Notes on the Last Supper

Personally, I do not hold the position that the Last Supper was a seder meal. I think that Christ purposefully stated that this was a new covenant, not a reenactment of the old ceremony. However below are some different scenarios which are possibilities, if you are looking for such.

The Synoptic Gospels and the Gospel of John seem to conflict chronologically. Here's the issue, and for the Synoptics, I'll just report what Mark 14:12-16 says; Matthew and Luke give less detail, but otherwise read the same:

And the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the Passover, his disciples said unto him, Where wilt thou that we go and prepare that thou mayest eat the Passover? And he sendeth forth two of his disciples, and saith unto them, Go ye into the city, and there shall meet you a man bearing a pitcher of water: follow him. And wheresoever he shall go in, say ye to the goodman of the house, The Master saith, Where is the guestchamber, where I shall eat the Passover with my disciples? And he will show you a large upper room furnished and prepared: there make ready for us. And his disciples went forth, and came into the city, and found as he had said unto them: and they made ready the Passover.

The problem? Coordinating with the other known historical data we have the Synoptics would seem to indicate that the timetable was that:

1. The lambs (the Passover, and the first day of the longer feast of Unleavened Bread) were killed (Thursday afternoon)
2. The Last Supper was eaten at the beginning of the Passover holiday (Thursday evening, until early Friday morning; in accord with the Jewish reckoning which started a day at 6 PM)
3. Jesus was crucified (Friday morning and afternoon)

But, the critics point to John's Gospel and see a contradictory schedule which has the Last Supper on a Wednesday evening -- and the rest is modified from there.

To say the least, I found this to be a tangled issue with opinions running the gamut and no connection to whether a commentator was liberal or conservative. Some proposed that John shifted the chronology purposely to have Jesus killed at the same time the Passover lambs were killed. Others argued that the Last Supper was not a Passover Seder  but a special meal. Yet another faction supposed that Jesus followed a special calendar used by the Essenes and some of the Sadducees, and that the Last Supper was on a Tuesday.

But the solution that shaves best with Occam's razor and coordinated best with the data laid in reading John with a more nuanced eye. Let's run over the verses in John that are the "culprits"...and at the same time, we'll look at some other verses that drop strong hints that John is following the same schedule as the Synoptics.

Now before the feast of the Passover, 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 devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him... (John 13:1-2)

This verse is sometimes seen as a problem because it is is read as saying that the supper and betrayal occurred "before the feast of the Passover," and the Supper, if held (by our reckoning) late Thursday, would have been during the feast of the Passover.

But most recognize rather that the only thing being said to be "before" the feast of the Passover is Jesus' knowledge and love (which has no time limit on it), and that verse 2 starts a new train of thought. (This fits in with the understanding as well of John as a supplement to the Synoptics.)

At worst it is admitted that the "vague expression makes it impossible to extract an exact chronology of Passion week" [Mich.Jn, 245]

Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the Passover. (John 18:28)

Here the thought is, Caiaphas and his cohorts have yet to eat the Passover; so the Last Supper wasn't eaten at the normal time, or else someone is making a mistake. Some even suggest that Caiaphas ate the Passover late.

That's actually very close to the solution. The key here is in knowing that in the popular jargon, and as evidenced by supporting literature, "Passover" was used to refer to the entire feast which was also known as the Feast of Unleavened Bread. During this feast, there were still sacrifices being offered that the priests might temporarily disqualify themselves from by being in the place of a Gentile. Evidence of this loose association is found [Smith.CLS]:

•        In Luke's Gospel: Luke 2:41-43 "Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the Passover. And when he was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the feast. And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned, the child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it."; and 22:1 "Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover."

•        In Mark's Gospel: Mark 14:12 "And the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the Passover..."

•        In Josephus, who like Mark loosely calls the first day of unleavened bread the Passover, and uses the terms inconsistently throughout his works (Antiq.14.2.1, 17.9.2, 18.2.2, 18.4.3, 20.5.3; War 2.1.3; though always treating them separately when commenting on the OT text)

•        In rabbinic sources, which refer to the "nights of Passover" (in the plural); even later a distinction between the two holidays disappears altogether

One pushback to this idea is that John uses the same phrase ("to eat the Passover") as the Synoptics do when they are clearly referring to the "standard" Passover meal on Thursday (Mark 14:12, Luke 22:15, Matt. 26:17). And admittedly, this is the only place where the exact phrase "to eat the Passover" would supposedly be used to refer to a meal that is a later part of the Passover/Unleavened Bread complex, without referring to the "actual" Passover as well.

