The question has arisen whether "the fruit of the vine" is really "the product of the grapevine" as the Concordant Version has it, or corresponds to the "bitter (herbs, A. V.)" of the passover (Ex. 12:8), that is to say, "bitters" (a bitter drink), rather than bitter things to eat. It is worthy of note that the "cup" is never directly said to be wine. It is quite possible that bitter ingredients could be "the fruit of the vine," or at least of vines other than the grapevine. The question is, does the original settle this for us, so that we may be sure whether the cup at the Lord’s dinner is to contain wine or "bitters"?

Recognizing the inadequacy of the word vine, the Concordant Version always has grapevine. Greek, like some modern langauges, had a special term for a grapevine. This will be clear to the most unlearned, when they know that the word for vineyard is ampelon (of-grapevines), while ampelos is Grape-vine. Everyone who attentively reads the passages in which vineyard occurs will be convinced that this is the correct rendering. All of the circumstances, especially its stone dyke, its trough and tower (Mat. 21:33), show that the vines are grapevines.

The evidence for grapevine is even more definite, for we read of the grapes of earth’s grapevine (Un. 14:18), and the meaning of grapes cannot be called into question. These grapes were put into a trough and the trough was trodden. Our Lord does not compare Himself with any kind of vine, but only with the grapevine (John 15:1, 4, 5). Israel was a vine that reverted to its wild state (Jer. 2:21). Christ fills their place. He is the true Grapevine. The evidence is beyond all denial that our Lord referred to wine when instituting the Lord’s dinner, and not to any other drink.

The fruit of the vine must be grapes. But our Lord did not refer to fruit, but to the product of the grapevine, that is, wine. Of this He will not drink henceforth until He drinks it with His disciples in the kingdom. That wine will be drunk in the kingdom there can be no doubt That "bitters" of any kind should be used as a beverage in that day is altogether out of tune with its character.

Had the word wine been used by our Lord, it would not have been so explicit, for this word was used in even a wider sense than in English, of fermented liquors such as palm wheat or barley beer. It could perhaps, even be strained so as to include "bitters." But by using a whole phrase, the product of the grapevine, He made it impossible to miss His meaning, and limited the source of the wine to one plant, which, in the figurative language of prophecy, is associated with the joys of the kingdom, all of which were included in the cup.

The Hebrew word mrumim (to-bitter p1) simply denotes bitter things. In Lamentations 3:15 we read, "He surfeits me with bitter things. He patiates me with wormwood." Satiates refers to drinking and surfeits usually to eating, in the Hebrew. There must be more than one bitter thing. The Jews speak of five different herbs which they ate at the Passover, though there is nothing in the text to confine it to herbs. The Septuagint likewise simply says pitkridon, bitter things. The evidence settles three points: There must be more than one. They must be bitter. They must be eaten.

In the passover, as instituted in Egypt, no drink is mentioned. All is to be eaten (Ex. 12:1-10). The lamb and the unleavened bread and the bitter things were to be eaten. That our Lord is not continuing the passover celebration in his dinner is evident, for the one essential is lacking is there is no lamb. The blood, instead of being sprinkled outside, is now found within, figured by the contents of the cup. It is the blood of the new covenant. It looks forward as well as backward It is a cup of blessing, for the new covenant has no bitterness in it.

The contents of the cup figure the blood (Mat. 26:27, 28; Mark 14:23; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor. 11:25, 26). This in turn figures the abiding efficacy of the sacrifice of Christ in the presence of God. As in Egypt the blood on the lintel was seen by the messenger of judgment and sheltered them from his stroke, so now the blood is inside the curtain, in the presence of God, and is the basis of all our blessing. In Egypt the blood gave no sensation of bitterness. That was left to the bitter things which were eaten. Now nothing but the bread is eaten. The lamb and its bitter additions are no longer used. The cup, containing the product of the grapevine, is brimming with the blessings brought us by the blood.

In Egypt the blood of the lamb brought protection from the judgment. It did not speak of any bitter thing. In the Lord’s dinner it is likewise a memorial of death and a bringer of blessing. It is quite impossible to see any bitterness in it for the Israelite in Egypt. Far less is there any such thought in the new memorial. The Lamb has been slain. The blood brings nothing but blessing. And the Scriptures connect the cup with the blood, and not with the bitter accompaniments of the roast lamb.

It is not difficult to see the significance of the bitter things which were eaten at the Passover, Israel was sheltered by the blood of the lamb and was sustained by its flesh. But the nation has many hitter experiences in connection with the true Passover Lamb. Peter was a picture of this when he denied his Lord. It is suggestive that a form of this very word is used, when we read that he lamented bitterly (Mat. 26 :75). Israel, as a nation, as no other earthly people, will enjoy the blessings which flow from the sacrificial Lamb. But this is associated with much that is most bitter, due to their national rejection of the true Lamb. They turned the altar into the cross, and called down the curse upon themselves and their children.

Of the Passover, our Lord did not continue the lamb or the bitter things. He did perpetuate the bread to symbolize His broken body, and the blood as symbolic of our blessing. But, as there is no lamb, neither can there be literal blood. Were there such, it could not be eaten according to the law (Lev. 3:17). So a new symbol is introduced which effectively sets forth the blessings which come to His saints through the blood. The product of the grapevine literally cheers the heart and the blood blesses our spirits.

The Lord’s dinner is concerned with the body and blood of our Lord (1 Cor. 11:27). One was broken for us. The other was shed for us. One sustains our spirits as bread does our bodies. The other exhilarates us as wine does our souls. For Him there was suffering and death. For us there is joy and life. Let us be thankful to God that His cup was bitter indeed, but ours is blessed! His sacrificial death, His suffering for sin, were for us indeed, but He has not given us any part in them. The bread, when broken, does not harm our frames. The cup does not make our souls bitter. In this He was alone. We share only in the blessing, not the curse. No bitterness there for us! How unutterably thankful we should be that the cup is not filled with bitterness but with bliss!

I am glad to pass on the above article from so great a linguist as my good friend, Mr. Knoch. As a lexicographer and translator and author of a forthcoming work on "Figures of Speech," his testimony ought to have great weight. Not only has he proven that "the fruit of the vine is the product of the grapevine" (and not of the raspberry vine, the blackberry vine, the dewberry vine, the watermelon vine, etc.), but he speaks of its being "the contents of the cup," "the cup, containing the product of the grapevine," etc.

Mr. Knoch, in another article in the same issue of Unsearchable Riches, takes our position, that, while "the product of the grapevine" signifies "the blood," the "cup" containing it signifies "the New Covenant." The following quotations show this to be a fact:

"This (i. e., the covenant and the blood—JDP) brings before us two different aspects, one under the figure of blood, the other of a cup. Even the old covenant was dedicated in this way, for the. scroll and the people were sprinkled with the blood and Moses said, ‘This is the blood of the covenant which God directs for you . . . (Heb. 9:15-22) ."

"THE CUP. The cup presents a different picture. The blood is the sinward side, the cup points to blessing (1 Cor. 10:16). What happiness is his whose sins are gone! What joy to be rid of hearts that cannot cease from transgression! What exhultation to know that God is their God, and they are His people! Supreme is the happiness of those who know Jehovah! All this is a part of the new covenant, and it is beautifully illustrated by the cup. As the covenant contained these blessings, so the cup was filled with that which cheers the heart of God and man (Judges 9:13). The wine was, at the same time, a symbol of the blood, which it resembles, and of joy, which it produces.

"The cup is called a covenant. . . ."

We are glad to know that real scholars, especially translators upon whom we must depend for our English versions of the Scriptures, recognize these important facts.