According to the Mishnah, Rabbinical teachings on the Torah, the Passover meal was eaten with a “hin” (10 pints) of red wine. [see Rev. Dr. Edersheim. “The Temple, Its Ministry and Services, as They were at the Time of Jesus Christ.” revised. Fleming H. Revell Company, London: unknown) page 204.]
“Christ, our paschal lamb, has been sacrificed.” – 1 Corinthians 5:7
A “Hin” of Wine
Although wine was not part of the original Exodus it was part of the celebration in Jesus’ day and spoke of “His blood.”
In the same way He also took 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” [NASB20 1 Corinthians 11:25]
4 Cups
The wine mixed with water was poured into four (4) cups drunk at different times during the Passover meal. Why four? Well, it’s complicated—as they say. It depends on which Rabbi you ask, but I know of no Biblical significance. Nonetheless, Jesus would have honored the rabbinic tradition since He and His disciples were accustomed to it and scripture does not challenge it.
- After the first cup, Jesus washed His disciples’ feet. [Luke 22:17; John 13:5].(Edersheim . page 205)
- Jesus would have sung Psalm 113:1-9 & Psalm 114:1-8 before drinking the second cup (Edersheim . page 207)
- “The cup of blessing” was third. (see 1 Corinthians 11:24) (Edersheim . page 209)
- The fourth cup was drunk singing the second portion of the “Hallel,” (Psalm 115:1 – 118:29) (Edersheim . page 210)
Any Interest?
Interesting fact: The adult human male contains between 1.2 and 1.5 gallons of blood (A man weighing >=150 pounds or approx. 10% blood by weight. If a “hin” is 10 pints of wine and the wine represents our Savior’s blood, this suggests His weight at the time of the Cross was a little over 156 lbs. This is realistic since the average Jewish man was about 5’6″ tall and Jesus Himself was under great stress during the final year of His life before His death.
Was it significant, then, when the soldier struck the spear into the Savior’s side [John 19:34] and blood and water came out? Most assuredly! As the song writer penned, “What can wash away my sins? Nothing but the blood of Jesus.” His death by the shedding of His blood was important in the plan of God for our salvation [Luke 22:20].
He didn’t just shed His life’s blood from the crown of thorns on His head or from the flesh laid open by the lash. When the spear struck, Jesus in a most literal and complete sense, gave His all for our salvation.
However, we remain wonderstruck at the absolute beauty of the world we live in but not because we are any closer to the underlining “how” of it—unless we believe in God. Birth and death, for example, remain the biggest mysteries of all; we do not cease to marvel in awe at the miracle of life itself but we can only theorize its inception. We cannot reproduce it. And if you think of it, so is the inevitability of death (That’s why “time” is so important in calculating everything discoverable; it tracks ultimate growth, movement, and decay).
Angels are outside this bubble! Try explaining to them how a baby is conceived! Physical death, time, and many other aspects of our “knowledge” we call inevitable, angels remained flummoxed by. Our science has no meaning to them—only what God does on our behalf makes any sense to them.
Furthermore, they probably speak a different language [I Corinthians 13: 1]. Our varied theological interpretations of our faith add to their confusion [1 Corinthians 11:10]. They have existed exclusively to serve God [Job 1:6].
Admittedly, angry thoughts and words have led to splintered families, churches, and nations. Without self-awareness those who support such outrage fail to connect the dots; they do not discover that their anger has consequences. They do not understand that at the beginning of every war or divorce or separation there are “words” intended to hurt and accuse. And there is a notable absence of gratitude for the good things that have been a part of each of these relations.
It seems incredulous to assume all this because of a lack of gratitude, but that is exactly what we are postulating. Being thankful for the simple benefits of life is devoid of rage, complaining, grumbling, yelling out, “unfair”! These are two feelings that cannot thrive together in the same heart.
second century. But for Paul, as a Roman prisoner, the faces in this tiny congregation became a cherished memory that often reminded him that his life was never without meaning. He called them “beloved and his joy and crown” [Philippians 4:1]. Only the believers in Philippi and Thessalonica received such commendation. And Paul thought this of “all” the Philippians. No fewer than eleven times he spoke inclusively of every believer in this congregation as if his heart would not let him forget any of them. “Every time I recall the fellowship we shared,” (if I might translate freely) he noted, “I am overcome with joyous appreciation to the Lord for bringing us together. I pray for each of you often asking our Lord to meet every need you have” [Philippians 1:3-4].