However, though there is no exact parallel, the data above showing the loose association of the holidays, combined with corollary data showing that John does indeed follow the Synoptic chronology, weigh in great favor of arguing that John is using the phrase in a different way than the Synoptics.

Similarly, in the view championed by Alfred Edersheim, the "Passover" that the Jews were afraid to miss eating was the obligatory Chagigah offering. This was a required "peace-type" offering on the 15th which required Levitical purity to offer and to eat. The meal made of this offering was a joyous occasion. Lest anyone object that there would be no reason to refer to this sacrifice as "the Passover," Edersheim notes:

One of the most learned Jewish writers, Dr. Saalschutz, is not of his opinion [that there is nothing "Paschal" about the Chagigah]. He writes as follows: The whole feast and all its festive meals were designated as the Passover. See Deuteronomy 16:2, comp. 2 Chronicles 30:24, and 35:8, 9; Sebach. 99, b, Rosh ha Sh. 5, a, where it is expressly said, "What is the meaning of the term Passover?" (Answer) The peace-offerings of the Passover. SOURCE: A. Edersheim, The Temple: Its Ministry and Services

The "why" of the defilement is another matter, which we may as well cover here: nearly all agree that what is in view is the perceived danger of defilement for seven days by being in contact with a corpse. There was a Jewish belief that Gentile dwellings were unclean because Gentiles buried aborted fetuses in their houses or washed them down drains. Under the rubric of Lev. 7:19-21, the priests could not eat of any sacrifice while unclean. However, Carson adds that even the one-day defilement of yeast in the house [cf. Ex. 12:19] would make for a tremendous inconvenience for the priests in their public functions. [Cars.GJ, 588]

And it was the preparation of the Passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King! (John 19:14)

Some point out that John has specified the hour to coordinate with the paschal sacrifice and is making a theological point. But there are two problems with this.

Contradiction is sometimes alleged in that Mark reports the crucifixion at the third hour (Mark 15:25) while John says the sixth. The basic reply is that Mark and the other synoptics are using Jewish time (sunset to sunset; third hour = 9 AM); John is using some form of Roman time, which is like ours (sixth hour = 6 AM - note that John says about the sixth hour; he's estimating). The former method is still used in the Middle East, and we and other Western nations use the latter.

We know from the Synoptics that the crucifixion took over 6 hours. If John's sixth hour is really the Jewish sixth hour - noon, as unfortunately, even the Living Bible says - then the crucifixion lasted past the time when the Sabbath started. John 19:31 says that the Jews didn't want the bodies left up over the Sabbath, which obviously means that the Sabbath hadn't started yet.

So either John is giving us an extraordinarily short crucifixion, or he is giving us the time in some Roman mode. Since crucifixions were usually extended affairs, the latter assumption is more valid.

But there is an even more clear indication that John is using some form of Roman time. In John 1:39 we are told that Andrew and Peter met Jesus and "spent that day with him. It was about the tenth hour." If this were Jewish time, that would make it 4 PM - too late to spend the "day" with someone (or maybe 4 AM, as some suggest, which at any rate is not usual visiting hours).

But by the other chronology, it is 10 AM - ample time to spend the day. This is a pretty clear indication of how John is reckoning things. (But again, the LIV gets it wrong here. John 4:6 is a time reference that would fit either paradigm as well.)

Objection: The Romans actually used the same sort of time as the Jews, that is, sunset to sunset.

This is not entirely true. Many Romans did use this sort of time, but others did not. The time like ours (midnight to midnight) was known to be used in legal matters, and there is some evidence from martyrdom accounts in the area that this sort of time was used in Asia Minor, where John did his evangelism. Pliny the Elder also notes that various professions varied in their reckoning of time. It is our contention that the evidence does point to John using a "midnight to midnight" model.

The Roman time measurement, at any rate, means that the time is nowhere near the sacrifice time, indeed, is over half a day off. Moreover, our second point: if John wanted to make this point, he could have done so quite obviously (as Mark mentioned the exact day the lambs were killed), and John is clearly the sort who would make significant mention of it (as the one who called Jesus the "lamb of God" -- Cars.GJ, 457).

