The Last Supper

[atpollard]

Saint John's gospel implies that the Lord was crucified as the Passover lamb was sacrificed and that inevitably means that the last supper - happening as it is claimed in the synoptic gospels the night before his crucifixion - could not possibly be a Passover meal.

Since you want me to discuss scripture more ...

[Mat 26:17-29 NASB] 17 Now on the first [day] of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus and asked, "Where do You want us to prepare for You to eat the Passover?" 18 And He said, "Go into the city to a certain man, and say to him, 'The Teacher says, "My time is near; I [am to] keep the Passover at your house with My disciples."'" 19 The disciples did as Jesus had directed them; and they prepared the Passover. 20 Now when evening came, Jesus was reclining [at the table] with the twelve disciples. 21 As they were eating, He said, "Truly I say to you that one of you will betray Me." 22 Being deeply grieved, they each one began to say to Him, "Surely not I, Lord?" 23 And He answered, "He who dipped his hand with Me in the bowl is the one who will betray Me. 24 "The Son of Man [is to] go, just as it is written of Him; but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had not been born." 25 And Judas, who was betraying Him, said, "Surely it is not I, Rabbi?" Jesus said to him, "You have said [it] yourself." 26 While they were eating, Jesus took [some] bread, and after a blessing, He broke [it] and gave [it] to the disciples, and said, "Take, eat; this is My body." 27 And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave [it] to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you; 28 for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins. 29 "But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's kingdom."

The disciples asked Jesus where He wanted them to prepare for Jesus to "eat the Passover" [Mat 26:17] and they prepared the Passover [Mat 26:19] which they ate "when evening came" [Mat 26:20]. It was at this meal, the Passover, that Jesus predicted his betrayal [Mat 26:21]. It was also at this Passover meal that Jesus broke the bread and offered His body [Mat 26:26] and offered the cup of His blood of the covenant. [Mat 26:27]

An interesting feature about the traditional Passiver meal is that the matza (unleavened bread) is offered to all, but one special piece is hidden in a napkin or cloth and broken in half later in the meal. This hidden 'unleavened bread' has special meaning in the Passover ritual and it is a significant, symbolic gesture if Jesus chose THAT PARTICULAR matza as the one to use when he announced "this is My body". There are also several refills of the guests cups of wine during the Passover meal in preparation of a specific 'toast' during the Passover ceremony, however, there is also an extra glass of wine that is poured and drunk by no one at the meal. That extra glass is for "Elijah" when he returns. It would be a matter of symbolic signifigance if Jesus chose "Elijah's cup" to announce "this is My blood".

A Jewish perspective on the meaning of the "hidden Matza":

• In the outline of the seder ritual, the division of the middle matzah–yahatz–takes place early, before the great declaration, “This is the bread of affliction.” The eating of the retrieved matzah comes after ransoming it from the children at the end of the seder. The ritual of eating the afikoman is called tzafun, which means “hidden.” It, too, is eaten in silence, without benediction, before mid*night. After the afikoman, no food or drink is to be taken except for the final two cups of wine. In some haggadot there is a devotional prayer in Aramaic that announces, “I am ready and pre*pared to perform the commandment of eating the afikoman to unite the Holy One blessed be He and His Divine Presence through the hidden and secret Guardian on behalf of all Israel.”
• Brokenness is a symbol of incompletion. Life is not whole. The Passover itself is not complete. The Passover we celebrate deals with the past redemption of our people from the bondage in Egypt. That redemption is a fact of history and it heartens us because through its recollection we know that our hope for future redemption is not fantasy. It did happen once and to our whole peo*ple. A small slave people witnessed the power of a supreme divine agency to snap the heavy chains around our hands, and to break the yoke upon our necks. It was no dream, this redemption. It hap*pened, and at the Seder we relate the testimony of this act.
• But it is toward the Passover of the Future that our memories are directed. The redemption is not over. There is fear and poverty and sickness. There is a trembling on earth. Around us are the plagues of pollution, and images of fiery nuclear explosions in the clouds, not like the cloud of glory and the pillar of fire that led our ancestors through the wilderness. The broken matzah speaks to our times, shakes us by the shoulders and shouts into our hearts, “Do not bury your spirit in his*tory. Do not think it is over, complete, that the Messiah has come and you have nothing to do but to wait, to pray, to believe.”

