Here I really don't understand your point. Are you embracing the idea that Jesus meant "an occasional memorial when believers gathered, without any specificity or “sacramental” import, nor with any requirement of frequency or consequence" or rejecting it?
If the former, it would suggest that Jesus, speaking at such a solemn occasion issues a command that has so little meaning it could be considered a nothing. To believe it is a nothing would be to take something away, to blot something out of scripture.
If the latter, then I agree with you. Jesus is speaking at a solemn dinner where Jews with an annual frequency commemorate a important scriiptural event in a very specific way. He was following the specific method of that commemoration and then he did something more:
When the hour came, Jesus and his apostles reclined at the table. And he said to them, “I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I tell you, I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in the kingdom of God.”
After taking the cup, he gave thanks and said, “Take this and divide it among you. For I tell you I will not drink again from the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.”
And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.”
Certainly this command of Jesus has meaning that cannot be reduced to a nothing.
Now, onto what I believe he meant. My view is summarized very neatly in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. To understand its scriptural basis in Hebrew and Christian scripture it would be best to read the whole section on the Eucharist, but I'll provide the specific part that address what to actually do (ten a link to the whole section):
"Do this in memory of me"
1341 The command of Jesus to repeat his actions and words "until he comes" does not only ask us to remember Jesus and what he did. It is directed at the liturgical celebration, by the apostles and their successors, of the memorial of Christ, of his life, of his death, of his Resurrection, and of his intercession in the presence of the Father.167
1342 From the beginning the Church has been faithful to the Lord's command. Of the Church of Jerusalem it is written:
They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. . . . Day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts.168
1343 It was above all on "the first day of the week," Sunday, the day of Jesus' resurrection, that the Christians met "to break bread."169 From that time on down to our own day the celebration of the Eucharist has been continued so that today we encounter it everywhere in the Church with the same fundamental structure. It remains the center of the Church's life.
1344 Thus from celebration to celebration, as they proclaim the Paschal mystery of Jesus "until he comes," the pilgrim People of God advances, "following the narrow way of the cross,"170 toward the heavenly banquet, when all the elect will be seated at the table of the kingdom.
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p2s2c1a3.htm
Seems we have another troll attempting to control the conversation with repititious redundency and irrelevant non-sequiturs.
It isn't difficult to understand. It is difficult to overcome! Only by making restrictive "definitions" can we overcome the TRUTH of Scripture.
There is NOTHING in Scripture that tells us to meet in a gilt house on Sundays to eat bread and drink wine...
Oft = when!
Cults try to dominate by inference and restriction....
Romans 8: ... 14 For those who are led by the Spirit of God are the children of God. 15 The Spirit you received does not make you slaves, so that you live in fear again; rather, the Spirit you received brought about your adoption to sonship. And by him we cry, “Abba, Father.” 16 The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children. 17 Now if we are children, then we are heirs—heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ, if indeed we share in his sufferings in order that we may also share in his glory.
This tells me all I need to know. You are a party-line man...the text of the Scripture is not in your definition. My definition is based on the remarks of Jesus...and no more. Yours is based upon the traditions of your cronies. We're done here. You have proved only that you cannot let go of your organization. I'll stick with the Bible.