The main point made here is to say that this "preparation of the Passover" refers to the preparing of it on Thursday. [Mich.Jn, 324] But the word "preparation" here refers to the day of preparation for the Sabbath -- i.e., Friday. In other words, John is saying that it was the Friday, the Sabbath preparation day, of the Passover. The word "preparation" (paraskeue) is never used anywhere else in coordination with the word "Passover" like this, and elsewhere it always refers to Friday before a Sabbath -- in Josephus, and in second-century patristic sources. [Cars.GJ, 604]

Note as well that John goes on to refer to the preparation by itself in 19:42, which all agree refers to a Friday.

Next up is John 19:31: "The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation [Friday], that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the Sabbath day [Saturday]..." This helps us with 19:14 above, for it makes no sense unless the days are consecutive and the "preparation" of the Passover referred to is a Friday. John goes on to say that "Sabbath day was an high day," which some take to mean that he regarded this Sabbath as the Passover day itself, but "even by the Synoptic reckoning the description would be suitable, as the Sabbath in the week of Unleavened Bread had the special observance of the offering of a sheaf of barley (Lev. 23.11)." [Lind.GJ, 584]

Now to seal this interpretation, we can also point to a few places where John "shows an awareness" that he is in with the Synoptic chronology:

•        John 13:10 -- "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."

This verse, in which Jesus turns down Peter's request for a washing of head and hands, suggests that the disciples had already taken the ritual bath required for Passover. [Smit.CLS, 32]

•        John 13:27-29 -- "And after the sop Satan entered into him. Then said Jesus unto him, That thou doest, do quickly. Now no man at the table knew for what intent he spake this unto him. For some of them thought, because Judas had the bag, that Jesus had said unto him, Buy those things that we have need of against the feast; or, that he should give something to the poor."

Some think this means John puts the Supper on a Wednesday, because shops would not be open if it were Thursday night for Judas to buy stuff for the Passover feast. But first, the "feast" here should be understood as the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the several days of holiday that followed. Second, if this is Wednesday, then why is it needful for Judas to move quickly under this assumption, since they could easily go shopping Thursday?

That leaves the problem of shopping on Passover eve, but later rabbinic literature indicates that "one could buy necessities even on a Sabbath if it fell before Passover, provided it was done by leaving something in trust [the word here, agorazo, literally means "go to market" and does not imply buying with money necessarily] rather than paying cash." [Cars.GJ, 475]

One suggests that it was possible also to get stuff on Passover eve, but like shopping on Christmas today, it was a lot more inconvenient.

Third, this passage clues us in about this being a Passover eve by the reference to the poor. It was on Passover eve that the temple gates were left open from midnight forward, so that beggars could congregate there and collect alms.

•        Jesus resided for the feast time in Bethany, but ate the Last Supper in Jerusalem, where it was required that the Passover be eaten. If this was a "regular" meal, why bother going into Jerusalem? Moreover, after the meal they did not go back to Bethany, but went into the Kidron Valley (18:1), which fits in with the ritual Passover requirement that they spend the night within the "legal limits" of Jerusalem [Smit.CLS, 31].

•        John 19:42 -- "There laid they Jesus therefore because of the Jews' preparation day; for the sepulchre was nigh at hand." The Mishnah Sabbath 23:4-5 says that burial is not permitted on the Sabbath, but washing and anointing was. [Cars.GJ, 943] The lack of completion of the burial means that John's "preparation" is a Friday, and the Supper was on Thursday.

Objection: Jews counted part of a day as an entire day. If this is so, then it seems that there's no reason why the fragment of day remaining from 4:00 PM to the end of the day couldn't have been counted as one day.

This is true in practical terms but the language would still be inappropriate. It stands to reason that their engagement would last longer than only 2 hours on such important topics as would be discussed, regarding Jesus' messiahship. Thus it would have to say, "They spent the day with him and into of the next day."

Objection: When Jesus asked the Samaritan woman for water, he was exhausted from his journey, and it was about the sixth hour. If John was using Roman time, then it would have been 6 AM. How could he be exhausted from traveling if it was only 6 AM?

It was not unusual for people to travel at night when it was cooler and travel was less exerting. The objector apparently has never lived in a place where air conditioning was not available.

So we conclude that the data weighs heavily in favor of John being in full accord with the Synoptic chronology.

A reader has helpfully submitted some supporting evidence for this article which we have used in a response to Bart Ehrman's Jesus, Interrupted. To see that material, please subscribe to the Tekton E-Block and request that issue in a separate email.