If Jesus chose THAT Matza to hold up and say "this is my body", then Jesus was proclaiming with the breaking of His body on the Cross, the hidden mystery IS OVER! THE MESSIAH HAS COME!

Of course many people place no value at all on symbolism, so for them Jesus could have used any bread and any cup at any meal.
For others, there is deep power in symbolism.

 

[Albion]

If Jesus chose THAT Matza to hold up and say "this is my body", then Jesus was proclaiming with the breaking of His body on the Cross, the hidden mystery IS OVER! THE MESSIAH HAS COME!

Of course many people place no value at all on symbolism, so for them Jesus could have used any bread and any cup at any meal.
For others, there is deep power in symbolism.

I cannot think of a church offhand that places no value whatsoever on symbolism.

But I know that many people seem to think if symbolism is involved, that must be the sum total of the act or event.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Since you want me to discuss scripture more ...

[Mat 26:17-29 NASB] 17 Now on the first [day] of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus and asked, "Where do You want us to prepare for You to eat the Passover?" 18 And He said, "Go into the city to a certain man, and say to him, 'The Teacher says, "My time is near; I [am to] keep the Passover at your house with My disciples."'" 19 The disciples did as Jesus had directed them; and they prepared the Passover. 20 Now when evening came, Jesus was reclining [at the table] with the twelve disciples. 21 As they were eating, He said, "Truly I say to you that one of you will betray Me." 22 Being deeply grieved, they each one began to say to Him, "Surely not I, Lord?" 23 And He answered, "He who dipped his hand with Me in the bowl is the one who will betray Me. 24 "The Son of Man [is to] go, just as it is written of Him; but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had not been born." 25 And Judas, who was betraying Him, said, "Surely it is not I, Rabbi?" Jesus said to him, "You have said [it] yourself." 26 While they were eating, Jesus took [some] bread, and after a blessing, He broke [it] and gave [it] to the disciples, and said, "Take, eat; this is My body." 27 And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave [it] to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you; 28 for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins. 29 "But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's kingdom."

The disciples asked Jesus where He wanted them to prepare for Jesus to "eat the Passover" [Mat 26:17] and they prepared the Passover [Mat 26:19] which they ate "when evening came" [Mat 26:20]. It was at this meal, the Passover, that Jesus predicted his betrayal [Mat 26:21]. It was also at this Passover meal that Jesus broke the bread and offered His body [Mat 26:26] and offered the cup of His blood of the covenant. [Mat 26:27]

An interesting feature about the traditional Passiver meal is that the matza (unleavened bread) is offered to all, but one special piece is hidden in a napkin or cloth and broken in half later in the meal. This hidden 'unleavened bread' has special meaning in the Passover ritual and it is a significant, symbolic gesture if Jesus chose THAT PARTICULAR matza as the one to use when he announced "this is My body". There are also several refills of the guests cups of wine during the Passover meal in preparation of a specific 'toast' during the Passover ceremony, however, there is also an extra glass of wine that is poured and drunk by no one at the meal. That extra glass is for "Elijah" when he returns. It would be a matter of symbolic signifigance if Jesus chose "Elijah's cup" to announce "this is My blood".

A Jewish perspective on the meaning of the "hidden Matza":

• In the outline of the seder ritual, the division of the middle matzah–yahatz–takes place early, before the great declaration, “This is the bread of affliction.” The eating of the retrieved matzah comes after ransoming it from the children at the end of the seder. The ritual of eating the afikoman is called tzafun, which means “hidden.” It, too, is eaten in silence, without benediction, before mid*night. After the afikoman, no food or drink is to be taken except for the final two cups of wine. In some haggadot there is a devotional prayer in Aramaic that announces, “I am ready and pre*pared to perform the commandment of eating the afikoman to unite the Holy One blessed be He and His Divine Presence through the hidden and secret Guardian on behalf of all Israel.”
• Brokenness is a symbol of incompletion. Life is not whole. The Passover itself is not complete. The Passover we celebrate deals with the past redemption of our people from the bondage in Egypt. That redemption is a fact of history and it heartens us because through its recollection we know that our hope for future redemption is not fantasy. It did happen once and to our whole peo*ple. A small slave people witnessed the power of a supreme divine agency to snap the heavy chains around our hands, and to break the yoke upon our necks. It was no dream, this redemption. It hap*pened, and at the Seder we relate the testimony of this act.
• But it is toward the Passover of the Future that our memories are directed. The redemption is not over. There is fear and poverty and sickness. There is a trembling on earth. Around us are the plagues of pollution, and images of fiery nuclear explosions in the clouds, not like the cloud of glory and the pillar of fire that led our ancestors through the wilderness. The broken matzah speaks to our times, shakes us by the shoulders and shouts into our hearts, “Do not bury your spirit in his*tory. Do not think it is over, complete, that the Messiah has come and you have nothing to do but to wait, to pray, to believe.”

