Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Mark 14:23
And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave [it] to them: and they all drank of it.
23. he took the cup ] probably the third Cup, and known as the “Cup of Blessing.” See above, Mar 14:16.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks,…. Over it, and for it, by blessing it, and appropriating it to the present use and service:
he gave it to them; his disciples,
and they all drank of it; Judas, as well as the rest, as he bid them do; [See comments on Mt 26:27].
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
A cup (). Probably the ordinary wine of the country mixed with two-thirds water, though the word for wine () is not used here in the Gospels, but “the fruit of the vine” ( ). See Mt 26:26-29 for discussion of important details. Mark and Matthew give substantially the same account of the institution of the Supper by Jesus, while Lu 22:17-20 agrees closely with 1Co 11:23-26 where Paul claims to have obtained his account by direct revelation from the Lord Jesus.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
The cup. The wine was the ordinary one of the country, only red. It was mixed with water, generally in the proportion of one part to two of water.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “And He took the cup,” (kai labon poterion) “And taking a cup,” a container of the “fruit of the vine,” Mar 14:25; 1Co 10:16.
2) “And when He had given thanks,” (euch aristesas) “When He Had offered thanks,” to His Father, Mat 26:27; 1Co 11:24-25.
3) “He gave it to them:” (edoken autois) “He gave it (doled it out) to them,” to each and all of them, of the disciples then present, Mat 26:27.
4) “And they drank of it.” (kai epion eks autou pantes) “And they (each and all)drank of it, “they of His disciples, with perhaps the exception of Judas who had gone out, Mat 26:18-19; 1Co 11:25.
The covenant of keeping God’s Word was sealed or sprinkled with blood, as a symbol of fidelity, loyalty, and sincerity, Exo 24:7-8. This blood of the covenant is symbolized in the fruit of the vine, Lev 17:11; Heb 8:6 -13; 13:20, 24.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(23) When he had given thanks.St. Mark agrees with St. Matthew in using the word blessing of the bread, and giving thanks of the cup. St. Luke uses the latter word of the bread, and implies by the word likewise that the form was repeated with the cup.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
‘And he took a CUP, and when he had given thanks, he gave to them, and they all drank of it, and he said to them, THIS IS MY BLOOD of THE COVENANT, which is poured out for many.’
Luk 22:20 And the CUP in like manner after supper, saying, THIS cup IS THE new COVENANT in MY BLOOD, even that which is poured out for you.’
1Co 11:25 ‘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.’
In each Jesus takes a cup and says, ‘This is the covenant in my blood’, or the more stark equivalent in Hebrew form, ‘This is my blood of the covenant’. The former is interpretive of the latter. Luke and Paul add that it is a ‘new’ covenant, for they would want their Gentile readers to know that it was not the old Jewish covenant renewed. But all were aware that it was a new covenant, partly in accordance with God’s promise in Jer 31:31, and partly because it was ‘in His blood’ and looked to the cross, and Jesus’ very words and actions demanded it even if He did not say it. Matthew, Mark and Luke all agree that He said, ‘which is poured out for —‘. Mark simply adds, ‘for many’, Luke adds. ‘for you’ and Matthew adds ‘for many to remission of sins’. Paul omits this but adds, ‘Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me’, which is actually required to be said by Jesus (or something like it) to establish the permanence of it as a symbol. As Mark’s ‘for many’ probably has Isaiah 53, 11, 12 in mind it has the same significance as Matthew’s longer phrase ‘for many to remission of sins’. ‘Luke’s ‘you’ simply personalises it, recognising that the ‘you’ is by then being spoken to the whole church who are the ‘many’ for whom Christ died. Thus the essential meaning is again the same. As with the bread the importance of doing it in remembrance must at some time have been said by Jesus for the Apostles to take up the feast and perpetuate it as they did. The slight overall differences emphasise the point each is seeking to bring out as they translate or paraphrase from the Aramaic, without altering the basic sense. But the basic idea is the same in all.