-JPH

Sources

1.       Cars.GJ -- Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John IVP, 1991.
2.       Lind.GJ -- Lindars, Barnabas. The Gospel of John. Eerdmans, 1972.
3.       Mich.Jn -- Michaels J. Ramsey. John. Hendrickson: 1989.
4.       Smit.CLS -- Smith, Barry. "The Chronology of the Last Supper." Westminster Theological Journal 53 (1991), 29-45.

 ++++++++++++++

                            

                

       

         

                   

When does Passover begin?

Introduction

It might be a bit confusing to understand exactly when Passover begins, at least from a traditional Jewish point of view.  Does it begin on Nisan 14 or Nisan 15?  In order to find an answer to this question, we first need to make a distinction between zman shechitat korban Pesach (the time of the slaughter of the Passover lambs) and then consider the commemoration of the holiday that was later instituted as the "Passover Seder ."





The Passover in Egypt            

                   

The original sacrifice of the Passover (in Egypt) was of an unblemished male lamb that was selected on Nisan 10 and kept until the evening of the 14th, when it was sacrificed and its blood applied to the two doorposts and upper lintel of the house using a bunch of hyssop (Exod. 12:2-7, 22). The door to the house was then sealed and no one was permitted to leave until the following morning (Exod. 12:22). The blood on the doors would function as a sign for God to "pass over" the house when He descended to slay all the firstborn of Egypt later that night (Exod. 12:13). Within the sealed house - during that very night (לַיְלָה) - the lamb would be roasted over a fire and eaten with unleavened bread and bitter herbs (Exod. 12:8). This sacred meal was to be commemorated as a feast to the LORD throughout all the generations and retold during the Passover Seder  service (Exod. 12:14, 25-27). Moreover, to commemorate the haste in which the Jews were brought out of Egypt, for seven days - from the evening of Nisan 14 until the evening of Nisan 21 - only unleavened bread was to be eaten and no leaven was to be found within any of the houses (Exod. 12:17-20).

                                               
Passover at the Temple    

During the time of the Temple, zman shechitat korban Pesach (the time of the slaughter of the Passover lambs) was performed during the afternoon hours of Nisan 14, in observance of the commandment: "In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month, between the evenings (i.e., bein ha-arbayim: בֵּין הָעַרְבָּיִם), is the Passover for the LORD" (Lev. 23:5). Note that the time of the lamb's sacrifice is described as "bein ha-arbayim," usually translated as "between the evenings" or "between the settings." To the sages, the "first setting" of the Sun occurred at the beginning of its descent after noon, and the "second setting" referred to sundown or twilight.  Hence "bein ha-arbayim" would mean sometime after noon but before twilight, or more simply, "the afternoon."

The sacrifice of the Passover lambs on the afternoon of Nisan 14 agrees with Jewish Oral Law and tradition. As Maimonides wrote, "It is a positive commandment to slaughter the Korban Pesach on the fourteenth of Nisan after midday" (Hilchot Korban Pesach). There is some discussion among the sages, however, as to whether the sacrifice of the korban Pesach occurred before or after the second set of tamid (daily) offerings made at the Temple (Exod. 29:38-42, Num. 28:1-8). In general, however, most of the sages agreed with Maimonides who clearly stated: "The Korban Pesach is not slaughtered until after the Tamid of the afternoon." In other words, the slaughter of the Passover lambs occurred on the late afternoon of Nisan 14.


Note that though the sacrifice of the Passover lamb occurred on the afternoon Nisan 14, the ceremonial eating of the meal, or the "Seder ," would begin later, just before sundown and continue throughout the night. This agrees with Exod. 12:8 which states clearly that the Passover meal was consumed during the night: "They shall eat the flesh [of the Pascal lamb] that night" (i.e., ba-lailah hazeh: בַּלַּיְלָה הַזֶּה). And since the Jewish day begins after sundown (when three stars are visible in the night sky), the traditional Passover Seder  would begin just before sundown on Nisan 14 but would continue into the new day of Nisan 15, which is also the start of the seven-day festival of chag ha-matzot (חַג הַמַּצּוֹת), the "Feast of Unleavened Bread" (Lev. 23:6).

In light of all this perhaps you can better appreciate why Jewish tradition regards "Passover" as an eight day holiday, since it links the times of the korban Pesach, the Seder  meal, and the seven days of unleavened bread together as a whole.