If Jesus chose THAT Matza to hold up and say "this is my body", then Jesus was proclaiming with the breaking of His body on the Cross, the hidden mystery IS OVER! THE MESSIAH HAS COME!

Of course many people place no value at all on symbolism, so for them Jesus could have used any bread and any cup at any meal.
For others, there is deep power in symbolism.

Honestly I am well aware of the difficulty with chronological differences between the three synoptic gospels and the gospel according to saint John, even the early church fathers were aware of it so there's always been some difficulty about when the last supper occurred, my tradition favours the night after the Passover lamb was slain but then it also needs to maintain the analogy of Christ as our Passover sacrificed at the time the lamb was slain. So when I read the analysis you've posted I think it is firmly in the synoptic tradition and ignoring the Johanine tradition. And since the post I wrote in the other thread was about saint John's tradition as different from the synoptic tradition I feel a little uncomfortable with abandoning his perspective as if the only one in the new testament were the synoptic one.

 

[atpollard]

I cannot think of a church offhand that places no value whatsoever on symbolism.

But I know that many people seem to think if symbolism is involved, that must be the sum total of the act or event.

Fair enough.
I am guilty of excessive use of hyperbole, for which I repent. :shake:

 

[atpollard]

Honestly I am well aware of the difficulty with chronological differences between the three synoptic gospels and the gospel according to saint John, even the early church fathers were aware of it so there's always been some difficulty about when the last supper occurred, my tradition favours the night after the Passover lamb was slain but then it also needs to maintain the analogy of Christ as our Passover sacrificed at the time the lamb was slain. So when I read the analysis you've posted I think it is firmly in the synoptic tradition and ignoring the Johanine tradition. And since the post I wrote in the other thread was about saint John's tradition as different from the synoptic tradition I feel a little uncomfortable with abandoning his perspective as if the only one in the new testament were the synoptic one.

I have heard (but it is so far out of my wheelhouse that I can neither confirm nor deny it)

we have a tradition of moving some holidays to Monday or Friday to create a 3 day weekend ... Presidents day in the US is an example where the birthday of the first President is celebrated on another day to create a 3 day weekend, but I am unfamiliar with the holidays of other nations.

In the same way, the First Century Jews had a tradition of moving "Special Sabbaths" like Passover to the nearest weekly Sabbath. This practice was followed by the Sadducee and Priestly caste. The Pharisee and Scholars were sticklers for the Law and would celebrate Passover on whatever weekday God commanded it. Thus Jesus (a 'Pharisee' accepting all of the OT Scripture) would have celebrated Passover on Thursday night (start of Friday Hebrew time) as the true Passover meal and been killed on Friday daytime to be buried before sunset Friday (the start of Hebrew Saturday) which would have been a double Sabbath for the Priests as both a Sabbath and a Holy Day. Hence the apparent confusion in the gospels comes from two different groups reckoning when to celebrate the Passover.

Matthew clearly wrote a more "Jewish" and "King of Israel" emphasis Gospel to an audience more familiar with Jewish traditions and OT scriptures, so it makes sense for Matthew to emphasize Jesus keeping the Passover of the Law and standing trial plus being executed as the 'Angel of Death' would have been passing through Egypt and executing God's judgement. John wrote a more gentile friendly Gospel that explains more and focuses on Jesus as Savior to all peoples more than just the Jewish Messiah, so using the more common Passover and not bothering to mention the internal Jewish controversy makes sense ... the Lamb of God was slain for the coming Passover Sabbath (the reason he was buried quickly).

