is ALL they are!] and life.
64 But there are some of you that do not believe." For Jesus knew from the first who those were that did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him.
65 And he said, "This is why I told you that no one can come to Me unless it is granted him by the Father."
66 After this many of His [Roman-Health-Department?] disciples [who neither wanted to bite into and chow on human flesh nor drink DNA-chromosomed human blood?] drew back and [understandably?] no longer went about with Him.
67 Jesus said to the twelve, "Do you also wish to go away?"
68 Simon Peter answered Him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words [and thankfully ONLY words!] of eternal life;

One must be careful to not read into nor make mere words which obviously are simply symbolicly representative figures of speech, to instead mean something ridiculously literal:

First Corinthians 11:27 (RSV) Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord.
First Corinthians 11:27 (KJ21) Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread and drink this cup of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty against the body and blood of the Lord.

Eating literal bread (whether doing so "worthily" or "unworthily") is one thing, but it is obvious that it would be impossible to literally drink a solid alabaster or earthen cup -- however easy it would be (in stark contrast) to drink liquid within that solid alabaster or earthen cup.

Our current and modern tradition of ingesting eucharistic elements (of bread and wine) nowadays is not directly commanded by Christ Himself in Scripture as a moral-vs-immoral imperative for us to do as a mandatory sacrament (and consider the saved but non-sacramented? dying thief on a cross!), nor to stave off starvation during Lent by nibbling on and sipping unction-words-blessed holy appetizers.....in contrast to the direct command Christ did give to His twelve disciples during what has become known as The Last Passover or The Last Supper (your choice).

The purposes for which communion or eucharist is now contemporarily done, in accord with First Corinthians 11:20-34, is to worthily (whatever that involves) "proclaim the Lord's death until He comes" (verse 26), being that:

First Corinthians 10:16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation (or communion) in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation (or communion) in the body of Christ?

Notice that the eat-bread/drink-cup sacred Words of Institution found in First Corinthians chapter 11 neither state: "eat the human flesh" of Christ, and especially do not state: "drink the human blood of Christ." In fact, the semantics actually written merely declare:

Matthew 26:29 I tell you I shall not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom."
Mark 14:25 Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God."
Luke 22:18 for I tell you that from now on I shall not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes."

"Fruit of the vine" - in reality - is in NO way blood of man nor beast!

So how Christ equated an (not necessarily "the") alabaster or earthen cup itself (not even referring to liquid contents therein) with being: "the new covenant (or testament) in My blood" (Luke 22:20 and First Corinthians 11:25) is a perplexing mystery. Note, nevertheless, that neither "the [porcelin or earthen?] cup of blessing which we bless" NOR even "the fruit of the vine" (whatever that means, whether or not potentially or presently intoxicating) is in ANY way equivalent with actual human blood!

Apparently Christ contradicts Himself in specific semantics, in that He equated the cup itself as "the new covenant," but then takes the cup AND the already-identified "fruit of the vine" (obviously not human blood) liquid therein as a combination, and terms THAT as follows:

Matthew 26:28 for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
Mark 14:24 And He said to them, "This is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many.

Notice that He speaks of the combo of cup and liquid therein as His "blood of the covenant" -- and He had not even shed His blood on a cross yet!

Strange. It reminds me of Him declaring sins purged (while not crucifed yet!) by simply preaching words to people:

John 15:3 You are already made clean by the word which I have spoken to you. [If 'already made clean' by Him merely uttering a few words, why later on did He die on some cross?]

Even medical attendants lowering a cripple down through the ceiling purged sins, according to the [premature-forgiveness-authorizing?] Lord [who had not been crucified yet!]:

Matthew 9:2 And hey, they brought to Him a paralytic, lying on his bed; and when Jesus saw their faith He said to the paralytic, "Take heart, my son; your sins are forgiven."
Matthew 9:5 For which is easier, to say, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Rise and walk'?
Mark 2:5 And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "My son, your sins are forgiven."
Mark 2:9 Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Rise, take up your pallet and walk'?
Luke 5:20 And when He saw their faith he said, "Man, your sins are forgiven you."
Luke 5:23 Which is easier, to say, 'Your sins are forgiven you,' or to say, 'Rise and walk'?