Passover Today

Today the traditional Passover Seder  begins on "Erev Pesach," meaning just before sundown on Nisan 14 and running into the first hours of Nisan 15 (outside of Israel a second Seder  is often held the following evening as well). The date of Passover can be somewhat confusing if you look at a Jewish calendar to see it listed simply as "Nisan 15." Again we must remember that the Jewish day begins on the night before it is listed on the calendar.  For example, if the calendar says that March 30th is Nisan 15 (i.e., Passover), then you must understand that Nisan 15 actually begins at sundown on the night before, i.e., on March 29th:

Unfortunately, most Jewish calendars refer to the previous evening as "Erev Pesach" without indicating that the first "day" of Passover spans the end of Nisan 14 and carries over to Nisan 15.

In answer to our original question, then, (i.e., "Does Passover begin on Nisan 14 or Nisan 15?"), the answer is that while the Passover sacrifice was made on the afternoon of the 14th, the Passover Seder  will span both the 14th and 15th!  I realize all this might be a bit confusing, but it's just the way the Jewish calendar works!


Addendum:



The important point in all of this, of course, is that Yeshua the is the "Lamb of God" who was sacrificed and raised from the dead according to the Scriptures (1 Cor. 15:3-5). As for the precise calculations involved in all this, including the time of His early Seder  with His disciples, the exact hours of His crucifixion, and so on, there are numerous questions, though I completely trust that Yeshua 100% fulfilled the types and prophecies concerning the meaning of the Passover.

רָאוּי הַשֶּׂה הַטָּבוּחַ לְקַבֵּל גְבוּרָה

עשֶׁר וְחָכְמָה וְכּחַ וִיקַר וְכָבוֹד וּבְרָכָה

ra'uy ha-seh ha-tavuach lekabel gevurah,

osher v'chokhmah v'koach vikar v'khavod uvracha

Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom

and might and honor and glory and blessing! (Rev. 5:12)



Here's the issue, and for the Synoptics, I'll just report what Mark 14:12-16 says; Matthew and Luke give less detail, but otherwise read the same:

And the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the Passover, his disciples said unto him, Where wilt thou that we go and prepare that thou mayest eat the Passover? And he sendeth forth two of his disciples, and saith unto them, Go ye into the city, and there shall meet you a man bearing a pitcher of water: follow him. And wheresoever he shall go in, say ye to the goodman of the house, The Master saith, Where is the guestchamber, where I shall eat the Passover with my disciples? And he will show you a large upper room furnished and prepared: there make ready for us. And his disciples went forth, and came into the city, and found as he had said unto them: and they made ready the Passover.

The problem? Coordinating with the other known historical data we have the Synoptics would seem to indicate that the timetable was that:

1. lambs (the Passover, and the first day of the longer feast of Unleavened Bread) were killed (Thursday afternoon)
2. the Last Supper was eaten at the beginning of the Passover holiday (Thursday evening, until early Friday morning; in accord with the Jewish reckoning which started a day at 6 PM)
3. Jesus was crucified (Friday morning and afternoon)

But, the critics point to John's Gospel and see a contradictory schedule which has the Last Supper on a Wednesday evening -- and the rest is modified from there.

To say the least, I found this to be a tangled issue with opinions running the gamut and no connection to whether a commentator was liberal or conservative. Some proposed that John shifted the chronology purposely to have Jesus killed at the same time the Passover lambs were killed. Others argued that the Last Supper was not a Passover Seder  but a special meal. Yet another faction supposed that Jesus followed a special calendar used by the Essenes and some of the Sadducees, and that the Last Supper was on a Tuesday.

But the solution that shaves best with Occam's razor and coordinated best with the data laid in reading John with a more nuanced eye. Let's run over the verses in John that are the "culprits"...and at the same time, we'll look at some other verses that drop strong hints that John is following the same schedule as the Synoptics.

Now before the feast of the Passover, 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 devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him... (John 13:1-2)

This verse is sometimes seen as a problem because it is is read as saying that the supper and betrayal occurred "before the feast of the Passover," and the Supper, if held (by our reckoning) late Thursday, would have been during the feast of the Passover.



But most recognize rather that the only thing being said to be "before" the feast of the Passover is Jesus' knowledge and love (which has no time limit on it), and that verse 2 starts a new train of thought. (This fits in with the understanding as well of John as a supplement to the Synoptics.)

At worst it is admitted that the "vague expression makes it impossible to extract an exact chronology of Passion week" [Mich.Jn, 245]

Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the Passover. (John 18:28)

Here the thought is, Caiaphas and his cohorts have yet to eat the Passover; so the Last Supper wasn't eaten at the normal time, or else someone is making a mistake. Some even suggest that Caiaphas ate the Passover late.

