Was Judas present when Christ instituted Communion?
please help with good resources.
Comments
-
First suggestion: The Bible! [H]
Edit: Matthew 26,25; Mark 14,18-20; Luke 22,21; John 13,26
"Mach's wie Gott - werde Mensch!" | theolobias.de
0 -
Which library do you have Pastor Jesse?
Sarcasm is my love language. Obviously I love you. 0 -
Pastor Jesse Blevins said:
please help with good resources.
I always think scripture is a good resource. In Luke 22:14-23, Judas was at the table. In Matthew 26:20-30 and Mark 14:12-25, it is not clear when Judas left. And the Eucharistic is not in John.
0 -
tom collinge said:
I always think scripture is a good resource. Luke Luke 22:14-23, Judas was at the table. In Matthew 26:20-30 and Mark 14:12-25, it is not clear when Judas left. And the Eucharistic is not in John.
You're too late, Tom - that was MY suggestion, and I even added John! [:P]
Edit: And, yes, I'm aware John 13 isn't about Communion.
"Mach's wie Gott - werde Mensch!" | theolobias.de
0 -
platinum. there is a lot of controversy on this issue even among the scholars.
0 -
Pastor Jesse Blevins,
You might run a search on "Closed Communion" (there are people out there stating Jesus himself instituted Closed Communion since Judas had already left - though I can't see any scriptural justification for this), you should get some results you can go with.
"Mach's wie Gott - werde Mensch!" | theolobias.de
0 -
You might want to do a search of your library like the following: (Judas NEAR present) AND ("Lord's Supper" OR Eucharist OR Communion)
Jacob Hantla
Pastor/Elder, Grace Bible Church
gbcaz.org0 -
Matthew 26:23
Definitely supping with the Lord.
But some may differentiate between the meal and the ordinance.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Theolobias said:tom collinge said:
I always think scripture is a good resource. Luke Luke 22:14-23, Judas was at the table. In Matthew 26:20-30 and Mark 14:12-25, it is not clear when Judas left. And the Eucharistic is not in John.
You're too late, Tom - that was MY suggestion, and I even added John!
Yes, I saw that I was slow looking up the scripture verses. I will also challenge you to find the Eucharist in John.
0 -
"Mach's wie Gott - werde Mensch!" | theolobias.de
0 -
luke 22 definitely says yes he was present.
0 -
Theolobias said:
Nope, I did not see that edit.
Because the Eucharist is not in John, we cannot use John to support or deny the presence of Judas when Jesus Instituted the Lord’s Supper.
0 -
Pastor Jesse Blevins said:
luke 22 definitely says yes he was present.
That's right - I recall positions saying Judas was present but didn't receive Bread and Wine. Again, I'm not convinced by the argumentation going along with this at all, but I guess "Closed Communion" could be a place to find some mentions of these discussions.
"Mach's wie Gott - werde Mensch!" | theolobias.de
0 -
tom collinge said:
Because the Eucharist is not in John, we cannot use John to support or deny the presence of Judas when Jesus Instituted the Lord’s Supper.
Tom, I'm totally aware of that - however, I think John 13 should be mentioned since it shows strong textual connections (Traditionskritik) to Matthew 26, Mark 14 and Luke 22.
"Mach's wie Gott - werde Mensch!" | theolobias.de
0 -
in marks gospel it does not say that Judas left. in verse 23 it says they all drink from it. Mark does not exclude Judas ; he could have easily.
0 -
Pastor Jesse Blevins said:
in marks gospel it does not say that Judas left. in verse 23 it says they all drink from it. Mark does not exclude Judas ; he could have easily.
That's what I'm saying!
"Mach's wie Gott - werde Mensch!" | theolobias.de
0 -
Theolobias said:
but I guess "Closed Communion" could be a place to find some mentions of these discussions.
I can see where Judas partaking of the Eucharist would be very problematic with Closed Communion adherants.