 

[MoreCoffee]

Note: Nisan 14 is the day when leaven was removed from the houses of Israel and so would be "the first day of unleavened bread" and the lamb was sacrificed on that day and the Passover meal eaten at night, which is the following day being the "second day of unleavened bread". It is helpful to keep in mind that for Jews a day starts at sunset.

I have heard (but it is so far out of my wheelhouse that I can neither confirm nor deny it)

we have a tradition of moving some holidays to Monday or Friday to create a 3 day weekend ... Presidents day in the US is an example where the birthday of the first President is celebrated on another day to create a 3 day weekend, but I am unfamiliar with the holidays of other nations.

In the same way, the First Century Jews had a tradition of moving "Special Sabbaths" like Passover to the nearest weekly Sabbath. This practice was followed by the Sadducee and Priestly caste. The Pharisee and Scholars were sticklers for the Law and would celebrate Passover on whatever weekday God commanded it. Thus Jesus (a 'Pharisee' accepting all of the OT Scripture) would have celebrated Passover on Thursday night (start of Friday Hebrew time) as the true Passover meal and been killed on Friday daytime to be buried before sunset Friday (the start of Hebrew Saturday) which would have been a double Sabbath for the Priests as both a Sabbath and a Holy Day. Hence the apparent confusion in the gospels comes from two different groups reckoning when to celebrate the Passover.

You offer a neat explanation but one that I do not believe reflects either Sadducee practise or Jesus' likely affiliation (he was not a Pharisee).

Matthew clearly wrote a more "Jewish" and "King of Israel" emphasis Gospel to an audience more familiar with Jewish traditions and OT scriptures, so it makes sense for Matthew to emphasize Jesus keeping the Passover of the Law and standing trial plus being executed as the 'Angel of Death' would have been passing through Egypt and executing God's judgement.

But if Jesus died when the Passover lamb was sacrificed on Nisan 14 then he did not eat the Passover meal the night before and you appear to be implying that Matthew wants it both ways which seems impossible. The Lord died in the daylight hours not at night and the angel of death passed over at night according to the scriptures so the analogy you are attributing to saint Matthew does not fit his narrative of the last days of Christ's Earthly life.

John wrote a more gentile friendly Gospel that explains more and focuses on Jesus as Savior to all peoples more than just the Jewish Messiah, so using the more common Passover and not bothering to mention the internal Jewish controversy makes sense ... the Lamb of God was slain for the coming Passover Sabbath (the reason he was buried quickly).

I think you know that Catholic tradition has Good Friday, the day reflecting the week day on which the Lord died and that was preceded by Holy Thursday the day on which the Lord's supper was first eaten and followed by Holy Saturday the weekly Sabbath day on which the Lord rested in the tomb and the special Sabbath for the Passover are all regarded as reflecting what happened in the last week of the Lord's earthly life regardless of the confusion that exists between saint John's gospel account and the account in Mark, Matthew, and Luke. And the first day of the new week, the Sunday of the week after the crucifixion, is the day on which the Lord rose from the grave which is regarded as the first day of the new creation and the new holy day on which Christians celebrate the resurrection of the Lord and their own resurrection to come at the last day because of their (that is to say the faithful's) incorporation in the body of Christ. Ican if you need it give scripture references and/or quotes to help with the chronology but I imagine you already know them and do not need them as substantiation for what I've written. So what is pertinent here is that all of the ancient Churches maintain the same week days; Thursday for the holy supper, Friday for the crucifixion, Saturday as sabbath rest in the tomb, and Sunday as the beginning of the new creation and resurrection of the Lord. And I venture to say that the vast majority of Protestants maintain a similar view at least regarding Good Friday and Easter Sunday.

These week days cannot be reconciled with the double sabbath perspective you've proposed - one held by the secularised Sadducees and maintained in temple ritual despite the Law's demand that the lamb be sacrificed on Nisan 14, and a second Sabbath maintained according to Pharisee legalistic views and held either on the usual weekly Sabbath day or on a separate Sabbath day related to Nisan 14 but not on "Saturday". I think that history and the old testament scriptures make it inevitable that both Pharisee and Sadducee both agreed which day was Nisan 14 since the High Priest and his priestly assistants were the authority which had the legal right to declare the new moons and hence the beginnings of the months and specifically which day was to be Nisan 14. This being so there really is no room for the Passover lamb to be killed on any day except the legally determined day in relation to the new moon and Nisan 14 so there really isn't a case for two separate Sabbaths maintained by two separate Jewish sects and by implication two separate Passover days.

