Jesus Christ Our
Passover
THE THIRTEENTH OF NISAN:
SUNSET TO SUNRISE
Part
One
The Christian world
would rid itself of much confusion if it would return to the simple accuracy of
God's Word rather than retaining the teachings of tradition. For example,
Christians have thought that the last supper Jesus ate with his disciples was
also the Passover meal. Yet the Word of God clearly teaches that Jesus himself
died as the Passover lamb on the fourteenth of Nisan, before the Passover meal
would have been eaten on the fifteenth. He could not possibly have eaten the
Passover that year. However, even though the last supper eaten by Jesus was not the Passover meal, it was an important
occasion and we want to study it carefully.
Matthew
26: 20 and 21a -- Now when the even [Monday
evening, around sunset beginning the new day of the thirteenth of
Nisan] was come, he [Jesus] sat down with the twelve.
And as
they did eat. . .
This evening meal occurred
around sunset on Monday, ending the twelfth of Nisan and beginning the
thirteenth. People have mistakenly called this meal Passover because the
preceding scriptures tell of Peter and John's preparation of a room in
Jerusalem for the Passover. It has been wrongly assumed from this that the next
meal recorded was the Passover.
When Jesus sent Peter
and John to prepare the room, he himself was outside the city. The Word of God
does not say that he afterward went into the city to eat this last supper there.
One can more logically assume that Jesus' last supper was eaten in Bethany
because every record prior to this indicates Jesus was in Bethany in the
evening to dine and lodge. This would also certainly be regarded by the
believers as a safer place than Jerusalem.
Furthermore, the Word
of God explicitly states in Matthew 26: 20 that he sat down with the twelve to eat. Exodus 12: 11
commands that the Passover meal was to be eaten with the loins girded, feet
shod, and staff in hand. This indicates that they were to eat standing and that
they were to be prepared to leave at a moment's notice. Nowhere does God in His
Word instruct His people to make the change from standing to sitting.
The meal for which
Peter and John had made preparations in Matthew 26: 17 to 19 was the Passover.
However, it would not be eaten until the fifteenth. The meal in Matthew 26: 20
and 21 is recorded next in sequence simply because it came next
chronologically. This meal was eaten on the evening ending the twelfth and
beginning the thirteenth of Nisan, around forty-eight hours before the Passover
meal. Look at John's record of this last supper.
John 13: 1
and 2a -- Now before the feast of the passover [the two oldest Aramaic manuscripts
read, "Before the unleavened bread"],
when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world
unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them
unto the end.
And supper
being ended. . .
The last supper
occurred before the Feast, and thus before the Passover meal. Again, we clearly
see this last supper was not the Passover meal. It was simply Jesus' last meal
before his crucifixion. The "his own" toward the end of verse 1
included those of Israel to whom God had sent Jesus as a minister.
John 13: 1 says that
Jesus now "knew that his hour was come." This is the first time God's
Word indicates that Jesus knew the exact hour of his death. Before, he had only
known he would die around Passover time, and so he arranged to eat the Passover
meal in accordance with the law. Now, on the evening that ended the twelfth and
began the thirteenth, Jesus had knowledge from God that he would die before the
Passover meal.
In continuing our study
of the last supper, we need to study Mark 14.
Mark 14:
17 -- And in the evening he [Jesus] cometh with the
twelve.
Where did they come to
that evening? Very simply, they came to the location where they would eat
supper. Was it in Bethany? Was it in Jerusalem? Did Jesus and the twelve come
to another's home to eat with the other disciples? God's Word does not say and
no amount of guesswork will give us a conclusive answer. Mark 14: 17 says he
came with the twelve. Nowhere does it exclude the possibility of others being
present at the meal. There may have been more people dining with Jesus than his
twelve apostles.
Luke 22:
14 to 16 -- And when the hour [the hour supper was to begin] was
come, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him.
And he
said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before
I suffer:
For I say
unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom
of God.
In verse 15 the words
"with desire I have desired" are the figure of speech polyptoton meaning the same root word is used with
different inflections or forms. By this figure of speech Jesus emphasized the
great desire he had to eat the Passover with his disciples. The phrase "I
have desired" is in the Greek aorist tense indicating a one-time action in
the past. It means "at one time I did desire." "This
passover" refers to the approaching Passover meal two days hence. Jesus
was not referring to the meal he was then eating, but to the impending Passover
meal on the fifteenth of Nisan. In essence, Jesus was saying that at one time
he desired with a great desire to eat the imminent Passover meal with them.