There is also another perspective called "Close Communion" (Presbyterian & others)
and then there is the "Open Communion" where there just about everyone who professes can partake (including Judas Iscacriot)
[6] To throw another monkey wrench into the works consider John 17:12 . Some say Judas lost his salvation. [^o)]
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
I can see where Judas partaking of the Eucharist would be very problematic with Closed Communion adherants.
There is also another perspective called "Close Communion" (Presbyterian & others)
I first wrote "Close Communion" but wasn't sure about English terminology. So I was right by guessing there's a difference between Closed and Close Communion in English. Well, in this case I'd run a search on "Close Communion" first.
"Mach's wie Gott - werde Mensch!" | theolobias.de
0 -
Pastor Jesse Blevins said:
in marks gospel it does not say that Judas left. in verse 23 it says they all drink from it. Mark does not exclude Judas ; he could have easily.
We do know Judas left, at some point. I see no conflict between the accounts just because one relates it and another does not. I think it is possible Judas did partake and it is possible he left without partaking. There seems to be a difference between eating a meal and the ordinance of Communion. Could it be both took place and Judas left between the two events? The theological implications are pretty important.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
The denominations that practice closed communion (and this is just from my understanding - this is not my tradition) use 1 Corinthians 11:29 to support their theological stance. If I am wrong, please correct me.
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
We do know Judas left, at some point. I see no conflict between the accounts just because one relates it and another does not. I think it is possible Judas did partake and it is possible he left without partaking. There seems to be a difference between eating a meal and the ordinance of Communion. Could it be both took place and Judas left between the two events? The theological implications are pretty important.
While that is right, Luke 22 is much more clear about this question, since verse 21 comes after Communion - one might say Judas could have gone outside for a while just to join the others after that again and then leaving for good, but this would be pretty speculative.
"Mach's wie Gott - werde Mensch!" | theolobias.de
0 -
tom collinge said:
The denominations that practice closed communion (and this is just from my understanding - this is not my tradition) use 1 Corinthians 11:29 to support their theological stance. If I am wrong, please correct me.
I think that's right, Tom - however, running a Google search for "Close Communion" or "Closed Communion" and "Judas" tells me there are a lot of discussions out there supporting the view that Judas was absent during Communion.
"Mach's wie Gott - werde Mensch!" | theolobias.de
0 -
Theolobias said:Matthew C Jones said:
I can see where Judas partaking of the Eucharist would be very problematic with Closed Communion adherants.
There is also another perspective called "Close Communion" (Presbyterian & others)
I first wrote "Close Communion" but wasn't sure about English terminology. So I was right by guessing there's a difference between Closed and Close Communion in English. Well, in this case I'd run a search on "Close Communion" first.
Your understanding of the English terminology was correct from the beginning. I would agree a search of "Closed Communion" is most applicable here. Reading on the other perspectives will highlight the differences and broaden our understanding. (The differing views on Communion can cause quite a stir so I hope we keep the discussion on the surface.)
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Theolobias said:tom collinge said:
Because the Eucharist is not in John, we cannot use John to support or deny the presence of Judas when Jesus Instituted the Lord’s Supper.
Tom, I'm totally aware of that - however, I think John 13 should be mentioned since it shows strong textual connections (Traditionskritik) to Matthew 26, Mark 14 and Luke 22.
I disagree because we are now imposing the theology found in Matthew (or Mark or Luke) onto John. The theology found in Matthew is different than the theology found in Mark with is different than what is found in Luke which is different than what is found in John.
0 -
Theolobias said:
I think that's right, Tom - however, running a Google search for "Close Communion" or "Closed Communion" and "Judas" tells me there are a lot of discussions out there supporting the view that Judas was absent during Communion.
I would put this into the same category that I put the statement that I once heard that Jesus didn't really drink wine, it was grape juice - eisegesis.
0 -
tom collinge said:
The denominations that practice closed communion (and this is just from my understanding - this is not my tradition) use 1 Corinthians 11:29 to support their theological stance. If I am wrong, please correct me.
