Was Judas present when Christ instituted Communion?

"Christian Sedona" tours... interesting business concept. The desert has a mysterious beauty.

diakon Piter, your post saddened me because it seemed that you were trying very hard to "get the right answer" to a very unimportant question.

Still.. very saddening. Go get a girlfriend pregnant (be fruitful and multiply)...

My wife is pregnant yet[:)

I understand you (I study at the seminary, and I know the study of the Jewish Passover).
But the Fathers were more open than we know. And I'm interested in Western thought - the Latin Fathers.
I understand that only Hilary Piktaviysky to speak against the sacrament of Judah. Although he was based in Hilary exegesis on Origen, and Origen believed that Judas Communion.

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.

I consider myself a Messianic disciple, though I am not Jewish. Yeishuu`a emphatically DID NOT participate in a Passover Seder meal on the night in question because He never once participated in a Passover Seder. The reason for this is straightforward: the seder was not yet invented. Yeishuu`a DID keep the Biblical Passover, which included just three elements: lamb, unleavened bread, and bitter herbs. The seder (meaning the elaborate 15-step haggadah), however, was not invented until many years after the destruction of the temple. It is something that ought to be obvious. There was no reason for anything resembling the seder as long as the temple stood. I understood this before finding the external evidence and support for it, but I did find a Jewish writer who gives a great amount of evidence for this understanding in my Logos resources. Unfortunately, I don't rember his name.

Many Messianics, whether Jewish or not, overlook this historical fact about the seder. For instance, the seder plate wasn't invented until about AD1000, give or take, possibly much later. Some Messianics insist that the cup Yeishuu`a passed around was the so-called "third cup" of the so-called "four cups" that are part of the seder service. Obviously, this is anachronistic nonsense--nor does it agree with Scripture.

The seder was the rabbinic response to the destruction of the temple, but the seder such as it exists today has practically no historical evidence until at least AD300-500, and isn't really clearly referrenced until about AD700-900.

Just to make clear, there was no Afikomen at the Last Supper.

Also, just for the sake of clarity, someone mentioned "pita" bread earlier in this thread. I know what is meant, as pita bread is "flat" bread. However, pita bread is nontheless leavened bread, and the bread used for Passover and the Last Supper/Communion was without question unleavened.

David Paul said:

I consider myself a Messianic disciple, though I am not Jewish. Yeishuu`a

Then why do you consistently use Yeishu`a rather than Jesus which is an anglicization of Ἰησοῦς.  The NT consistently uses Ἰησοῦς, and the reversion to (an incorrect) transliteration of the Hebrew name seems something of an affectation.

David Paul said:

It's not an affectation, it's the only accurate post-captivity pronunciation of Yeishuu`a's name.

As far as Messianics are concerned, we are strong advocates of Hebraic perspective, which includes use of using as much Hebrew as we can comfortably manage. Obviously, some are capable of more than others.

In other words, you choose to use a late, probably Aramaicized, pronunciation rather than an accurate Hebrew pronunciation (though I think "Yeyshua" would be better).  Still, it's an affectation.  You aren't Hebrew, and it's Ἰησοῦς (Iēsous) in Greek or Jesus in English.  Why pretend to be something you aren't?

David Paul said:

I consider myself a Messianic disciple, though I am not Jewish. Yeishuu`a emphatically DID NOT participate in a Passover Seder meal on the night in question because He never once participated in a Passover Seder. The reason for this is straightforward: the seder was not yet invented. Yeishuu`a DID keep the Biblical Passover, which included just three elements: lamb, unleavened bread, and bitter herbs. The seder (meaning the elaborate 15-step haggadah), however, was not invented until many years after the destruction of the temple. It is something that ought to be obvious. There was no reason for anything resembling the seder as long as the temple stood. I understood this before finding the external evidence and support for it, but I did find a Jewish writer who gives a great amount of evidence for this understanding in my Logos resources. Unfortunately, I don't rember his name.