 

[Albion]

Fair enough.
I am guilty of excessive use of hyperbole, for which I repent. :shake:

Okay, but hyperbole was not what I was concerned with. Rather, it was the idea that if there is symbolism in the Lords Supper, then that must be all that it is.

This is faulty reasoning and also contrary to the belief system of all the churches that believe in the Real Presence. Sure, they see more than symbolism there, but they also see the same symbolism that Christians who do not believe in the Real Presence see.

 

[atpollard]

Okay, but hyperbole was not what I was concerned with. Rather, it was the idea that if there is symbolism in the Lords Supper, then that must be all that it is.

This is faulty reasoning and also contrary to the belief system of all the churches that believe in the Real Presence. Sure, they see more than symbolism there, but they also see the same symbolism that Christians who do not believe in the Real Presence see.

That is speculation, not scripture and I promised MC to try to play nice and engage scripture rather than attack speculation based on doctrinal preferences. If there was a verse that PROVED that it could not be literal but that Jesus was speaking symbolically, then I would present the scripture to stand on its own. No such scripture exists. Neither is there a scripture that proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that the bread in his hand was somehow transformed into literal human flesh (as early Christians were accused by pagan writers). If you wish to present some scripture that you believe makes a strong case for some transubstantiation or cosubstantiation, have at it. I will be happy to look at the scripture.

But I promised MC not to argue opinions, so I have no intention of doing so.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Okay, but hyperbole was not what I was concerned with. Rather, it was the idea that if there is symbolism in the Lords Supper, then that must be all that it is.

This is faulty reasoning and also contrary to the belief system of all the churches that believe in the Real Presence. Sure, they see more than symbolism there, but they also see the same symbolism that Christians who do not believe in the Real Presence see.

That is speculation, not scripture and I promised MC to try to play nice and engage scripture rather than attack speculation based on doctrinal preferences. If there was a verse that PROVED that it could not be literal but that Jesus was speaking symbolically, then I would present the scripture to stand on its own. No such scripture exists. Neither is there a scripture that proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that the bread in his hand was somehow transformed into literal human flesh (as early Christians were accused by pagan writers). If you wish to present some scripture that you believe makes a strong case for some transubstantiation or cosubstantiation, have at it. I will be happy to look at the scripture.

But I promised MC not to argue opinions, so I have no intention of doing so.

Albion is right, Catholics and Orthodox too see symbolism as well as the real presence and despite explanations current in Catholic Dogma (such as the aptness of the word Transubstantiation for whatever unseen and undetectable change occurs in the bread and the wine to cause them to be rightly called the body and the blood of Christ) the truth is that the holy Eucharist is a mystery at almost every level except the simple physical partaking of bread and wine which are called the body and the blood of Christ after the consecration. And when faced with a mystery - a truth revealed by God but unavailable to human enquiry apart from what is revealed by God - on the whole the only thing human beings can offer that is reliable is silence. It's a mystery and that's that. I do wish sometimes that my own tradition had more people willing to say that and fewer that opined about what it really means. I wish that for others too who opine about it being symbolic and nothing but symbolic. It is one of the great divides between the ancient churches on the one hand and the Protestant and especially the evangelical and free churches on the other. God grant that one day we all learn to be silent rather than so full of opinions.

PS: Thank you, atpollard, for promising and working to keep your promise. I do not want you to be burdened with any promises that demand too much, all I really want is a fair go and maybe some mutual respect in discussions. Psalms 91 and I found that some time ago and mostly we keep to our arrangement without undue silencing of deeply held positions, I'd like to have that arrangement with everyone who chats in here. God willing it will come eventually.

 

[Josiah]

Lutherans accept what Jesus said and Paul penned. They said/penned "IS". Not "is NOT" . Not "changed from one reality to an entirely different one via the alchemic mechancisim of transubstantiation leaving behind an indistinquishable mixture of reality and Aristotelian Accidents."


