South End
Church of Christ
4001 Taylor Blvd
Louisville, KY 40215

Who We Are About Us Classes Contact Us Study Materials Audio Sermons Order Free CDs Articles The Abiding Truth Charts

10 Facts About One Cup Controversy
Aaron Erhardt

1. Some oppose multiple cups in communion (1)

2. They argue that only one cup was used by Jesus (2)

3. They argue that multiple cups were late addition (3)

4. They argue that the cup (container) represents NT (4)

5. The word “cup” comes from Greek word poterion (5)

6. The word “cup” is used by metonymy for contents (6)

7. The “cup” represents the shed blood (Matt. 26:28) (7)

8. Christians in different places drank of the same cup (8)

9. Multiple cups are authorized by general authority (9)

10. It is sinful to make laws not found in scripture

Footnotes:

1. Opponents of multiple containers are often referred to as “One Cup” advocates.

2. This argument, which says Jesus used only one cup so we must use only one cup, is based on assumption. The Passover Feast provided that each person have his own container. Therefore, Jesus may have had them divide the fruit of the vine into their own containers (Lk. 22:17). Furthermore, since Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper in an upper room (v. 12), does that mean we must eat it in an upper room? What proves too much proves nothing at all!

3. The NT is silent on how communion was served in local churches. It is hard to image, however, that 5,000 Christians all used the same container in the Jerusalem congregation (Acts 4:4).

4. They argue that there are three elements of Lord’s Supper: The unleavened bread (body); the fruit of the vine (blood); and the container (NT). However, the Lord’s Supper has but two elements (1 Cor. 10:16). It is the blood of the cup that ratified NT (Matt. 26:28).

5. Poterion means “…a cup, a drinking vessel…by meton. of the container for the contained, the contents of the cup, what is offered to be drunk” (Thayer, p. 533).

6. Metonymy “is a figure by which one name or noun is used instead of another, to which it stands in a certain relation” (Bullinger, p. 538). Ex: “The pot is boiling,” that is, the water in the pot.

7. The fact that Jesus said the cup was his blood proves that “cup” was used by metonymy for its contents. Also, it could be drunk (Matt. 26:28) and divided (Lk. 22:17).

8. Paul, in Ephesus, wrote to the Corinthians and said they drank of “the cup” (1 Cor. 10:16). Hence, the cup was the contents, not the container. The cup they drank was the fruit of the vine!

9. Multiple cups aid in fulfilling the command to drink the fruit of the vine without changing the very nature of the command. Therefore, they are authorized by general authority.