Many Messianics, whether Jewish or not, overlook this historical fact about the seder. For instance, the seder plate wasn't invented until about AD1000, give or take, possibly much later. Some Messianics insist that the cup Yeishuu`a passed around was the so-called "third cup" of the so-called "four cups" that are part of the seder service. Obviously, this is anachronistic nonsense--nor does it agree with Scripture.

The seder was the rabbinic response to the destruction of the temple, but the seder such as it exists today has practically no historical evidence until at least AD300-500, and isn't really clearly referrenced until about AD700-900.

Just to make clear, there was no Afikomen at the Last Supper.

Also, just for the sake of clarity, someone mentioned "pita" bread earlier in this thread. I know what is meant, as pita bread is "flat" bread. However, pita bread is nontheless leavened bread, and the bread used for Passover and the Last Supper/Communion was without question unleavened.

I agree that the Passover meal Jesus participated in before his death did not look like the Seder meal practiced by Jews today. However, I have read some very interesting (and scholarly) sources that suggest that there were 4 cups used during Jesus' time and quite possibly a primitive form of afikomen.

It is not as "obvious" as you make it out to be. In fact, there is no definitive evidence either way.

David Paul said:

The name and pronunciation I use is the Biblical one that was in use at the time Yeishuu'a was alive. Aramaicized?? Dunno, maybe. But it is nonetheless the one that was in use, and the change may well have taken place for some prophetic reason, of which I am not aware. I do believe that His Hebrew name was Y'hohshu`a, but that apparently isn't what he was called. The shorter, post-captivity version, a la Neh. 8, is the name that was common for the many males who were given this same name during the inter-testimental period.

I am 100% Hebrew. Only Hebrews can be saved by definition. But that is getting doctrinal.

The Gospel writers had no problem changing his name into its Greek form.

Joshua G said:

I agree that the Passover meal Jesus participated in before his death did not look like the Seder meal practiced by Jews today. However, I have read some very interesting (and scholarly) sources that suggest that there were 4 cups used during Jesus' time and quite possibly a primitive form of afikomen.

It is not as "obvious" as you make it out to be. In fact, there is no definitive evidence either way.

Whether the four cups were used in Yeishuu`a's time or not is really not the point. The more pertinent question would be did He use four cups?? The answer ought to be obvious--of course not. (Deut. 4:2, Deut. 12:32, Eccl. 3:14). No more than the possibility that He practiced "qorbaan" as the Pharisee rabbis did (Mk. 7:10-13).

But the operative word you used is "suggest". Since absence of evidence is no evidence (even though "nothing" never leaves a trace), it will be virtually impossible to say for sure that the four cups (or anything at all, for that matter) didn't happen at a particular time. But it is immaterial either way. There is no chance He had four cups on the table--there was ONE that was passed. It was prophesied and had tremendous prophetic significance.

Thanks MJ, for getting us back on topic, it was begging to be deleted as some people were beginning to adressing the poster and not the topic/message..

Do some partakers of the New Covenant still lie/cheat/steal/betray..? sadly yes, and because so, I dont see why would it matter if Judas was or wasnt there?

I favour the position that he was.. and would have likely snuck out at the end of the meal when he knew they were going to spend the evening - otherwise they would have arrested him at the house..

Hard proof, no, just my 2c
  

In other words, which view would be most amenable to you and your sect? Do you already hold to the idea of predestination, and you hope this text further supports, rather than challenges it? Or the other way around?

Life is like a game of cards. The hand that is dealt you represents determinism; the way you play it is free will.
Jawaharal Nehru

I did research for a First Century Passover Haggadah about 25 years ago. While Mishnah Pesahim 10 is a valuable source, it does contain post-first-century elements. FWIW, here is my annotated bibliography:

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Barclay, William, THE LORD'S SUPPER, Abingdon Press,
Nashville, 1967. A short, readable book.

Bloch, Abraham P., THE BIBLICAL AND HISTORICAL
BACKGROUND OF THE JEWISH HOLY DAYS, Ktav Publishing House, Inc., New York,
1978. This book gives the best analysis of the evolution of the seder.