That's actually very close to the solution. The key here is in knowing that in the popular jargon, and as evidenced by supporting literature, "Passover" was used to refer to the entire feast which was also known as the Feast of Unleavened Bread. During this feast, there were still sacrifices being offered that the priests might temporarily disqualify themselves from by being in the place of a Gentile. Evidence of this loose association is found [Smith.CLS]:

• In Luke's Gospel: Luke 2:41-43 "Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the Passover. And when he was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the feast. And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned, the child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it."; and 22:1 "Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover."
• In Mark's Gospel: Mark 14:12 "And the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the Passover..."
• In Josephus, who like Mark loosely calls the first day of unleavened bread the Passover, and uses the terms inconsistently throughout his works (Antiq.14.2.1, 17.9.2, 18.2.2, 18.4.3, 20.5.3; War 2.1.3; though always treating them separately when commenting on the OT text)
• In rabbinic sources, which refer to the "nights of Passover" (in the plural); even later a distinction between the two holidays disappears altogether

One pushback to this idea is that John uses the same phrase ("to eat the Passover") as the Synoptics do when they are clearly referring to the "standard" Passover meal on Thursday (Mark 14:12, Luke 22:15, Matt. 26:17). And admittedly, this is the only place where the exact phrase "to eat the Passover" would supposedly be used to refer to a meal that is a later part of the Passover/Unleavened Bread complex, without referring to the "actual" Passover as well.

However, though there is no exact parallel, the data above showing the loose association of the holidays, combined with corollary data showing that John does indeed follow the Synoptic chronology, weigh in great favor of arguing that John is using the phrase in a different way than the Synoptics.

Similarly, in the view championed by Alfred Edersheim, the "Passover" that the Jews were afraid to miss eating was the obligatory Chagigah offering. This was a required "peace-type" offering on the 15th which required Levitical purity to offer and to eat. The meal made of this offering was a joyous occasion. Lest anyone object that there would be no reason to refer to this sacrifice as "the Passover," Edersheim notes:

One of the most learned Jewish writers, Dr.Saalschutz, is not of his opinion [that there is nothing "Paschal" about the Chagigah]. He writes as follows: The whole feast and all its festive meals were designated as the Passover. See Deuteronomy 16:2, comp. 2 Chronicles 30:24, and 35:8, 9; Sebach. 99, b, Rosh ha Sh. 5, a, where it is expressly said, "What is the meaning of the term Passover?" (Answer) The peace-offerings of the Passover. SOURCE: A. Edersheim, The Temple: Its Ministry and Services

The "why" of the defilement is another matter, which we may as well cover here: nearly all agree that what is in view is the perceived danger of defilement for seven days by being in contact with a corpse. There was a Jewish belief that Gentile dwellings were unclean because Gentiles buried aborted fetuses in their houses or washed them down drains. Under the rubric of Lev. 7:19-21, the priests could not eat of any sacrifice while unclean. However, Carson adds that even the one-day defilement of yeast in the house [cf. Ex. 12:19] would make for a tremendous inconvenience for the priests in their public functions. [Cars.GJ, 588]

And it was the preparation of the Passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King! (John 19:14)

Some point out that John has specified the hour to coordinate with the paschal sacrifice and is making a theological point. But there are two problems with this.

Contradiction is sometimes alleged in that Mark reports the crucifixion at the third hour (Mark 15:25) while John says the sixth. The basic reply is that Mark and the other synoptics are using Jewish time (sunset to sunset; third hour = 9 AM); John is using some form of Roman time, which is like ours (sixth hour = 6 AM - note that John says about the sixth hour; he's estimating). The former method is still used in the Middle East, and we and other Western nations use the latter.

We know from the Synoptics that the crucifixion took over 6 hours. If John's sixth hour is really the Jewish sixth hour - noon, as unfortunately, even the Living Bible says - then the crucifixion lasted past the time when the Sabbath started. John 19:31 says that the Jews didn't want the bodies left up over the Sabbath, which obviously means that the Sabbath hadn't started yet.

So either John is giving us an extraordinarily short crucifixion, or he is giving us the time in some Roman mode. Since crucifixions were usually extended affairs, the latter assumption is more valid.

But there is an even more clear indication that John is using some form of Roman time. In John 1:39 we are told that Andrew and Peter met Jesus and "spent that day with him. It was about the tenth hour." If this were Jewish time, that would make it 4 PM - too late to spend the "day" with someone (or maybe 4 AM, as some suggest, which at any rate is not usual visiting hours).

