And as they were eating, Jesus, having taken bread, when he had blessed, broke [it], and gave [it] to them, and said, Take [this] this is my body.
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
And having taken [the] cup, when he had given thanks, he gave [it] to them, and they all drank out of it.
The cup goes round the table on the night before the cross. Three questions sit in this short verse: what did Jesus thank God for, why does Mark record the drinking rather than the invitation, and who is the cup for?
Hours from death, He thanked God. One writer finds the reason in what that death would produce:
Yet after the Passover with His disciples, as He created this new feast, "He gave thanks." Yes — the flames of love in His own heart could not be quenched. All the storms of Satan and the malice of wicked men failed to reach them. They burned on that occasion without a flicker. He rose above His griefs. He unselfishly looked forward to the blessings that would flow from His death. So, "for the joy that was set before him," He "endured the cross, despising the shame." He could find joy even in the sufferings ahead of Him — and so "He gave thanks."
Mark uses one word over the bread in the previous verse and another over the cup here. The two are not rivals:
In Scripture, blessing and giving thanks belong closely together. Scripture uses both terms for the Lord's Supper — blessing (Mark 14:22; 1 Cor. 10:16), and giving thanks (Mark 14:23; Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24).
Matthew records what Jesus said over the cup; Mark records what the disciples did with it. Put side by side, the two accounts become a question about who may come:
"Drink of it, all of you" (Matt. 26:27) was the Lord's invitation to His disciples, and surely His invitation today to all His own is just the same. "They all drank of it," we read in Mark 14:23. Matthew's Gospel gives the invitation; Mark's Gospel gives the glad response. Who is the Lord's Supper for? Is it the badge of membership in one particular group of Christians? To raise the question is to answer it. Scripture is so plain about it. It is the LORD'S Supper. It is where He should be supreme. His invitation is for all the blood-bought children of God. If a Christian, sound in the faith and living a godly life, asks to remember the Lord in His death, he must be received. Otherwise it stops being the LORD'S Supper and becomes a feast for members of one group only.
Only Mark tells us the drinking happened. That detail carries weight in a long argument: may a church hand people the bread and keep the cup back?
Had Matthew's account been lost, we would not have known that the Lord said, as He gave the cup, "Drink of it, all of you." Had Mark's account not survived to our day, we would not have known that they all drank of it. Taking the bread without the cup was not practised in the Lord's presence, and nothing He said supports it.
Another writer explains what the cup itself declares, and why taking it away costs so much:
It is His death that is before us: a broken body, and the blood separated from it, life given up in this world. Drinking the blood on its own marks it out as shed. It is a striking example of Satan's power that the cup is refused to ordinary worshippers. To comfort them, they are told that a whole Christ — body, blood, soul and divinity — is present in each: in the bread as well as in the wine. But if the blood is still in the body, there is no redemption. Then what they celebrate is a Christ still living on earth, who had shed no blood to redeem us. It is a sacrament of no redemption.
Mark's order matters. One writer draws a lesson from it:
The order here is significant. The disciples share the cup before the Lord speaks of what it symbolises. This corrects the idea that the bread and wine work on their own, whatever the spiritual state of the person receiving them.
One writer describes the act and weighs it:
After giving thanks, one breaks the bread and eats in remembrance of Him; and it is the same with the cup. He gave it to them, we read (Mark 14:23), and they all drank of it. For the believer it is the simplest, the most touching, and the most solemn of observances.
The cup is shared, and the sharing means something. Notice the word "we":
When we drink from the cup we have communion with the blood of Christ. Not I alone have this, but "we", all the believers — and it is the same with the bread. All believers who celebrate the Lord's Supper have fellowship with it and with one another.
- Thanks — On the night before the cross He gave thanks. He looked past the suffering to the blessings His death would bring.
- Cup — What He handed round speaks of blood shed; take the cup away and you take away the picture of redemption itself.
- All — Matthew records the invitation, Mark records the response. The table belongs to the Lord, and His welcome runs to all His own.
- Drank — They drank before He explained. The bread and wine are not a power working on their own, apart from the heart of the one receiving.