However, he would suffer and die before that meal and therefore would not eat
of it "until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God," a time which is
still future. That is the simple, minute accuracy of this passage. Luke 22
continues to unfold the events of the last supper.
Luke 22:
17 and 18 -- And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and
divide it among yourselves:
For I say
unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God
shall come.
Mark 14: 18
to 21 -- And as they sat and did eat, Jesus said, Verily I say unto you, One of
you which eateth with me shall betray me.
And they
began to be sorrowful [sad and uneasy], and to say unto him one
by one, Is it I? and another said,
Is it I?
And he
answered and said unto them, It is one
of the twelve, that dippeth with me in the dish.
The Son of
man indeed goeth, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son
of man is betrayed! good were it for that man if he had never been born.
Jesus told them quite
plainly that "one of the twelve" would betray him. Why would Jesus
point out that the betrayer would be "one of the twelve" if only the
twelve were eating with him? This is one indication that there may have been
others present besides the twelve apostles.
The statement of
betrayal so stirred up those present that they immediately began inquiring
among themselves with sadness and uncertainty. Each one began wondering if he
himself would be the betrayer.
Jesus responded that
the betrayer was one of the twelve dipping with him in the dish. In the East,
meals were not eaten with utensils such as forks and spoons. Instead they used
flat sheets of thin pliable bread. A piece of this bread was torn off, wrapped
around a piece of food, and dipped into a common dish. Since all of those
eating would be doing this, Jesus did not single out any one person by this
statement. However, according to Eastern thinking a person had an unbreakable
bond of friendship and commitment to anyone with whom he ate, especially if the
food was salted, as it usually was. So while an Easterner would gladly serve a
meal to any of his guests, he would only eat with those he trusted, such as
family and intimate friends.
Revelation
3: 20 -- Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and
open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
This eating together
shows the closeness of the relationship. That is the significance of Eastern
hospitality when people eat with one another. For someone to betray a person
with whom he has eaten is unforgivable to the true Eastern way of thinking.
That was the deeper implication of what Jesus was saying when he pointed out
that his betrayer was dipping his food in the same dish with Jesus; they were
at present eating together. In the Gospel of Matthew we see the reaction of
Judas Iscariot to this statement.
Matthew
26: 25 -- Then Judas, which betrayed him, answered and said, Master, is it I?
He said unto him, Thou hast said.
Judas now knew beyond a
shadow of a doubt that Jesus knew he would be the betrayer. There is no
indication whether or not any of the others present heard Jesus' reply to
Judas. All of this happened as they were eating and obviously in general
commotion as each clamored to ask, "Is it I?" "Is it I?"
Sometime later during
the course of the meal Jesus performed another act of great significance.
Matthew
26: 26 -- And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.
It is significant that
the Greek word for "bread" is artos. In the New Testament, artos is never used of the unleavened bread that was required for
Passover and for the Feast of Unleavened Bread. The Greek word invariably used
for that "unleavened bread" is azumos. In each Gospel artos
is the word used regarding the bread eaten at the last supper. Since
only unleavened bread was to be eaten with the Passover, this is further
evidence that this last supper was not the Passover meal. In all the records of
the last supper, there is no mention of the Passover lambs being eaten. Surely
reference to this would not have been omitted if this had been the Passover
meal.
Sometime after this
memorial of bread was instituted, the memorial of the cup was given.
Matthew
26: 27 to 29 -- And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;
For this
is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of
sins.
But I say
unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day
when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.
Again Jesus stated that
he would not again drink of this fruit of the vine before his death. But he
assured them he would one day "drink it new" with them in his
Father's Kingdom.
Here at this last
supper, Jesus instituted a memorial for his approaching death. It is a memorial
to be recognized and one that may be participated in by all born again
believers until he returns. It is also a symbol of the making of a new covenant
with Israel, a covenant involving the shedding of blood. During the Church Age
that new covenant is held in abeyance. It will again be in effect when Israel
is reestablished as stated in the Book of Revelation, for then Jesus Christ
will again be present to reign over Israel in the Kingdom of Heaven. The
prophecy of this new covenant can be found in Jeremiah 31: 31 to 34.
Jeremiah
31: 31 to 34 -- Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new
covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Not
according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them
out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an
husband unto them, saith the Lord:
But this shall
be the covenant that I will make
with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law
in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and
they shall be my people.
And they
shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying,
Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the
greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will
remember their sin no more.
