A question about Mt 26:29

[justamoose89]

I’m having a discussion with a Protestant friend about the Eucharist, and if Jesus really meant for us to take him literally when He said that it is His body and blood. My friend said that since Jesus said “I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father’s kingdom.” in Matthew 26:29, he called his already transfigured blood “fruit of the vine”. If Jesus really meant for us to understand that the wine is really His blood, why did He call it “fruit of the vine” after it has been transfigured?

 

[Belloc_Fan]

I’m having a discussion with a Protestant friend about the Eucharist, and if Jesus really meant for us to take him literally when He said that it is His body and blood. My friend said that since Jesus said “I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father’s kingdom.” in Matthew 26:29, he called his already transfigured blood “fruit of the vine”. If Jesus really meant for us to understand that the wine is really His blood, why did He call it “fruit of the vine” after it has been transfigured?

It’s a Passover reference. In the Passover, there are four cups you drink (mikeratliff.wordpress.com/2008/03/26/the-four-cups-of-wine-of-passover/). The Eucharist was instituted on the third cup, then they did the Psalms on their way to the Garden. From a Jewish perspective, this is all pretty bizarre. Why not finish the Passover? Where’s the Fourth Cup? It’s on the Cross. Check out John 19:28.

So Jesus refers to it in this way to signal that it’s one of the Passover cups – since the Eucharist includes the species of wine, it counts. Besides that, the Fourth Cup was wine vinegar, not actual wine, either. And when He drinks of the Fourth Cup, note that it’s given to Him on a hyssop branch (John 19:19), the same branches used during the Passover with the Blood of the lamb to smear it on the doorposts (Exodus 12:22).

In the Jewish calendar, the Last Supper and the Passion occur on the same day. For some Jews, this day was Preparation Day, but for other, it was Passover itself. Since Passover fell on a Friday, many pious Jews would celebrate it the day before instead. Jesus clearly did this with the Last Supper - but His action with the four cups just make it clear that the Passover prefigures the Passion.

I’m not sure if all of that made total sense, but the really short answer is that it’s because Jesus is showing that the Eucharistic species of wine is one of the four cups of the Ultimate Passover.

 

[bpbasilphx]

God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.

God Incarnate said, “Your sins are forgiven you,” and they were forgiven.

God Incarnate said to blind eyes and deaf ears, “Be opened,” and they were.

God Incarnate said, “Arise, take up your bed, and walk,” and the lame did so.

God Incarnate said, “Little girl, arise,” and the dead child came back to life.

God Incarnate said, “Lazarus, come forth,” and he did.

God Incarnate said over bread and wine, “This is My Body. This is My Blood.”

If anyone can believe that NOTHING HAPPENED, his faith is stronger than mine.

 

[japhy]

My friend said that since Jesus said “I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father’s kingdom.” in Matthew 26:29, he called his already transfigured blood “fruit of the vine”. If Jesus really meant for us to understand that the wine is really His blood, why did He call it “fruit of the vine” after it has been transfigured?

Well, you could interpret Scripture by Scripture. If wine is “of the fruit of the vine”, and Jesus calls Himself the vine (cf. John 15), it is reasonable for Jesus to speak of His blood as “of the fruit of the vine”.

 

[thistle]

I’m having a discussion with a Protestant friend about the Eucharist, and if Jesus really meant for us to take him literally when He said that it is His body and blood. My friend said that since Jesus said “I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father’s kingdom.” in Matthew 26:29, he called his already transfigured blood “fruit of the vine”. If Jesus really meant for us to understand that the wine is really His blood, why did He call it “fruit of the vine” after it has been transfigured?

D-R Bible, Haydock Commentary:

Ver. 29. I will not drink from henceforth of this fruit of the vine. In St. Luke, (xxii. 15, 16,) Christ said to his disciples; I earnestly desired to eat this Pasch with you before I suffer; (or this paschal sacrifice) for I say to you, that, from this time I will not eat thereof, till it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. These expressions seem to import no more, than that it was the last time he would eat and drink with them in a mortal body. And if, as some expound it, Christ, by the generation of the vine, understood the consecrated cup of his blood, he might call it wine, or the fruit of the vine; because he gave them his blood under the appearance of wine; as St. Paul calls the body of Christ bread, because given under the appearance of bread. (1 Corinthians xi. 26.) (Witham) — Fruit of the vine. These words, by the account of St. Luke, (xxii. 18,) were not spoken of the sacramental cup, but of the wine that was drunk with the paschal lamb. Though the Sacramental cup might also be called the fruit of the vine, because it was consecrated from wine, and retains the likeness, and all the accidents, or qualities, of wine. (Challoner) — As St. Paul calleth the body of Christ bread, so the blood of Christ may still be called wine, for three reasons: 1. Because it was so before; as in Genesis xi.[ii.?] 23, Eve is called Adam’s bone; in Exodus vii, Aaron’s rod devoured their rods, whereas they were not now rods but serpents; and in John ii, He tasted the water made wine, whereas it was now wine not water. 2. Because the blessed Eucharist retaineth the forms of bread and wine, and things in Scripture are frequently called from their appearance; as Tobias v, the archangel Raphael, is called a young man; and Genesis xviii, three men appeared to Abraham; whereas they were three angels. 3. Because Jesus Christ in the blessed Sacrament is the true bread of life, refreshing us in soul and body to everlasting life. (Bristow) — Drink it new, after a different manner most wonderful and hitherto unheard of, not having a passible body, but one clothed with immortality; and henceforth no longer in need of nourishment. Thus he brings to their minds the idea of his resurrection, to strengthen them under the ignominies of his passion, and eats and drinks with them, to give them a more certain proof of this grand mystery. (S. Chrysostom, hom lxxxiii.)

 

[flowergrdn]

---

The scripture “fruit of the vine” means wine in this passage, meaning Jesus will not be sharing a meal or drinking , referring to his last supper as a human being. He also refers to a heavenly banquet, or everlasting life in His kingdom
I like to read the whole chapter , because it’s easier to understand , then to break it down verse by verse.