I was raised with the practice of open communion. The congregation I presently worship with practices closed communion.
They do use 1 Corinthians 11:29 , as you say, to support the practice.
I find the preceding verse (1 Corinthians 11:28) does not support others sitting in judgement of a believers worthiness to partake. A survey of famous preachers will reveal the judgment of others does not reveal moral or spiritual failures as well as a self-examination would. That said, I would have a problem with a blatantly sinning person to partake with fellow believers. But that is where church discipline should kick in.
I'm feeling I have strayed too far afield theologically. I'm not attempting to dictate doctrine here. Each perspective has genuine issues that are being addressed.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
What do the Messianic Jewish resources say about this? (I don't have many of them yet; on my very extensive list of future purchases)
I ask because I think the fact that it was a Passover Seder meal is crucial. When in the meal did Judas leave? In John 13 Jesus dipped a piece of unleavened bread and gave it to Judas and then he left; this would seem to indicate that it was before the institution because that particular "dipping" takes place early in the Seder celebration and most likely it was during the breaking of the middle piece of unleavened bread, the hidden Afikomen, that was Jesus' body given for us. It seems he definitely left before the cup would have come in the course of the meal.
Thanks for raising an important question; hopefully we can all point each other to resources within Logos that can help clarify the issue.
0 -
Rev. Wayne Paul Barrett said:
it was a Passover Seder meal is crucial.
Rev. Wayne Paul Barrett said:that particular "dipping" takes place early in the Seder celebration and most likely it was during the breaking of the middle piece of unleavened bread, the hidden Afikomen, that was Jesus' body given for us. It seems he definitely left before the cup would have come in the course of the meal.
Very good. This is becoming very interesting.
I've got to be careful here. Preconceived ideas about Judas perishing under the old covenant (Law) because he was no part of the new (Grace) .............
I've got some of those resources. Time to look at them.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Rev. Wayne Paul Barrett said:
What do the Messianic Jewish resources say about this? (I don't have many of them yet; on my very extensive list of future purchases)
I ask because I think the fact that it was a Passover Seder meal is crucial. When in the meal did Judas leave? In John 13 Jesus dipped a piece of unleavened bread and gave it to Judas and then he left; this would seem to indicate that it was before the institution because that particular "dipping" takes place early in the Seder celebration and most likely it was during the breaking of the middle piece of unleavened bread, the hidden Afikomen, that was Jesus' body given for us. It seems he definitely left before the cup would have come in the course of the meal.
Thanks for raising an important question; hopefully we can all point each other to resources within Logos that can help clarify the issue.
But if we look at Luke, Judas is clearly at the table.
0 -
tom collinge said:
I disagree because we are now imposing the theology found in Matthew (or Mark or Luke) onto John. The theology found in Matthew is different than the theology found in Mark with is different than what is found in Luke which is different than what is found in John.
Tom,
I wasn't imposing theology found in Matthew onto John at all, and there's no doubt John's theology is different from Mark's etc. I was simply stating there had been most likely a specific oral tradition of Judas being the betrayer and how Jesus dealt with this before the scriptural fixation of the Communion texts and John 13 went down, and the effects of this oral tradition can be clearly found in the Synoptic Gospels as well as in John's. Unless one is avoiding higher criticism, there's no real academic controversy about this particular point. As I said, John 13 doesn't deal with Communion, but since it is clearly linked to the Synoptic Communion texts, it can at least indirectly endorse the Synoptic tradition stating that Judas was present during the institution of Communion.
"Mach's wie Gott - werde Mensch!" | theolobias.de
0 -
tom collinge said:
I would put this into the same category that I put the statement that I once heard that Jesus didn't really drink wine, it was grape juice - eisegesis.
Me too.