But by the other chronology, it is 10 AM - ample time to spend the day. This is a pretty clear indication of how John is reckoning things. (But again, the LIV gets it wrong here. John 4:6 is a time reference that would fit either paradigm as well.)

Objection: The Romans actually used the same sort of time as the Jews, that is, sunset to sunset.

This is not entirely true. Many Romans did use this sort of time, but others did not. The time like ours (midnight to midnight) was known to be used in legal matters, and there is some evidence from martyrdom accounts in the area that this sort of time was used in Asia Minor, where John did his evangelism. Pliny the Elder also notes that various professions varied in their reckoning of time. It is our contention that the evidence does point to John using a "midnight to midnight" model.

The Roman time measurement, at any rate, means that the time is nowhere near the sacrifice time, indeed, is over half a day off. Moreover, our second point: if John wanted to make this point, he could have done so quite obviously (as Mark mentioned the exact day the lambs were killed), and John is clearly the sort who would make significant mention of it (as the one who called Jesus the "lamb of God" -- Cars.GJ, 457).

The main point made here is to say that this "preparation of the Passover" refers to the preparing of it on Thursday. [Mich.Jn, 324] But the word "preparation" here refers to the day of preparation for the Sabbath -- i.e., Friday. In other words, John is saying that it was the Friday, the Sabbath preparation day, of the Passover. The word "preparation" (paraskeue) is never used anywhere else in coordination with the word "Passover" like this, and elsewhere it always refers to Friday before a Sabbath -- in Josephus, and in second-century patristic sources. [Cars.GJ, 604]

Note as well that John goes on to refer to the preparation by itself in 19:42, which all agree refers to a Friday.

Next up is John 19:31: "The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation [Friday], that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the Sabbath day [Saturday]..." This helps us with 19:14 above, for it makes no sense unless the days are consecutive and the "preparation" of the Passover referred to is a Friday. John goes on to say that "Sabbath day was an high day," which some take to mean that he regarded this Sabbath as the Passover day itself, but "even by the Synoptic reckoning the description would be suitable, as the Sabbath in the week of Unleavened Bread had the special observance of the offering of a sheaf of barley (Lev. 23.11)." [Lind.GJ, 584]

Now to seal this interpretation, we can also point to a few places where John "shows an awareness" that he is in with the Synoptic chronology:

• John 13:10 -- "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."

This verse, in which Jesus turns down Peter's request for a washing of head and hands, suggests that the disciples had already taken the ritual bath required for Passover. [Smit.CLS, 32]

• John 13:27-29 -- "And after the sop Satan entered into him. Then said Jesus unto him, That thou doest, do quickly. Now no man at the table knew for what intent he spake this unto him. For some of them thought, because Judas had the bag, that Jesus had said unto him, Buy those things that we have need of against the feast; or, that he should give something to the poor."

Some think this means John puts the Supper on a Wednesday, because shops would not be open if it were Thursday night for Judas to buy stuff for the Passover feast. But first, the "feast" here should be understood as the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the several days of holiday that followed. Second, if this is Wednesday, then why is it needful for Judas to move quickly under this assumption, since they could easily go shopping Thursday?

That leaves the problem of shopping on Passover eve, but later rabbinic literature indicates that "one could buy necessities even on a Sabbath if it fell before Passover, provided it was done by leaving something in trust [the word here, agorazo, literally means "go to market" and does not imply buying with money necessarily] rather than paying cash." [Cars.GJ, 475]

One suggests that it was possible also to get stuff on Passover eve, but like shopping on Christmas today, it was a lot more inconvenient.

Third, this passage clues us in about this being a Passover eve by the reference to the poor. It was on Passover eve that the temple gates were left open from midnight forward, so that beggars could congregate there and collect alms.

• Jesus resided for the feast time in Bethany, but ate the Last Supper in Jerusalem, where it was required that the Passover be eaten. If this was a "regular" meal, why bother going into Jerusalem? Moreover, after the meal they did not go back to Bethany, but went into the Kidron Valley (18:1), which fits in with the ritual Passover requirement that they spend the night within the "legal limits" of Jerusalem [Smit.CLS, 31].
• John 19:42 -- "There laid they Jesus therefore because of the Jews' preparation day; for the sepulchre was nigh at hand." The Mishnah Sabbath 23:4-5 says that burial is not permitted on the Sabbath, but washing and anointing was. [Cars.GJ, 943] The lack of completion of the burial means that John's "preparation" is a Friday, and the Supper was on Thursday.