The new covenant does
not apply directly to those of us in the Church of the Body. It was for Israel.
However, in a very real and practical sense, we do enjoy the benefits of that
covenant and all the accomplishments of Christ which made the second covenant
possible. That is why we observe communion in remembrance of these things. When
Israel rejected Jesus as the Messiah, that new covenant he established was
withdrawn and is being held in abeyance. But in its place God made something
much greater available to both Israel and the Gentiles, namely, the great
Mystery, that the Gentiles are fellowheirs and of the same Body, each
individual believer having Christ in him. Only a small segment of Israel ever
came to the point of accepting this opportunity to appropriate the greatness of
the Mystery which God brought about.
When we during the Age
of Grace observe the memorial called "holy communion," we declare
that we remember the many blessings Jesus Christ made available by his death.
By revelation he instituted this memorial before his suffering and death. What
a loving act by our wonderful savior!
"This is my
body" in Matthew 26: 26 could not be literal. We do not literally eat
Jesus Christ's body. Centuries of argumentation could have been avoided if people
had recognized a very simple figure of speech called metaphor. A metaphor is
stronger than a simile which simply compares two things by using the words
"like" or "as." In a metaphor the verb "is" can
be replaced by the word "represents." Jesus was emphatically saying,
"This bread represents my body." Likewise, the wine in the cup
represented his blood. The Apostle Paul spoke of this memorial in I Corinthians
11.
I
Corinthians 11: 23 to 30 -- For I have received of the Lord that which also I
delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
And when
he had given thanks, he brake it, and
said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in
remembrance of me.
After the
same manner also he took the
cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament [diatheke, covenant] in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in
remembrance of me.
For as
often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death
till he come.
Wherefore
whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and
blood of the Lord.
But let a
man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that
cup.
For he that
eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation [judgment] to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
For this
cause many are weak and sickly
among you, and many sleep.
Notice that this bread
and wine are to be taken "in remembrance." That is why it is a
memorial rather than a sacrament (which is a rite with a mysterious meaning).
We are to give proper remembrance of Jesus Christ and the accomplishments of
his death. He died as Israel's last and true Passover lamb. Because he was the ultimate
Passover lamb, there is no need for any more Passover sacrifices or meals
because Jesus Christ was the final sacrifice. The Passover meal has been
replaced with holy communion, which is the memorial of Jesus Christ's death.
The cup of wine represents the blood he shed to atone for sins. The bread
represents his body. The accomplishments of his bodily sufferings bring us
physical deliverance. Not discerning the Lord's body has caused many Christians
to become weak, sickly, and even die. They have not claimed the physical health
Jesus Christ made available. Whereas Passover memorialized the children of
Israel's deliverance from the bondage of Egypt, holy communion memorializes the
believers' deliverance from the bondage of sin and its consequences. Communion
is the only memorial God has given whereby Christians remember the atonement of
His Son. And it is a memorial that, when done properly, brings immediate
benefits.
After the memorial was
instituted, several events took place which we will look into later. One of
these events was a "praise" or the singing of a hymn.
Matthew
26: 30 -- And when they had sung an hymn, they went out into the mount of
Olives.
Mark 14:
26 -- And when they had sung an hymn, they went out into the mount of Olives.
Up to this point, we
have observed in a basically chronological fashion the records of the last
supper as recorded in Matthew 26, Mark 14, and Luke 22. This was possible
because each of these three Gospels records several details common to them all.
However, the Gospel of John records this same meal from a totally different
perspective and with many other details. With the possible exception of the
proclamation that a betrayer was in their midst, [see John 13: 21 to 25] none of
the details of the event recorded in John can be found in the other three
Gospels. The Gospel of John relates many unique and significant truths of what
happened at the last supper.
John 13: 2
and 3 -- And supper being ended [the text reads "taking place" or "beginning to take place"], the devil ["Satan", in Aramaic] having now [already] put 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 was
come from God, and went to God.
This knowledge of his
superior calling from God contrasts vividly with the humbling service Jesus was
about to perform. Usually only a slave would do what he was about to do, and
only the lowest class of slave at that.
John 13: 4
and 5 -- He riseth from supper, and laid aside his garments; and took a towel,
and girded himself.
After that
he poureth water into a bason, and began to wash the disciples' feet, and to
wipe them with the towel
wherewith he was girded.