"Mach's wie Gott - werde Mensch!" | theolobias.de
0 -
I want to share with you this quote from Mills:
You will notice that Jesus gave the Eucharist to the apostles on two separate occasions during the Last Supper. On the first occasion (recorded in Luke), He served wine and then bread, while on the second occasion this order was reversed. On the first occasion an unsaved person (Judas) was present, so the offer of redemption through Jesus’ blood was first extended to him. On the second occasion, fellowship in Jesus’ life was emphasized, and this is appropriate, as all the participants were redeemed. It is interesting that Paul, who was Luke’s mentor, nevertheless follows the same order as Matthew and Mark in 1 Corinthians 11, but then that epistle was addressed to saints.
Mills, M. (1999). The Life of Christ: A Study Guide to the Gospel Record (Mt 26:26–Mk 14:25). Dallas, TX: 3E Ministries.
Ironside: says Judas was not present.
Lenski: Judas was not present.
St. Augustine and some of the early church fathers: Say that Judas was present.
0 -
What do the Messianic Jewish resources say about this? (I don't have many of them yet; on my very extensive list of future purchases)
I ask because I think the fact that it was a Passover Seder meal is crucial. When in the meal did Judas leave? In John 13 Jesus dipped a piece of unleavened bread and gave it to Judas and then he left; this would seem to indicate that it was before the institution because that particular "dipping" takes place early in the Seder celebration and most likely it was during the breaking of the middle piece of unleavened bread, the hidden Afikomen, that was Jesus' body given for us. It seems he definitely left before the cup would have come in the course of the meal.
Upon several of these points there is dispute among the Jewish writers, but the order, as here given, is substantially according to the paschal ritual of the Talmudists. Whether this order was generally followed in our Saviour’s time, is very doubtful; nor, if so, is it by any means certain that He strictly followed it.
Andrews, S. J. (1889). The life of Our Lord upon the earth; considered in its historical, chronological, and geographical relations (467). New York: Charles Scribner's sons.
0 -
Pastor Jesse Blevins said:
luke 22 definitely says yes he was present.
It says he was present at the meal, but if you notice when the actual celebration of the Eucharist begins it states that he used the "cup after supper." If Judas left sometime during the meal then didn't return until he led the temple police to Jesus in the garden, he may not have been present for the Eucharist itself. I fail to see, however, what significance it has. Remember Paul's words, "For all who eat and drink without discerning the body, eat and drink judgment against themselves. "
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
Pastor Jesse Blevins said:
I want to share with you this quote from Mills:
You will notice that Jesus gave the Eucharist to the apostles on two separate occasions during the Last Supper. On the first occasion (recorded in Luke), He served wine and then bread, while on the second occasion this order was reversed. On the first occasion an unsaved person (Judas) was present, so the offer of redemption through Jesus’ blood was first extended to him. On the second occasion, fellowship in Jesus’ life was emphasized, and this is appropriate, as all the participants were redeemed. It is interesting that Paul, who was Luke’s mentor, nevertheless follows the same order as Matthew and Mark in 1 Corinthians 11, but then that epistle was addressed to saints.
Mills, M. (1999). The Life of Christ: A Study Guide to the Gospel Record (Mt 26:26–Mk 14:25). Dallas, TX: 3E Ministries.
Ironside: says Judas was not present.
Lenski: Judas was not present.
St. Augustine and some of the early church fathers: Say that Judas was present.
Hello Jesse,
Because I have never heard of the theological argument that Jesus gave the Eucharist twice during the last supper, I decided to look up Mr. Monty Mills and the publishing company who produced these items 3E Ministries.
I could not find anything that was written by Mr. Mills on Amazon or Barns & Noble, and I could not find any information on Mr. Mills.
For 3E Ministries, I only found the following information: the company was established in 1975, incorporated in Texas, current estimates show this company has an annual revenue of 56,000, and employs a staff of approximately 1.
Based on my own study and this information, I personally am not going to put a lot of weight behind what Mr. Mills says concerning Jesus giving the Eucharist twice during the last supper.
0 -
Was Judas present when Christ instituted Communion?
