J
JSmitty2005
Guest
Can someone give me a summary of Scott Hahn’s theory regarding the Fourth Cup and “It is finished.”? I am interested in this and am open to any links or online audio sources as well. Thanks for your help.
- Status
M
MrS
Guest
www.stjoe.com has almost all of Dr. Hahn’s stuff including this talk on VHS and on CD
It is really thought provoking… I remember watching the video years ago, late night… I had to watch it twice more, and I was up till about 2 or 3 in the morning… good stuff I thought, and still do
It is really thought provoking… I remember watching the video years ago, late night… I had to watch it twice more, and I was up till about 2 or 3 in the morning… good stuff I thought, and still do
J
JSmitty2005
Guest
MrS said:
Thanks for the info. I think it’s www.saintjoe.com though. I heard this somewhere before or maybe I read it, but I forget how it went and some of my Protestant friends are asking me things that I think would be answered by Dr. Hahn’s explanation. Does anyone out there know of an online source where I don’t have to pay? Sorry, but as a college student, I’m kinda broke! Haha.
S
SherryLynn9
Guest
Here is a link to Dr. Hahn’s website.
salvationhistory.com/bookstore/audioRsrcs.cfm
Lots of audio links. I don’t know for sure if what you’re referring to is there or not though.
Sherry
M
MariaG
Guest
Short story.
In the Bible when you read the account of the Last Supper, the Passover Meal, only three cups of wine were consumed. In Jewish Tradition, 4 cups had to be drunk or the ceremony was incomplete. (The Lamb also had to be eaten.)
Jesus also said the fruit of the vine shall not pass my lips…
The fourth cup was never drunk at the passover meal, the meal was not yet finished.
On the Cross, Jesus said “I thirst”. (Scott Hahn gets into how unlikely that is for various reasons, medical and otherwise.)
At that time, Jesus was given Wine. Sour Wine, but wine none the less, the fourth “cup”. After Jesus drank, He said, it is finished. These words according to Hahn refer to the passover meal.
I hope this helps a little.
God Bless,
Maria
M
MrS
Guest
yep ,that’s it… and then he goes further to say that the words “It is finished” are not in reference to the plan of salvation as some protestant theologians present. Christ still had to rise on Easter Morning to complete that plan.
A
awfulthings9
Guest
I understand it differently, but could be wrong, which is why I’m posting (and going back to pour over the Scripture once I’m done). I understood the “fourth cup” to be Christ’s actual death - thus, his blood spilled for us. We participate in the passover supper and drink, with his apostles, the fourth cup every time we take part in the re-presentation of Christ’s sacrifice at the Mass. To that point, Christ was offered a glass of wine on his way to the crucifixion, but refused. On the cross, he wasn’t offered wine, but vinegar - a close cousin to wine, but not wine, itself. This may seem nit-picky, but the distinction is important because, by declaring his actual death the “fourth cup”, it supports the idea of transubstantiation because Christ actually becomes the wine, of which we all partake. Likewise, while Scripture actually mentions that they slaughtered a passover lamb, the holy Spirit chose to remain silent on whether they actually ate that lamb. We know they were eating, and they may very well have been eating the lamb, but the silence of Scriptures to that end lets us understand that besides allowing Christ’s death to become the fourth cup, the slaughtered lamb (in this instance, Christ), still needs to be eaten to complete the passover meal. Thus, at communion, we truly eat his body, the slaughtered lamb, and truly drink from the fourth cup, which is his blood. Thoughts?
M
MariaG
Guest
Hmm. I would have to go back and reread things a bit more, both Bible and Scott Hahn. Since I have loaned out the book by Hahn, I can only recheck the Bible.
Anybody else who has the book that can maybe recheck things more accurately than I can?
Maria
A
awfulthings9
Guest
Another thing to consider is that Christ, while he is on the cross, says, “Let this cup pass from me”. What cup? The vinegar he is offered is in a sponge on the end of a branch. This is further indication that the cup - the cup of consumation - is his own suffering, which he wishes to have pass from him because of his human will.
But, when it’s all said and done, this isn’t dogma - just the interesting and rich speculations of a theologian, so you don’t have to feel that the interpretation I proposed is the “right” one. As with so much in Scripture, there are many layers of meaning and Hahn’s insight doesn’t have to be perfectly adhered to or, for that matter, believed in, even though I see value in it.
R
RobNY
Guest
Perhaps you’d like Scott Hahn’s Fourth Cup presentation in easy textual form to peruse at your leisure?
Enjoy.
Enjoy.