Luke 7:44 Then turning toward the woman He said to Simon, "Do you see this woman? I entered your house, you gave Me no water for my feet, but she has wet my feet with her tears and wiped them with her [previously shawl-covered but temporarily-mopheaded?-on-the-floor?] hair.
45 You gave me no kiss, but from the time I came in she has not ceased to kiss my feet (and notice it is not recorded that He [erotically or otherwise] kissed her [bare?] feet back).
46 You did not anoint my head with oil, but she has anointed my feet with ointment.
47 Therefore I tell you, her sins, which are many, are forgiven, for she loved much; but he who is forgiven little, loves little."
48 And He said to her, "Your sins are forgiven." [Apparently without her even saying one word of penitence! And Christ had at that time not even died on a cross yet!]

Incidently, NO where in either the KJ21 nor the RSV New Testament have I found the word "wine" associated with any eucharist or communion passage! One cannot presume by illegitimate inference that because Jesus made real wine at Cana and that Paul suggested to Timothy in First Timothy 5:23 that he drink a little real wine for medicinal purposes, that therefore that "fruit of the vine" mentioned in the Bible passages listed above was then of necessity real wine.

The non-specified-repetition-period ritual of eucharist or communion (which I guess the minimum common-sense period would be at least once annually, as during Holy Week) is conveniently done at times by intinction (that is, dipping the wafer into the cup of wine before ingesting it). More than a mere remembrance or celebration, the whole process involves impanation (the presence of Christ coming within the elements while the elements remain physically non-changed), rather than eerily-mystifying human-body/human-blood consubstantiation nor even temporarily-transformed human-body/human-blood transubstantiation.....let alone transmutation (as when Christ changed actual water into actual wine at Cana, similar to changing mass into energy or energy into mass according to Einstein's famous E=mc-squared mathematical formula).

As long as I am figuratively "roasting" center-of-attraction Jesus Christ, an additional literal/figurative? description of Him is given as an additional gourmet menu item (and I want mine well-done and NOT bloody raw, plus please pass the salt and pepper):

First Corinthians 5:7 Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our paschal lamb, has been sacrificed.

Well, from one Christian lump to another, keep in mind that there are special conditions for us to dine in or out pertaining to us non-vegetarian animal-rights activists feasting on our Holy Mutton, with or without the obsolete? jewish tradition of seder on Maunday Thursday:

Exodus 12:8 They shall eat the flesh that night, roasted; with unleavened bread and bitter herbs they shall eat it.

Christ the Sacred Lambchop, with veggies. The "Bread" of Life. The "Lamb" of God. How tasty! Yum!

Or is it instead: "Yuck! How cannabalistic nauseating!?" It almost makes one want to run for refuge to the verse:

Matthew 6:16 And when you fast [yes!], do not look dismal, like the hypocrites, for they disfigure their faces that their fasting may be seen by men. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward.

Rather than disfigure faces with tattoos of ashen crosses smeared on the forehead for Ash Wednesday, acceptable it is to rather wear gunnysack underwear and sit in a heap of ashes somewhere:

Leviticus 19:28 You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh on account of the dead or tattoo any marks upon you: I am the LORD.

Jonah 3:7 And he made proclamation and published through Nineveh, "By the decree of the king and his nobles: Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste anything; let them not feed, or drink water,
Jonah 3:8 but let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and let them cry mightily to God; yea, let every one turn from his evil way and from the violence which is in his hands.
Jonah 3:9 Who knows, God may yet relent and turn from His fierce anger, so that we perish not?"
Jonah 3:10 When God saw what they did, how they turned from their evil way, God relented of the evil which He had said He would do to them; and He did not do it.