Here is a list of people that defend that he was or deny that he was:
Wichelhaus (257) enumerates as its defenders, Cyprian, Jerome, Augustine, Chrysostom, the two Cyrils, Theodoret; and later, Bellarmine, Baronius, Maldonatus, Gerhard, Beza, Bucer, Lightfoot, Bengel.
Calvin is undecided. Probabile tamen esse non nego Judam affuisse.
It is affirmed by the Lutherans, but denied by the Reformed.
Of the later commentators affirming it, are McKnight, Krafft, Patritius, Stier, Alford;
denying it, Meyer, Tischendorf, Robinson, Lichtenstein, Friedlieb, Bucher, Ebrard, Lange, Wieseler, Riggenbach, Ellicott. For an interesting discussion of the point, see Bynaeus, i. 443.
Andrews, S. J. (1889). The life of Our Lord upon the earth; considered in its historical, chronological, and geographical relations. New York: Charles Scribner's sons.
How one answers the question is important because it will help shape one's beliefs concerning who can receive the Eucharist. For interesting insight on the question of worthiness to commune read the works of Wesley (very insightful).
0 -
Peace to you, Pastor Jesse,Pastor Jesse Blevins said:Was Judas present when Christ instituted Communion?
Here is a list of people that defend that he was or deny that he was:
Wichelhaus (257) enumerates as its defenders, Cyprian, Jerome, Augustine, Chrysostom, the two Cyrils, Theodoret; and later, Bellarmine, Baronius, Maldonatus, Gerhard, Beza, Bucer, Lightfoot, Bengel.
Calvin is undecided. Probabile tamen esse non nego Judam affuisse.
It is affirmed by the Lutherans, but denied by the Reformed.
Of the later commentators affirming it, are McKnight, Krafft, Patritius, Stier, Alford;
denying it, Meyer, Tischendorf, Robinson, Lichtenstein, Friedlieb, Bucher, Ebrard, Lange, Wieseler, Riggenbach, Ellicott. For an interesting discussion of the point, see Bynaeus, i. 443.
Andrews, S. J. (1889). The life of Our Lord upon the earth; considered in its historical, chronological, and geographical relations. New York: Charles Scribner's sons.
How one answers the question is important because it will help shape one's beliefs concerning who can receive the Eucharist. For interesting insight on the question of worthiness to commune read the works of Wesley (very insightful).
I have Andrews in my library, and -- although I have searched -- I cannot find what you said...
"It is affirmed by the Lutherans, but denied by the Reformed. "
I don't agree with that at all; and I'm trying to use my resources to get at this also...... Can you give me a page number, please?
Philippians 4: 4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand..........
0 -
Milford Charles Murray said:
I don't agree with that at all; and I'm trying to use my resources to get at this also...... Can you give me a page number, please?
It's on p.473 the text he quotes is from the footnote at the end of the article.
EDIT: I'm not sure I agree with the statement either. BTW, I've grew up with 'Close' communion as Reformed and new some Missouri Synod Lutherans who practiced a very 'Closed' communion (only members of the celebrating church could participate). So either the statement is a huge over-generalization, or it demonstrates that the presence of Judas at the institution is not essential to the practice of 'close' or 'closed' communion.
Help links: WIKI; Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)
0 -
Thanks, Richard!
I should have been a bit more patient and worked a little harder! *smile*
Actually, I missed that. Also missed also, thereby, the "when" of the quote re. which Lutherans and which Reformed were being spoken of.
Sorry!
Peace to all!
Edit: I appreciate your "edit" also, Richard! *smile*
Philippians 4: 4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand..........
0 -
Thanks Richard for looking that up.
I had read the question on my smart phone and got on the computer to post it and found that you answered it.
As far as why I posted this question on the forum:
I asked this question because I am working on some sermons for Holy Week and got drawn in by it as I was doing my own research. I hope that this discussion may be of some use in your own sermon preparation (for those of you that are pastors) and will help my other brothers and sisters on the Logos forums to more deeply reflect on this issue.