Bokser, Baruch M., THE ORIGINS OF THE SEDER: THE
PASSOVER RITE AND EARLY RABBINIC JUDAISM, University of California Press,
Berkeley, 1984. The author explains how and why the Passover celebration
changed after the destruction of the Temple. Extensively analyzes the text of
MISHNAH PESAHIM 10, the earliest full description of the
post-biblical Passover seder, and
other ancient sources.

Dalman, Gustaf, JESUS-JESHUA: STUDIES IN THE GOSPELS,
The MacMillan Company, New York, 1929. A helpful book, which also examines the
Aramaic behind the gospel tradition.

Daube, David, THE NEW TESTAMENT AND RABBINIC JUDAISM,
The Athlone Press, University of London, 1956. Many interesting insights into
Jesus's words and actions, obtained by relating them to rabbinical traditions
and sayings.

Edersheim, Alfred, THE LIFE AND TIMES OF JESUS THE
MESSIAH, Longmans, Green and Company, New York, 1904. A sometimes‑ponderous
book, often more homiletical than exegetical or historical, but with lots of
information nevertheless.

Edersheim, Alfred, THE TEMPLE, ITS MINISTRY AND
SERVICES AS THEY WERE AT THE TIME OF JESUS CHRIST, Bradley & Woodruff,
Boston, 1904. A good book, with valuable information on first‑century Jewish
religious life. Includes some later elements in its description of the first‑century
seder.

Feeley-Harnik, Gillian, THE LORD'S TABLE: EUCHARIST
AND PASSOVER IN EARLY CHRISTIANITY, University of Pennsylvania Press,
Philadelphia, 1981. Contains a good conjectural description of the first‑century
seder.

Foston, Hubert M., THE EVENING OF THE LAST SUPPER: A
NEW COMPARISON OF THE RECORDS, W. Heffer & Sons, Ltd., Cambridge, England,
1928. The "new comparison" is an examination of some of the
particular words used by the gospel writers, with a view to suggesting a
different answer to the question of whether the last supper was a Passover
meal. Very difficult, not on account of the subject matter or the argument, but
because of the author's literary style.

Freedman, Jacob, POLYCHROME HISTORICAL HAGGADAH FOR
PASSOVER, Jacob Freedman Liturgy Research Foundation, Springfield,
Massachusetts, 1974. The author uses different colors to show vividly and
clearly which portions of the modern seder
date to which eras of rabbinical and Jewish history.

Gaster, Theodor Herzl, PASSOVER: ITS HISTORY AND
TRADITIONS, Henry Schuman, Inc., New York, 1949. Liberal scholarship. Useful in
that it contains a valuable description from a nineteenth‑century work of the
Samaritan Passover.

Gavin, Frank, THE JEWISH ANTECEDENTS OF THE CHRISTIAN
SACRAMENTS, Ktav Publishing House, Inc., New York, 1969. Some interesting
insights.

Goodman, Philip, THE PASSOVER ANTHOLOGY, Jewish
Publication Society of America, Philadelphia, 1961. A collection of Passover
facts and stories from all ages of Jewish history.

Graves, Robert and Podro, Joshua, THE NAZARENE GOSPEL
RESTORED, Doubleday & Company, Inc., Garden City, New York, 1954. A
controversial reconstruction of the "authentic" gospel by scholars
who reject the Christian interpretation of Jesus. Some interesting and valuable
notes.

GREEK-ENGLISH NEW TESTAMENT, Edited by Barbara and
Kurt Aland, Johannes Karavidopoulos, Carlo M. Martini, Bruce M. Metzger, Eighth
Revised Edition (Greek text: Novum Testamentum Graece, 27th edition), Deutsche
Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart, 1994.

Grelot, P. and Pierron, J., THE PASCHAL FEAST IN THE
BIBLE, Helicon Press, Inc., Baltimore, 1966. One volume in a Catholic study
series.