The Zwinglian (and often modern Calvinist view not shared by Calvin) is that Jesus and Paul forgot to say "NOT". Their bad.

 

[atpollard]

Lutherans accept what Jesus said and Paul penned. They said/penned "IS". Not "is NOT" . Not "changed from one reality to an entirely different one via the alchemic mechancisim of transubstantiation leaving behind an indistinquishable mixture of reality and Aristotelian Accidents."

The Zwinglian (and often modern Calvinist view not shared by Calvin) is that Jesus and Paul forgot to say "NOT". Their bad.

I came here to discuss scriptures on the Last Supper.
You will not lure me into your dark corners, troll.
:taz:

 

[MennoSota]

I came here to discuss scriptures on the Last Supper.
You will not lure me into your dark corners, troll.
:taz:

Spoken like a true Yooper.

 

[MennoSota]

Matthew 26:17-30
Now on the first day of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying, “Where will you have us prepare for you to eat the Passover?” He said, “Go into the city to a certain man and say to him, ‘The Teacher says, My time is at hand. I will keep the Passover at your house with my disciples.’” And the disciples did as Jesus had directed them, and they prepared the Passover. When it was evening, he reclined at table with the twelve. And as they were eating, he said, “Truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me.” And they were very sorrowful and began to say to him one after another, “Is it I, Lord?” He answered, “He who has dipped his hand in the dish with me will betray me. The Son of Man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been better for that man if he had not been born.” Judas, who would betray him, answered, “Is it I, Rabbi?” He said to him, “You have said so.” Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of thecovenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.” And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives.

 

[MennoSota]

Mark 14:12-26
And on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they sacrificed the Passover lamb, his disciples said to him, “Where will you have us go and prepare for you to eat the Passover?” And he sent two of his disciples and said to them, “Go into the city, and a man carrying a jar of water will meet you. Follow him, and wherever he enters, say to the master of the house, ‘The Teacher says, Where is my guest room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?’ And he will show you a large upper room furnished and ready; there prepare for us.” And the disciples set out and went to the city and found it just as he had told them, and they prepared the Passover. And when it was evening, he came with the twelve. And as they were reclining at table and eating, Jesus said, “Truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me, one who is eating with me.” They began to be sorrowful and to say to him one after another, “Is it I?” He said to them, “It is one of the twelve, one who is dipping bread into the dish with me. For the Son of Man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been better for that man if he had not been born.” And as they were eating, he took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to them, and said, “Take; this is my body.” And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, and they all drank of it. And he said to them, “This is my blood of thecovenant, which is poured out for many. Truly, I say to you, I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.” And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives.

 

[MennoSota]

Luke 22:7-39
Then came the day of Unleavened Bread, on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed. So Jesus sent Peter and John, saying, “Go and prepare the Passover for us, that we may eat it.” They said to him, “Where will you have us prepare it?” He said to them, “Behold, when you have entered the city, a man carrying a jar of water will meet you. Follow him into the house that he enters and tell the master of the house, ‘The Teacher says to you, Where is the guest room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?’ And he will show you a large upper room furnished; prepare it there.” And they went and found it just as he had told them, and they prepared the Passover. And when the hour came, he reclined at table, and the apostles with him. And he said to them, “I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I tell you I will not eat ituntil it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he said, “Take this, and divide it among yourselves. For I tell you that from now on I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood. But behold, the hand of him who betrays me is with me on the table. For the Son of Man goes as it has been determined, but woe to that man by whom he is betrayed!” And they began to question one another, which of them it could be who was going to do this. A dispute also arose among them, as to which of them was to be regarded as the greatest. And he said to them, “The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them, and those in authority over them are called benefactors. But not so with you. Rather, let the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the leader as one who serves. For who is the greater, one who reclines at table or one who serves? Is it not the one who reclines at table? But I am among you as the one who serves. “You are those who have stayed with me in my trials, and I assign to you, as my Father assigned to me, a kingdom, that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. “Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you,that he might sift you like wheat, but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned again, strengthen your brothers.” Peter said to him, “Lord, I am ready to go with you both to prison and to death.” Jesus said, “I tell you, Peter, the rooster will not crow this day, until you deny three times that you know me.” And he said to them, “When I sent you out with no moneybag or knapsack or sandals, did you lack anything?” They said, “Nothing.” He said to them, “But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one. For I tell you that this Scripture must be fulfilled in me: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors.’ For what is written about me has its fulfillment.” And they said, “Look, Lord, here are two swords.” And he said to them, “It is enough.” And he came out and went, as was his custom, to the Mount of Olives, and the disciples followed him.