End of note.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
‘And he took a cup and when he had given thanks he gave to them and they all drank of it. And he said to them, “This is my blood of the covenant which is shed for many. Truly I tell you I will no more drink of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new under the Kingly Rule of God.” ’
Again the wine was to be seen as representing His blood. It could not be His blood because that was still in His veins. But they would remember too His words in John 6 where He had spoken of ‘drinking His blood’, something which signified response to Him in His death. By drinking the wine they were indicating their oneness with Him in His death and binding themselves to the covenant of mercy.
In Zec 9:15 the LXX speaks of the fact that the victorious people of God ‘will drink their blood like wine’ (the blood of their enemies) signifying a triumphant victory and the slaughter of their enemies, and David used a similar picture when three of his followers had risked their lives to fetch him water. He poured it out on the ground as an offering to God and said, ‘shall I drink the blood of the men who went at the risk of their lives?’.
Isaiah brought both metaphors together when he said of the enemies of Israel that God would ‘make your oppressors eat their own flesh, and they shall be drunk with their own blood as with wine’ (Isa 49:26), signifying that they would destroy themselves. Thus in Hebrew thought drinking a person’s blood meant killing someone or benefiting by their death.
This can be paralleled elsewhere in the New Testament for in Matthew’s Gospel the people said of their ‘fathers’ that they were ‘partakers in the blood of the prophets’ (Mat 23:30). Thus when Jesus spoke of ‘eating my flesh and drinking my blood’ in John 6 He was using easily recognised Jewish metaphors. He was indicating that they would either kill Him or would benefit from His death.
‘My blood of the covenant which is shed for many’ would take their minds back to the covenant sealed by the shedding of blood at Sinai. See Exo 24:8, which also refers to ‘the blood of the covenant’. And that connects with many other similar covenants, sealed by sacrifice (see Gen 15:9-18). But the blood of the covenant at Sinai incorporated a whole new people, and here now was a greater covenant for it was Jesus Himself Who was sealing a covenant with His own blood, which would be offered as the sacrifice (‘my blood’), and Whose blood would confirm and guarantee the new covenant and incorporate His whole new people. See Zec 9:11 in context with Mar 9:9 which latter passage Jesus had deliberately identified with Himself. See also Jer 31:31-34. It was a covenant of deliverance and of life-changing power. ‘This is the covenant I will make — I will put my law in their inward parts and I will write it in their heart, and I will be their God and they will be my people’ (Jer 31:31-34; Heb 8:8-13).
‘Which is poured out for many.’ This refers back to Isa 53:12 where the ‘many’ are described in the context of His life being poured out (in MT). ‘He poured out His soul to death — He bore the sin of many’ (Isa 53:12). ‘By His humiliation (an extension of the meaning of yatha‘ found at Ugarit – ‘the humiliation He had known, experienced, undergone’) shall my righteous servant make many to be accounted righteous’ (Isa 53:11). The One bore the sin of the many. So the blood of the Servant was shed in order to establish a new covenant between men and God, and when men drank of that wine they were signifying their desire to have a part in that covenant. ‘Poured out’ is also the language of sacrifice (Exo 24:6).
‘They all drank of it.’ This included Judas. He pretended a response to Jesus in the new covenant knowing all the time what he was about to do. This was treachery unlimited. By drinking he was binding himself to the new covenant while aiming to destroy it. He drank to his own condemnation (1Co 11:29).
Nothing illustrated more Jesus’ awareness of His own uniqueness than this taking of an old and revered ceremony and its transformation so that from now on it would point to Him. He had taken over the Passover, for He was the Passover lamb being offered for sin and being participated in by His people. As the Passover lamb was offered, so He was offered. As the Passover lamb was eaten so could they partake of Him through coming in faith and receiving Him. But in future the lamb would be replaced by the bread and the wine, symbolising the need of constantly coming to Him and believing on Him (Joh 6:35). That was necessary, for the Lamb had been offered once for all.