THE HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION,
International Bible Society, East Brunswick, New Jersey, 1973, 1978, 1984. A
popular standard Evangelical translation.

Jeremias, Joachim, THE EUCHARISTIC WORDS OF JESUS,
Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, 1966. The author firmly believes and
persuasively argues that the last supper was a Passover meal. A standard work
on the subject by a well‑known scholar.

Kitov, Eliyahu, THE BOOK OF OUR HERITAGE: THE JEWISH
YEAR AND ITS DAYS OF SIGNIFICANCE, Feldheim Publishers, New York, 1978. Sets
forth and explains clearly and simply the rabbinical teachings on the seder and its elements. Contains a
fascinating eyewitness account by a Roman official of the Passover celebration
in the days of the second Temple.

Levy, Isaac, A GUIDE TO PASSOVER, Jewish Chronicle
Publications, London, 1958. Good, brief description of the evolution of the
Passover celebration.

Lipson, Eric-Peter, PASSOVER HAGGADAH: A MESSIANIC
CELEBRATION, JFJ Publishing, San Francisco, 1986. Based on the traditional
Jewish seder, with New Testament
passages and comments.

Maertens, Thierry, A FEAST IN HONOR OF YAHWEH, Fides
Publishers, Inc., Notre Dame, Indiana, 1965. Proposes that Jesus, following a
different calendar, celebrated his own Passover feast earlier than the Temple
priests, in order to show that the feast had been fulfilled in his person.

Marshall, I. Howard, LAST SUPPER AND LORD'S SUPPER,
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1980. Explores the
relationship of the Lord's supper to the last supper, describes the first‑century
seder, and discusses whether the last
supper was a Passover meal.

NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE, The Lockman Foundation,
La Habra, California, 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977,
1995. A popular literal Evangelical translation.

THE NEW JERUSALEM BIBLE, Doubleday & Company,
Inc., Garden City, New York, 1985. A new revision of THE JERUSALEM BIBLE.
Excellent textual and study notes.

THE PASSOVER HAGGADAH, WITH HEBREW AND ENGLISH
TRANSLATION ON FACING PAGES, Introduction and Commentary: Based on the Studies
of E. D. Goldschmidt, Edited by Nahum N. Glatzer, Schocken Books Inc., New
York, 1953, 1969, 1979, 1989. A standard work, with many helpful notes.

PESAHIM: HEBREW‑ENGLISH EDITION OF THE
BABYLONIAN TALMUD, Translated into English with notes, glossary and indices by
Rabbi Dr. H. Freedman, B.A., Ph.D., under the editorship of Rabbi Dr. I.
Epstein, B.A., Ph.D., D.Lit., The Soncino Press, London, 1967 (New Edition).
The rabbinical sources on Passover. Very little relates to the first‑century seder.

Raphael, Chaim, A FEAST OF HISTORY: PASSOVER THROUGH
THE AGES AS A KEY TO JEWISH EXPERIENCE, WITH A NEW TRANSLATION OF THE HAGGADAH
FOR USE AT THE SEDER, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1972. A good historical
look at the evolution of the feast, with photographs and illustrations.

Regelson, Abraham, THE HAGGADAH OF PASSOVER,
Shulsinger Brothers, New York, 1949. "Introductory Notes and
Supplement" by Rabbi Sidney B. Hoenig, 1961. A nicely‑illustrated edition
of the traditional haggadah. The
notes and supplement contain valuable excerpts from the biblical, rabbinical
and historical writings on Passover.

Rosen, Ceil and Moishe, CHRIST IN THE PASSOVER, Moody
Press, Chicago, 1978. Moishe Rosen is the founder of Jews for Jesus, and Ceil
is his wife. This book compares the biblical, ancient and modern Passover seders, and relates them to Christ.

Schauss, Hayyim, GUIDE TO JEWISH HOLY DAYS: HISTORY
AND OBSERVANCE, Schocken Books, New York, 1938. A very readable but cursory
examination of the subject.