I
Ianjo99
Guest
Wow, just wow. That’s pretty amazing stuff. Brings a whole new light into what’s going on!
Bravo, Scott Hahn! Even if this is just speculation and overanalyzation, I think it’s a very apt analogy or explanation.
Bravo, Scott Hahn! Even if this is just speculation and overanalyzation, I think it’s a very apt analogy or explanation.
M
MariaG
Guest
Thanks:thumbsup:
D
DaveBj
Guest
Two nitpicks.
First, He said “Let this cup pass from me” in the garden, not on the cross, and the reference was specifically to the suffering He was about to undergo, not to a “cup” of wine.
Second, it was wine that he was offered on the sponge, albeit the cheap sour wine that Roman soldiers were used to drinking, not vinegar as we know it. The word “vinegar” was a bad King-James-era translation choice.
DaveBj
H
Halo
Guest
I read an explanation once that said
With the 4th chalice,
Jesus said “Take and divide among you for I will not drink of the fruit of the vine til the kingdom of God come”
He then went on to drink of the fourth chalice, but He did not contradict Himself, for it was not wine but His consecrated Blood.
A change of substance took place at this consecration and he called their attention to it.
Just food for thought.
With the 4th chalice,
Jesus said “Take and divide among you for I will not drink of the fruit of the vine til the kingdom of God come”
He then went on to drink of the fourth chalice, but He did not contradict Himself, for it was not wine but His consecrated Blood.
A change of substance took place at this consecration and he called their attention to it.
Just food for thought.
A
awfulthings9
Guest
Sorry. Like I said, I didn’t have the verses in front of me at the moment. He said it at the garden, but my point is yours as well, the cup was his suffering. Even if he drank sour wine rather than vinegar, the “cup” was his suffering. And since we are missing a fourth cup in the Last Supper narratives, one can interpret that his suffering and death give us the cup of consumation, specifically because of his use of that word in the garden. Thanks for the clarification, DaveBj.
R
Redbandito
Guest
My father is Jewish, so I grew up celebrating the Passover. Thus, this has always been a really interesting topic to me. Just a few things I’d like to add here.
For starters, we know that “It is finished” cannot be referring to our justification, because Romans 4:25 states, “25He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification.” This led Dr. Hahn to pour through the Scriptures. What he came to were a couple of conclusions. First, he looked to the original passover, which ironically enough is the only other time in Scripture than the Last Supper that it states, “This is the blood of the covenant” (Ex 24:8). We also know that during the Passover, three things were required: First, a lamb had to be slaughtered without breaking a bone. Second, the blood had to be spread over the door. Third, YOU HAD TO EAT THE LAMB. Since we know that Christ is “Our Paschal Lamb” (1 Cor 5:7), we see that it is through the Eucharist that we continue to celebrate the Passover. It is really an awesome concept, and the early Church fathers confirm Dr. Hahn’s thoughts on this subject.
For starters, we know that “It is finished” cannot be referring to our justification, because Romans 4:25 states, “25He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification.” This led Dr. Hahn to pour through the Scriptures. What he came to were a couple of conclusions. First, he looked to the original passover, which ironically enough is the only other time in Scripture than the Last Supper that it states, “This is the blood of the covenant” (Ex 24:8). We also know that during the Passover, three things were required: First, a lamb had to be slaughtered without breaking a bone. Second, the blood had to be spread over the door. Third, YOU HAD TO EAT THE LAMB. Since we know that Christ is “Our Paschal Lamb” (1 Cor 5:7), we see that it is through the Eucharist that we continue to celebrate the Passover. It is really an awesome concept, and the early Church fathers confirm Dr. Hahn’s thoughts on this subject.
R
Redbandito
Guest
This is correct.
D
DaveBj
Guest
Until reading this thread, I had never really looked at it like this. Opens a whole new understanding.
DaveBj
H
Halo
Guest
I have really enjoyed reading about the Jewish traditions of Passover, and how Christ said the First Mass.
I think of how the Apostles must have felt when they realized what Jesus was doing, the crossing over from the Old to the New Covenant. Absolutely wonderul stuff
I think of how the Apostles must have felt when they realized what Jesus was doing, the crossing over from the Old to the New Covenant. Absolutely wonderul stuff
Y
YADA
Guest
St Paul refers to the “Cup of Blessing, which we bless” being a participation in the Boold of Christ, the Paschal Meal. In the Jewish Passover the Cup of Blessing is the third of four cups. The Fourth Cup is refered to as the Cup of Consumation. I believe this is where Dr. Hahn is in his interpretation.
Pax
Pax
- Status