 

[MennoSota]

John 13:1-35
Now before the Feast of the Passover, when Jesus knew that his hour had come to depart out of this world to the Father, having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them to the end. During supper, when the devil had already put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, to betray him, Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he had come from God and was going back to God, rose from supper. He laid aside his outer garments, and taking a towel, tied it around his waist. Then he poured water into a basin and began to wash the disciples’ feet and to wipe them with the towel that was wrapped around him. He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, “Lord, do you wash my feet?” Jesus answered him, “What I am doing you do not understand now, but afterward you will understand.” Peter said to him, “You shall never wash my feet.” Jesus answered him, “If I do not wash you, you have no share with me.” Simon Peter said to him, “Lord, not my feet only but also my hands and my head!” Jesus said to him, “The one who has bathed does not need to wash, except for his feet,but is completely clean. And youare clean, but not every one of you.” For he knew who was to betray him; that was why he said, “Not all of you are clean.” When he had washed their feet and put on his outer garments and resumed his place, he said to them, “Do you understand what I have done to you? You call me Teacher and Lord, and you are right, for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet. For I have given you an example, that you also should do just as I have done to you. Truly, truly, I say to you, a servantis not greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him. If you know these things, blessed are you if you do them. I am not speaking of all of you; I know whom I have chosen. But the Scripture will be fulfilled,‘He who ate my bread has lifted his heel against me.’ I am telling you this now, before it takes place, that when it does take place you may believe that I am he. Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever receives the one I send receives me, and whoever receives me receives the one who sent me.” After saying these things, Jesus was troubled in his spirit, and testified, “Truly, truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me.” The disciples looked at one another, uncertain of whom he spoke. One of his disciples, whom Jesus loved, was reclining at table at Jesus’ side, so Simon Peter motioned to him to ask Jesus of whom he was speaking. So that disciple, leaning back against Jesus, said to him, “Lord, who is it?” Jesus answered, “It is he to whom I will give this morsel of bread when I have dipped it.” So when he had dipped the morsel, he gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot. Then after he had taken the morsel, Satan entered into him. Jesus said to him, “What you are going to do, do quickly.” Now no one at the table knew why he said this to him. Some thought that, because Judas had the moneybag, Jesus was telling him, “Buy what we need for the feast,” or that he should give something to the poor. So, after receiving the morsel of bread, he immediately went out. And it was night. When he had gone out, Jesus said, “Now is the Son of Man glorified, and God is glorified in him. If God is glorified in him, God will also glorify him in himself, and glorify him at once. Little children, yet a little while I am with you. You will seek me, and just as I said to the Jews, so now I also say to you, ‘Where I am going you cannot come.’ A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another. By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”

 

[MennoSota]

John 18:1 When Jesus had spoken these words, he went out with his disciples across the brook Kidron, where there was a garden, which he and his disciples entered.

The Last Supper goes from John 13 to John 18:1. I chose not to share the extensive dialogue John provides at that supper.

What observations do people make about the Last Supper from these passages?

 

[Josiah]

I came here to discuss scriptures on the Last Supper.

Me, too.


Lutherans accept the words. Some others don't. It is appropriate to note that. Before we "discuss" words, we need to be up front as to whether we believe and accept them or desire to change them.



.

 

[MennoSota]

Me, too.


Lutherans accept the words. Some others don't. It is appropriate to note that. Before we "discuss" words, we need to be up front as to whether we believe and accept them or desire to change them.



.

...or include speculative additions because...God didn't say...so we can...

 

[MoreCoffee]

I came here to discuss scriptures on the Last Supper.
You will not lure me into your dark corners, troll.
:taz:

Your post made me laugh, I like the Tasmanian devil and your remark is funny so you get a like

:smirk:

PS: When I read posts like the one you responded to I just sigh and move on. All the piled up adjectives and doctrine flames just isn't even worth a response I reckon