What, many times, makes human acts of sacramental ritualism almost obnoxious if not outright blasphemous is:

(1) presuming that blessing eucharistic elements and then ingesting them functions as some sort of self-atonement by [supposedly] "sacrificing Christ back to Himself" which purportedly self-absolves one of his own sins by himself, and/or
(2) presuming that doing any sacrament (e.g. baptism, communion, etc.) is a self-atoning substitute for doing the non-adiaphora morality in every other area of life God considers FAR more important.

Amos 5:22 Even though you offer me your [bread-and-juice jewish-seder] offerings and cereal offerings, I will not accept them, and the peace offerings of your church luncheons I will not look upon.
23 Take away from Me the [pablem-lyrics] noise of your [overly-repetitive simplistic-chord-progression praise] songs; to the melody of your [guitars and more] I will not listen.
24 But let [NON-"civil-racist-rites"/NON-"equal-feminist-rites"/NON-"homohuman-rites"] justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream.
25 "Did you bring to Me [eucharistic] sacrifices and offerings the forty years in the wilderness, O house of Israel?
26 You shall take up Sakkuth your king, and Kaiwan your star-god, your images, which you made for yourselves;
27 therefore I will take you into exile beyond Damascus," says the LORD, whose name is the God of hosts.

Hebrews 10:5 Consequently, when Christ came into the world, He said, "[Eucharistic] sacrifices and offerings You have not desired, but a body have You prepared for Me.

More is-it-literal? or is-it-figurative? clarification is needed:

Matthew 16:6 Jesus said to them, "Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees."
Matthew 16:11 How is it that you fail to perceive that I did not speak about bread? Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees."
Matthew 16:12 Then they understood that He did not tell them to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees.
Luke 12:1 In the meantime, when so many thousands of the assembly had gathered together that they trod upon one another, He began to say to His disciples first, "Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.
First Corinthians 5:8 Let us, therefore, celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

So then:

First Corinthians 2:13 And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit.

Sometimes, the line between what should be taken verbatim and literally in contrast to what should not be taken verbatim and literally falls into fuzzy gray area. The quasi-cannibalistic? literal/figurative? proclamations of Christ stretch the limits of rationality and sanity.

Frequently, what is stated with literal words needs to be properly qualified by other words. The phrase the Scriptural quotation that "Baptism....now saves you" (First Peter 3:21) - taken without the overall context of other vital explanatory Scripture verses - can be misinterpreted to support arrogant works righteousness by human actions alone or even in addition to God's grace, similar to the misconception that ingesting eucharist (which some prefer it referred to as: "communion") saves one by ingestive human actions alone, with or without legalistically practicing other nitpicky man-made rules and rituals or occasional goody-goody actions one would falsely presume to be brownie points deserving heavenly-entrance payback.

It should be clear to the honest person that the only thing that saves us is Christ's bloody atonement for us on a cross, and not even our belief or faith in that, even though our belief in faith that such does save, atone for, and redeem us is necessary for such to effectively save, atone for, and redeem us -- along with other obedient behavior we must also perform.

Romans 5:6 While we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly.

Titus 3:5 he saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit,

Such would be similar to debating whether or not our grabbing a life buoy floating to us saves us from drowning, or instead whether the life buoy itself saves us by its approaching benign and buoyant presence. Both are necessary to prevent drowning, but who or what gets the credit? And who enabled us to grab anything, plus who created the buoy?

James 1:17 Every good endowment and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.

In conclusion, how about some high-stakes gaming? Big-time gambling? How would you like to lose nothing if you're wrong, but win everything if you're right? Admittedly, it is true in some ways that:

First Corinthians 15:19 If for this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all men most to be pitied.

But why would that be? What is the sense of cutting one's life short acting like a goof, or even shortening one's life doing weirdo-nutjob immoral or dangerous things and suffering the consequences in pain and misery? Mortals all see and experience only an tiny infinitesmal fraction of whatever tidbits (sensuous or not) before death. And we all are destined to die and leave everything behind anyway. So what's to pity?

If Christ's law and gospel are true, then I have everything to gain and nothing to lose. If they are not true, I would not have lost anything anyway, and who's to laugh and be humiliated by such when yours truly and everyone else is eternally gone?