‘Truly I tell you I will no more drink of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new under the Kingly Rule of God.’ Jesus knew that the wine on that Passover night was His last drink of joyous wine on earth before He died (He would drink the sour wine on the cross – Mar 15:36). Now He was either dedicating Himself to long abstinence, or was indicating how soon they would enjoy His presence in the Kingly Rule of God, something which is indicated in Mat 28:20. Then they would partake of new wine with Him at the Lord’s Table. Either way the next time He ‘drank wine’ with them in this way would be in the day of triumph, when they would all ‘drank it new’ within the Kingly Rule of God. This was thus their guarantee that, in spite of the catastrophe that would soon seem to engulf them, they would finally emerge to enjoy the triumph of the Kingly Rule of God. One day soon they would again meet and celebrate His triumph in God’s presence, either in this world or the next. Thus the wine not only symbolised His death and the new covenant, it was a guarantee of the future blessings that would be theirs, and of their future inheritance in Christ.
There is a strong case for suggesting that the wine in Mar 14:23 and the wine in Mar 14:25 should in some way be connected. The wine in Mar 14:23 was the old wine being converted into something new. It had now become a symbol of His death, and of the life that would result. This would suggest that the new wine in Mar 14:25 is a continuation of this as they partake in it after the resurrection under His Father’s Kingly Rule. On this basis the new wine can be seen as symbolising the joyous future beyond the cross, when He would ‘eat and drink’ with them continually as the Kingly Rule of God advanced throughout all nations to the end of the world (Mar 14:9; Mar 13:10). It would begin when He ate (and drank) with them after His resurrection (Luk 24:43; Act 10:41), and continue every time that His people engaged in the Lord’s Supper. But it will also occur daily for all who continually come and believe on Him (Joh 6:35). We are not intended to assume that we will drink wine in heaven. There we will have that which is much better than wine. See second note below.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
23 And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it.
Ver. 23. See Trapp on “ Mat 26:27 “
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Mar 14:23 . , etc., and they drank of it, all. In Mt.’s account Jesus bids them drink, as He had previously bidden them eat. Mk.’s version strikes one as the more primitive; Mt.’s as influenced by liturgical usage.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Mar 14:23. , and they all drank of it) This clause interposed between the words of the Lord is an argument, that the words, This is My body, this is My blood, were said, during the time whilst they were eating, and whilst they were drinking. Whence the evangelists either prefix or else subjoin those words; comp. note, Mat 3:7. All drank, even Judas; for who is there that will say that Judas might have stolen away from the company in the midst of the supper? [Comp. Mar 14:17-18; Mar 14:22] [Nay, even in Mar 14:31, we may suppose that, under the word all, Judas is even still included. It is not unlikely that he crossed the brook Kedron along with the Saviour and the disciples, and after that acted as conductor to the armed band which was waiting for Him in the neighbourhood.-Harm. p. 528.]
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
when: Mar 14:22, Luk 22:17, Rom 14:6, 1Co 10:16
and they: Mat 26:27
Reciprocal: Psa 104:15 – wine Mat 14:19 – he blessed Luk 22:18 – I will not
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
3
Instead of “blessing” the cup he gave thanks, which shows that the two terms mean the same and that nothing supernatural was done to the “emblems.”
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
The common cup likewise symbolized Jesus’ sharing Himself with the disciples and their unity as disciples. Judas had apparently left the upper room before the institution of the Lord’s Supper. Jesus’ viewed His blood as the ratifying agent of the New Covenant (cf. Jer 31:31-34), as animal blood had made the Old (Mosaic) Covenant valid (Exo 24:8). The Greek word translated "covenant" is diatheke, a word that describes an agreement made by one person for others. A different word, syntheke, describes an agreement that two parties made in which both had obligations to each other. The diluted wine in the cup was also a reminder of the covenant’s existence. [Note: Taylor, p. 546.] Jesus’ blood poured out is an obvious allusion to His death. "For" translates the Greek preposition hyper meaning "in behalf of" or "instead of," a clear reference to vicarious atonement (cf. Mat 26:28). "Many" means all (cf. Mar 10:45; Isa 53:11-12).
"By the word many he means not a part of the world only, but the whole human race." [Note: Calvin, 3:214.]