translation [NLT] put the onus on us! “God blesses those who do not turn away because of [Jesus].” (And then the translator seemed to reconsider in a footnote, “Or who are not offended by me“). Even Jesus, at times, needed to explain Himself and at times the explanation was worse. “I am the bread of life,” Jesus argued with Jewish leaders who sought to entrap Him in His words. They were discussing “manna.” And then the Savior raised His voice and cried, “unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life in yourselves” [John 6:53]. That’s where He lost them. John 6:66 is one of the saddest scriptures: “From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.” I have come to cherish Peter’s response to all of this when the Savior asked him if he, too, would leave, “Lord, to whom will we go? You have the words of eternal life.” Spot on, my brother!
Many maintain, as the song goes, “We’ll talk it over in the bye and bye. I’ll ask the reasons; He’ll tell me why.” There is some truth here, but more immediately it helps to understand that mercy must be administered by a judge, The Judge, and our limited understanding of His rulings, His form of justice, is what probably bothers us most. Yet, Abraham seemed to know, “Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?“[Genesis 18:25]
identification, gender dysphoria and gender reassignment, gender affirming care for children, non-binary persons, shared pronouns, and misgendering are among the increasing list of labels by which some self-identify. (This explains the complexity that might introduce a gender studies course in college.)
What makes a man, a man? We have lost any intuitive understanding of the word—a fact made more evident by talks of gender fluidity or reassignment. We always understood, culturally, that boys grow into men and fathers were a vital part of that process [Proverbs 1:8]. But a society that condemns virility, that accuses loving husbands of rape, that empowers wives in the name of equity to redefine the dynamics of the marriage relationship, or that marginalizes a husband’s manliness, is a society that has lost the Biblical concept of family and its cultural importance. We have assuredly exited Eden in a most literal sense and cannot find our way back.
Fatherhood culturally always stood in the way of reinventing society. There was always something about a father’s creative genius, his passion for family, his strength—not just physically but his strength—of character that made him into a frightening opponent to any who failed to discern the love in his motives. Men are by nature revolutionaries where their families are concerned. It was important for social change to occur that fathers be defanged, domesticated, and made amenable to such change. Their determination to lead where their children were concerned became culturally and legally challengeable.
Enter the idea of equity which rips and tears at a long standing cultural recognition of the role of fatherhood in society. Diversity became an acceptable word for marginalizing a father’s cultural supremacy within the family. One has to ask rhetorically: Why the attempt at eroding the distinction traditionally awarded “mother and father,” “man and woman” by inventing generic terms that can serve to narrate the story of culture without any reference to either?
We have seen fathers wimp out while mothers assume roles they were not psychological suited to. The fatherly task of teaching self-discipline, for one, became less and less evident even in a household were he was still in residence. But having a dad to learn discipline and the practical wisdom it engenders was, and continues to be, the divine model:
Fathers were always a vital part of a Bible based social structure. It became important in a woke world to reinterpret Scripture in a way that spins this golden truth into worthless straw. [Homosexuality, for example, in the Bible is being interpreted as only an antiquated pagan religious practice not in any way akin to the present day dissolution of the nuclear family unit.] But the important truth being ignored here is the Biblical role of fatherhood in the children’s lives. If we can bring this to the forefront culturally, I maintain, we can cauterize this slow bleeding which is draining the very spiritual and psychological life out of our world.
When Jesus declared, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you” [John 6:53] John witnessed “On hearing it, many … said, “This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?”
Religious training has given us a degree of comfort with the Biblical system of sacri- fices as representative (a type of) Jesus’ death, but to what extent should we consider this metaphor as explicatory in other cultures? How useful is it in a given cultural setting to evangelize a people?
But enter the writings of the French philosopher, Jean-Paul Sartre, who concluded “No finite point has any meaning unless it has an infinite reference point.” What is the value of this life unless there is a transcendent personal God? One good thing became apparent to Meyer: he was not going insane; he was becoming a philosopher.
Viktor Frankl, who, little doubt, amassed profound wisdom from his experience in a German concentration camp, and who, consequently, wrote his classic work, “Man’s Search for Meaning,” reminded us that such questions are okay to ask.