In the East the
lowliest bondslave, the son of a bondslave, was responsible to wash the feet of
his master's family or of guests when they arrived at the house. Anytime a
guest entered a house, whether it was once or fifty times a day, this procedure
took place.
Occasionally when a
person of high rank visited another's home, only the head of the house was
allowed to wash his guest's feet, and then he, the head of the house, would
serve his guest at the table. This was a very high compliment for a man to give
a guest. Jesus did this humble task and thereby set an example of love, service,
and humility.
The
"garments" of verse 4 refer to Jesus' outer cloak. This would have
left him wearing his tunic. The towel was a linen cloth. Jesus would, as a
servant, tie this about his waist and use the ends of it for wiping the
disciples' feet. The verb "wash" is the Greek word nipto, meaning "to wash one part of the
body."
The extraordinary point
here is how Jesus in washing his disciples' feet totally broke with custom to
show the extent of the love of God they were to have in their lives. These were
lowly men, but Jesus treated them like royalty. His disciples were completely
taken by surprise because they knew from their social status that they did not
deserve such treatment, especially from their lord.
John 13: 6
to 8 -- Then cometh he to Simon Peter: and Peter saith unto him, Lord, dost
thou wash my feet?
Jesus
answered and said unto him, What I do thou knowest not now; but thou shalt know
hereafter.
Peter
saith unto him, Thou shalt never wash my feet. Jesus answered him, If I wash
thee not, thou hast no part with me.
Peter, who loved and
respected Jesus, could not accept this act of humility from his master. Jesus
reproved his beloved friend and follower. If he, Jesus, did not wash Peter's
feet, then Peter could not share in Jesus' work.
John 13: 9
and 10 -- Simon Peter saith unto him, Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head.
Jesus
saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye
are clean, but not all. [not all present are clean]
After Jesus explained
the washing, Peter wanted to be completely washed. But Jesus said that he who
is bathed or washed all over needs only to wash his feet, and is otherwise
clean. The Greek word for "clean" is katharos, meaning "free from impurity in
every way." In the East, people would get dirty feet from wearing only
sandals when walking on the dusty roads. Yet the rest of the body would remain
clean. That is why it was customary to wash the feet. From this simple truth
Jesus then showed them that, as a group, they were basically free from
impurity, but not all of them were. The next verse explains this.
John 13:
11 -- For he knew who should betray him; therefore said he, Ye are not all
clean.
Judas was not pure. The
rest of the disciples were.
John 13:
12 -- So after he had washed their feet, and had taken his garments, and was
set down again, he said unto them, Know ye what I have done to you?
Jesus was a teacher to
the end. Having performed the action, he explained it so clearly that all could
learn from it.
John 13:
13 to 16 -- Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am.
If I then,
your Lord and Master, have
washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another's feet.
For I have
given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you.
Verily,
verily, I say unto you, The servant [Greek: doulos, bondslave] is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent
greater than he that sent him.
This was one of Jesus'
greatest teachings on serving. Jesus was not saying that his followers should
literally always be ready to wash the feet of fellow believers. He was teaching
a principle, saying that in attitude of heart his followers should be like
bondslaves. Doulos, here
translated "servant," is used of a dedicated, trusted servant. When
the analogy is transferred to Christian service, it expresses the highest
devotion of one who is bound by love. That is what Jesus' example meant.
Christians should devotedly help each other keep their walks pure before God.
They should be willing to do the lowliest task in order to bless each other.
John 13:
17 and 18 -- If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them.
I speak
not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: but that the scripture may be
fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me.
Jesus quoted the Old
Testament, namely Psalms 41: 9, in declaring that there was a betrayer among
them, one who would betray him even though they had eaten together.
John 13: 19
to 23 -- Now I tell you before it [his betrayal] come, that,
when it is come to pass, ye may believe that I am he.
Verily,
verily, I say unto you, He that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth me; and
he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.
When Jesus
had thus said, he was troubled in spirit, and testified, and said, Verily,
verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.
Then the
disciples looked one on another, doubting of whom he spake.
Now there
was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.
Theologians, artists,
and tradition have proclaimed that this disciple "whom Jesus loved"
was the Apostle John. As so often happens, people have assumed this to be
correct and have made a doctrine out of it. We cannot do that and stand
approved before God. The Word of God never tells us who this disciple was. The
argument can more convincingly be made that this disciple was Lazarus. Although
Jesus surely loved John, never does God's Word emphatically declare his love
for John as an individual. However, the Word does state this of Lazarus.
End Of Part One