Segal, Judah Benzion, THE HEBREW PASSOVER FROM THE
EARLIEST TIMES TO A.D. 70, Oxford University Press, London, 1963. Liberal
scholarship. Difficult reading.

Silver, Arthur M., PASSOVER HAGGADAH: THE COMPLETE
SEDER, Menorah Publishing Company, Inc., New York, 1980. Its subtitle is
"Step-by-Step Directions, Halakhic References, Reasons, and Sources for
the Customs of the Seder," and that's what it contains.

TANAKH, "A NEW TRANSLATION OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES
ACCORDING TO THE TRADITIONAL HEBREW TEXT," The Jewish Publication Society
of America, Philadelphia, 1985. "Tanakh" is an acronym for Torah, N'vi‑im and K'tuvim, the
three traditional divisions of the Hebrew Scriptures.

Theiss, Norman, "Passover and Eucharist: the
Seder for Christian Use," UNA SANCTA, Brooklyn, New York, 1965. A first‑century
Passover haggadah. My research shows
that some of the sections the author has included are from the post‑Temple era.

Theiss, Norman, "The Same Night in Which He Was
Betrayed: a Study of Passover and Eucharist," UNA SANCTA, Volume 23,
Number 4. This is the article that accompanies "Passover and Eucharist:
the Seder for Christian use," and includes additional notes and
references.

Zeitlin, Solomon, SOLOMON ZEITLIN'S STUDIES IN THE
EARLY HISTORY OF JUDAISM, Volume I, Ktav Publishing House, Inc., New York,
1973. "The Liturgy of the First Night of Passover" (and the accompanying
introduction) describes the development of the seder liturgy and the evolution of its elements. Focuses on the
three (or four) sons and questions, and the dipping at the meal (the pesah into the haroset). Also discusses Jesus
and the last supper.

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.

Mark's version also seems to suggest the presence of others there besides Jesus and the Twelve, for Jesus' response to their query that it would be "one of the Twelve" makes no sense if they were the only ones present. I liked how the movie THE GOSPEL OF JOHN had Mary Magdalene present during John 13-17. Originally she appeared to be just one of the three women serving the men (see 10:51ff. on disc 2 of the DVD), but then she stayed after the others left and joined the table when Jesus began talking about the one who would betray Him.

I'm going back to some earlier posts since this has been knawing at me the whole time.  First you said,

David Paul said:

I consider myself a Messianic disciple, though I am not Jewish.

Then later you said,

David Paul said:

I am 100% Hebrew. Only Hebrews can be saved by definition. But that is getting doctrinal.

Whether you are using a different definition of "Hebrew" and Jewish" is not my concern.  What seems evident is that you are a nut.  Paul would disagree with you unequivocally,

29 Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, ³⁰ since God is one; and he will justify the circumcised on the ground of faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith.

Rom 3:29-31

²³ and what if he has done so in order to make known the riches of his glory for the objects of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— ²⁴ including us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?

Rom 9:22-24

And so would "Luke"

34 Then Peter began to speak to them: "I truly understand that God shows no partiality, ³⁵ but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him.

Acts 10:34-35

And Ignatius

If, then, those who had lived in antiquated practices came to newness of hope, no longer keeping the Sabbath but living in accordance with the Lord’s day, on which our life also arose through him and his death (which some deny), the mystery through which we came to believe, and because of which we patiently endure, in order that we might be found to be disciples of Jesus Christ, our only teacher, (2) how can we possibly live without him, whom even the prophets, who were his disciples in the Spirit, were expecting as their teacher? Because of this he for whom they rightly waited raised them from the dead when he came.

Epistle to the Magnesians 9

Eric Weiss said:

George Somsel said:

Whether you are using a different definition of "Hebrew" and Jewish" is not my concern.  What seems evident is that you are a nut.

Would that be משוגע?

 

Yes, but without the affectionate connotation.  Weird.

Time will tell...