- One — One shared cup ties every believer to the blood of Christ and to one another, in the simplest and most solemn act there is.
And he said to them, This is my blood, that of the [new] covenant, that shed for many.
On the night before the cross, Jesus passes the cup round the table. The disciples drink first. Only then does He tell them what they have shared: His own blood, poured out for many. Two questions sit behind those words. Which covenant does He mean? And how far does "many" reach?
The Greek word here can mean a will or a covenant. Older English versions chose "testament," and they also read "new covenant" in this verse. That is the wording the writers quote. One writer shows from the words themselves why "testament" cannot be right.
Can there be the shade of a doubt here, or in Mark 14:24? Our Lord is speaking of the cup He gave the disciples. First, where would be the fitness of "new" applied to a "testament" or will? Nobody ever talks about a "new" will. But secondly, there is another and stronger objection. What has "blood" to do with a testament or will? The moment we turn to the new "covenant" everything falls into place. The blood of Christ is exactly its foundation.
Israel's earlier covenant was also sealed with blood. The two sealings do opposite work.
The blood of the old covenant sealed Israel's promise to obey. They were people in the flesh, under the Law. The blood of the new covenant sealed the accomplishment of grace for the people who believed in Jesus by the Spirit.
One writer sets out what the blood meant under each covenant.
The first covenant may have had the blood of sacrifices connected with it. That blood was its warning, threatening death on those who proved unfaithful. It was as if it said: if you fail to obey the law, you must die, as these victims died. The blood of the new covenant has an entirely opposite character. Christ's blood, as a starting point, secures a perfect clearance for every soul who believes in Him.
Mark does not name the many. One writer answers who is included.
His body ("This is My body"), and His blood, "the blood of the new covenant, shed for many." It was not for the Jew only, but shed for many.
Matthew has the same phrase, while Luke records "shed for you." One writer weighs the difference.
In the Luke account we have the words "shed for you." That language was deeply personal to all at the table on that solemn night. But in Matthew the expression is more general, and deliberately so: "shed for many." Israel's unbelief has not stopped the tide of God's grace. In His wisdom, it has turned that grace aside from themselves for a while. It has made grace overflow every barrier, so that it may reach outsiders like us.
So is that covenant now in force? One writer weighs the exact words used over the cup.
Hebrews 8 and 9 show the change of covenant. A new covenant is brought in, still to be made with Judah and Israel. The old was "ready to vanish away." Meanwhile a Mediator is introduced, before the time when Israel and Judah will be back in the land. This Mediator has shed the blood needed to establish the covenant, but has not yet established it with them. In Matthew 26:28 He says, "This is my blood of the new covenant" — not, This is the new covenant, but "the blood" of it. The covenant itself has not yet been established.
So what do Christians hold now?
I do not say that we, Christians, have the new covenant itself, but we have the blood of the new covenant. We have that on which the new covenant is founded. The new covenant supposes certain spiritual blessings: the law of God written in the heart, and our sins forgiven. These spiritual parts of the new covenant we have received now.
In Mark, the drinking comes first and the explanation after. One writer draws a conclusion from the sequence.
The order here is significant. The disciples partake of the cup before the Lord speaks of its meaning. In this we have a corrective to one idea about the bread and wine. They do not work on their own, apart from the spiritual condition of the one receiving them.
Mark tells it briefly. Even so, nothing needed is missing — including what this meal closed off for Jesus Himself.
Brevity marks Mark's record all through. Nowhere is it more marked than in his account of how this supper began. The essentials, however, are all here: the bread and its meaning, the cup and its significance. For the Lord Himself the fruit of the vine, and what it symbolised — earthly joy — was all past. All earthly hopes and joys on the old basis were closed for Him.
- Blood. The cup speaks of blood, and blood belongs to a covenant, not a will. That is why "covenant" fits here and "testament" does not.
- Basis. Under the old covenant, blood sealed a people's promise to obey and threatened death for breaking it. Here it seals grace accomplished, and clears every soul who believes.
- Breadth. "For many" reaches past Israel. Luke's "shed for you" is personal; the wider word is open enough to take in outsiders like us.