For those of you that think that Judas was there. Fine.
For those of you that think that Judas was not there. Fine.
I'm not sure personally that I will ever come to a 100% dogmatic answer to it. For now, I lean more to the opinion that he was there. My own personal theology is not to be dogmatic on matters of opinion and if I am going to err I definitely prefer to err on the side of grace. I guess that also explains why I lean more toward the practice of open communion. Grace and Peace.
0 -
Peace, Jesse!
Thank you for posting the question on the Forums. It gave us all an opportunity to reflect again on many things! *smile* And to check out a few of our resources ... And to try out a few techniques to use this "mighty" Bible Software! And to touch base with Brothers and to Sisters!!!
God Bless you and your family --- and also your Preaching His Word to His People.
You seem to have a very good heart -- and a very good attitude indeed!
Philippians 4: 4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand..........
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
I can see where Judas partaking of the Eucharist would be very problematic with Closed Communion adherants.
Possibly but not necessarily
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
Very good. This is becoming very interesting.
Next thing you know, you'll be trying to count cups.[:)]
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
Next thing you know, you'll be trying to count cups.
1?
One branch of the Church of Christ used to use one cup and pass it around.
I don't know if they still do.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:MJ. Smith said:
Next thing you know, you'll be trying to count cups.
1?
One branch of the Church of Christ used to use one cup and pass it around.
I don't know if they still do.
In the Episcopal Church we use a common cup though there is generally more than one so that the communicants can be served more rapidly. Of course, the number of cups depends on the size of the congregation.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
Pastor Jesse Blevins said:
For those of you that think that Judas was there. Fine.
For those of you that think that Judas was not there. Fine.
And what about those of us who just don't know for sure? [*-)] Is that fine too?
Pastor Jesse Blevins said:will help my other brothers and sisters on the Logos forums to more deeply reflect on this issue.
This has certainly been a point my family has enjoyed discussing today. It reminds me to carefully read and meditate of the scriptures.
I do not wish to debate the point but there are some who believe Judas was saved but turned away, discarding his salvation. They base that on Jesus prayer in John 17:12 saying Jesus could not have lost what he never possessed. Most denominations that don't embrace "once-saved, always-saved" would not be troubled believing Judas had a free will to walk away from a saved state." It does not bear on my relationship with my Lord, so I will humbly let it rest.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
0 -
Matthew C Jones said:
And what about those of us who just don't know for sure?
Is that fine too?No, Matthew, you have to go for the ultimate evidence - Judas posed with the others for the picture[:D][6][:#]
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
No, Matthew, you have to go for the ultimate evidence - Judas posed with the others for the picture
Photoshop [6]
0 -
One thing you'll notice is that there were no gentiles present. This is because this was a Jewish observance of a Jewish celebration of the release of the Jews from Egyptian bondage. Jesus commandeers this and turns it into the memorial of his own death, and the pita bread and wine the symbols of his body and blood as "the death brought in" to implement the new testament that God is making with the Jews (Hebrews 9:16-17).
Note that because the NT writers had Greek scriptures, they did not understand TORAH and BRIT but thought in terms of a NOMOS and DIAQHKH ("law" and "testament"). As "To the Hebrews" says (writing to Samaritans), the testament is a post-humous matter. (The NET bible refers to it as a "will").
So, it is in appropriate for gentiles to partake of the pita bread or the wine (and those are the correct "elements").
The new covenant is specifically with Jews (from Breton's LXX):
Jer 38:31
Jer 38:32
not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day when I took hold of their hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; for they abode not in my covenant, and I disregarded them, saith the Lord.
Jer 38:33
For this is my covenant which I will make with the house of Israel; after those days, saith the Lord, I will surely put my laws into their mind, and write them on their hearts; and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people.
Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant **with the house of Israel, and with the house of Juda**:0 -
WoundedEgo ... I guess we can safely assume that your coffee table has a limited personage (referring to Bob's forum guidelines). That's not to say your point is invalid etc.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0