[A]

Btw, George, there were a few comments of mine you simply dodged with attempts of clever repartee. In response to your use of Tit. 3:10-11, you said accuracy of doctrine was not an issue with regard to whether a person was a heretic. The only criterion was whether a person caused division. My response, citing Lk. 12:51-53, was to ask, "Is Jesus a heretical man?"  By your assertion, He must be...which would bring Paul's condemnation upon Him.

Eric Weiss said:

Joshua G said:

The Gospel writers had no problem changing his name into its Greek form.

Nor did Paul or the other NT writers. They also used "kurios" for YHWH and "theos" for ELOHIM and "Christos" for mashiach. It's not that they couldn't transliterate the Hebrew for Jesus' and God's name(s) and titles, etc., if they had wanted to. They apparently didn't want to or need to or saw the need to. And God apparently didn't see the need to ensure that our NT documents conveyed the original Hebrew words and pronunciations, nor did he seem to have a problem with the NT authors using the LXX for ~90%+ of their OT quotations or allusions. In fact, some NT arguments depend on the LXX rendering and reading of the verse, even when it differs in meaning from the Hebrew.

And you don't find anything slightly strange about that? I suppose Yeishuu`a taking part in a patently unbiblical series of activities that were concocted by the very group that He openly and vehemently condemned for ignoring and twisting and adding to and taking away from Scripture is of no consequence for you? The one and only group which He consigned to the second death of eternal destruction???

I never cease to be amazed by an apparent lack of discernment that exists when discussing NT issues, such that most folks who adopt a "cultural period background perspective" for the purpose of determining what Jesus did or may have done unfailingly appeal to Judasim. The cognitive dissonance is staggering. Attempting to establish what Yeishuu`a did by examining what the Jews did, and in particular the practices of the Pharisee rabbis, is to deny the entire context of Scripture. Virtually the entire saga of the Bible depicts the failure of Israel and Judah to do what they were given to do. That this problem continued unabated into the time of Messiah's walk is attested throughout the gospel accounts. He never ceases to excoriate the Jewish leaders for not keeping Tohraah according to YHWH's word. Virtually everything they did was "off-script". JUDAISM IS NOT AND NEVER WAS THE RELIGION OF THE OT!

Judaism was an intertestimental fabrication by which the Pharisee party, who had no legitimate claim to authority other than their admittedly legitimate dissatisfaction with the Hasmoneans (who in response to this theo-political challenge themselves established the Sadducee party) concocted a program that was designed to wrest authority for themselves in the eyes of the populace. The idea of Oral Tohraah, which has not a shred of historical or textual proof, was developed so that the Pharisees could effectively "cut out" the corrupt (in their minds and in truth) Hasmonean/Sadducee contingent, who also just happened to be...the PRIESTS. The Pharisees backed up their challenge by appeal to the Oral Tohraah fiction. The problem with the Oral Tohraah is that by the explicit definition found in THE WRITTEN TOHRAAH it is an adulterated LIE (Deut. 4:2, Deut. 12:32).

To examine Judaism and its practices for signs of Yeishuu`a's possible behavior is like searching through squares for evidence of circles.

David Paul said:

George (et. al.), you do err, not knowing the Scriptures. Paul wouldn't disagree, because HE DIDN'T DISAGREE...   Rom. 2:28-29

That both backs up my statement and disproves yours, even though that isn't exactly what I meant by my statement. BY DEFINITION only Hebrews will be saved. You may as well argue with oxygen.

“These verses [vv. 25–29] must be kept in their context, which is that Paul is dealing with Jews and making a distinction between Jews who believe and Jews who do not believe. He is not teaching that every Gentile Christian is a spiritual Jew. Rather, he is teaching that every Jew is not a full Jew. A completed Jew is one who has had both circumcisions, the circumcision of the flesh, which is outward in obedience to the Abrahamic covenant, and an inward circumcision of the heart as an act of obedience to the new covenant.”

Tom Constable, Tom Constable's Expository Notes on the Bible (Galaxie Software, 2003), Romans 2:28.