- Blessings. Jesus names the blood of the covenant, not the covenant itself. Believers hold its spiritual blessings now. The covenant's own day still lies ahead.
- Cost. The disciples drank before He explained. He drank nothing more. The cup that gives them everything is the cup that closed earthly joy to Him.
Verily I say to you, I will no more drink at all of the fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.
The Lord has just given the cup to His disciples and named it His blood of the covenant, poured out for many. Then He adds a vow: no more wine for Him on earth, and the next cup waits for the kingdom of God.
The cup was a symbol before it was a vow. One writer draws out what wine stands for, and where the believer's hope now rests:
The Lord has used the cup as the symbol of His blood shed for many. Looking at the wine in its natural sense as the fruit of the vine, it would set forth earthly joy. The death of Christ breaks His links with earth and earthly things, until at last God sets up His Kingdom on the earth. Today the believers' links are with a heavenly Christ Who has suffered on earth. They wait for the future Kingdom, to share with Christ in the glories and joys of the earthly Kingdom.
A Nazarite was a person set apart to God, and part of that vow was to keep away from wine. Writers see the Lord taking that place here in the open. He did not become something new. He was showing what had always been true of Him:
This verse seems to present clearly this Nazarite character of Christ. And it seems to me to imply that this was in fact always His character. In openly taking this position of separation from sinners, He gives us to understand that in truth it was always so. "I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine" — "I cannot have it in joy with you. I cannot take the blessedness of what makes glad the heart of God and man, here with man in his present state. God's kingdom must come first."
The Greek word behind "new" decides the sense:
The attentive reader may notice that this settles the force also of Matthew 26:29 and Mark 14:25: "until that day when I drink it new." The word here is not νέος, which would mean wine that has not yet grown old. It is wine of a new sort, a new kind. It is not the old wine at all.
He has just handed them the cup and called it His blood. In the same breath He speaks of the fruit of the vine as something still ahead of Him:
The Lord has made the cup of His blood, which we drink, real and absolutely true for the soul and for faith. Yet He still goes on to declare plainly that the fruit of the vine is not His blood. For He says He will in no way drink of it until He drinks it new with us in the kingdom of His Father.
Mark says "the kingdom of God." Matthew's account says "in my Father's kingdom." Luke says only that the kingdom of God comes. One writer fits the three together:
Mark 14:25 uses the words "kingdom of God." That confirms that the term "kingdom of God" takes in everything, the other terms being special features of God's kingdom… It is also interesting to see Luke 22:18. There, after the Passover meal, we may view the disciples as representing the remnant of Israel, and the Lord says He will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes. For the remnant of Israel on earth in the coming day, it will not be the Father's kingdom in heaven. It will be the kingdom of God on earth.
So has none of that kingdom arrived yet? One writer answers with a distinction:
If someone asks, "Has the kingdom of God not come?" I answer: in a certain sense, yes, in Spirit… But as for the earthly reality of it, plainly it has not come, and so the joy is not actually fulfilled.
The supper stands between the vow and the kingdom. It looks back to the cross, not forward to the throne:
He would drink no more of the fruit of the vine until He drank it new with them in the kingdom of God. He refused what was the sign of fellowship in things here below… That kingdom is founded on His suffering unto death. But meanwhile, before it comes, there is the remembrance of something wholly different. It is not the remembrance of a kingdom, power and glory, but of crucifixion in weakness: His body ("This is My body"), and His blood, "the blood of the covenant, poured out for many." It was not for the Jew only, but poured out for many.
- Vow — Wine stands for earthly gladness, and the Lord sets it aside; His death cuts His links with earth as it now is.
- Nazarite — He openly takes the place of separation that was always His. He cannot share that joy with man as he now is, until God's kingdom comes.
- New — The word means new in kind, not just young wine. The coming joy is of a different kind from the old.
- Sign — The fruit of the vine is not itself His blood. He speaks of it as a cup still ahead of Him.
- Meanwhile — Until that day, His people keep a remembrance. It is not of glory but of crucifixion in weakness: a body given and blood poured out for many.