Objection: Jews counted part of a day as an entire day. If this is so, then it seems that there's no reason why the fragment of day remaining from 4:00 PM to the end of the day couldn't have been counted as one day.

This is true in practical terms but the language would still be inappropriate. It stands to reason that their engagement would last longer than only 2 hours on such important topics as would be discussed, regarding Jesus' messiahship. Thus it would have to say, "They spent the day with him and into of the next day."

Objection: When Jesus asked the Samaritan woman for water, he was exhausted from his journey, and it was about the sixth hour. If John was using Roman time, then it would have been 6 AM. How could he be exhausted from traveling if it was only 6 AM?

It was not unusual for people to travel at night when it was cooler and travel was less exerting. The objector apparently has never lived in a place where air conditioning was not available.

So we conclude that the data weighs heavily in favor of John being in full accord with the Synoptic chronology.

A reader has helpfully submitted some supporting evidence for this article which we have used in a response to Bart Ehrman's Jesus, Interrupted. To see that material, please subscribe to the Tekton E-Block and request that issue in a separate email.

-JPH

Sources

1.       Cars.GJ -- Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John IVP, 1991.

2.       Lind.GJ -- Lindars, Barnabas. The Gospel of John. Eerdmans, 1972.

3.       Mich.Jn -- Michaels J. Ramsey. John. Hendrickson: 1989.

4.       Smit.CLS -- Smith, Barry. "The Chronology of the Last Supper." Westminster Theological Journal 53 (1991), 29-45.



       

Hebrew for Christians

Copyright © John J. Parsons

All rights reserved.

www.hebrew4christians.com



       

 

Not all gospel authors agreed on this, though.



In Mark 14:12, Matthew 26:17, and Luke 22:7 the Last Supper occurs on the first day of Passover. In John 19:14 the Last Supper occurs the day before and Jesus is crucified on the first day of Passover. (Possible solution is that John was using Roman calendar that measured a day from midnight to midnight; whereas, on the Jews calendar a day ran from 6 PM to 6 PM.

Mark 15:25 and John 19:14-16

1. The third hour (Mark 15:25) - "And it was the third hour when they crucified Him."
2. The sixth hour (John 19:14-15) - "Now it was the day of preparation for the Passover; it was about the sixth hour. And he *said to the Jews, "Behold, your King!" 15They therefore cried out, "Away with Him, away with Him, crucify Him!" Pilate *said to them, "Shall I crucify your King?" The chief priests answered, "We have no king but Caesar."

Most probably, John was using the Roman measurement of time when dealing with the crucifixion.  Matthew, Mark, and Luke, for the most part, used the Hebrew system of measuring a day:  from sundown to sunup.  The Roman system was from midnight to midnight.  "John wrote his gospel in Ephesus, the capital of the Roman province of Asia, and therefore in regard to the civil day he would be likely to employ the Roman reckoning.

 

Thursday Nisan 13 –preparation

Daylight hours

Mark 14:12-16; 17

Nisan 14—meal; betrayal

Jewish evening hours

Friday Nisan 14 –crucifixion 3 pm . . . burial, so as not to be on the Cross on the High Sabbath

Jewish daylight hours

1st day in grave

Saturday Nisan 15—in grave High Sabbath

1st night and 2nd day in grave

Sunday Nisan 16—in grave

2night and 3rd day

Nisan 17

3rd night arose precisely sunup, therefore not in grave past 3rd day.

Therefore, prophecy fulfilled that he would like Jonah be in the grave 3 days and 3 nights. Also, this harmonizes with the Synoptics and John’s Gospel as he was crucified on the on the 1st Passover day, and not on the High Sabbath. In my opinion, the Lord’s Supper was a modified Seder  meal without the roasted lamb, since there is no mention of the lamb since he is the Lamb, but bitter herbs were dipped in salt water to depict the bitter sorrow with tears of the passion. He sweated tears as thought they were great drops of blood. And, of course, like a lamb taken to slaughter, he suffered that sacrificial pain of slaughter and death on the Cross as a substitute for us.



"An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale's belly, so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (Mt 12:40)

Luke 22:17, 20



Passover points:

Observed by Jesus (Matthew 26:17-20; Luke 22:15; John 2:13,23;)

 

Jesus Meets Privately with His Disciples Prior to His Crucifixion (13:1-17:26)

• Jesus Washes His Disciples' Feet (13:1-20)
• Jesus Predicts His Betrayal (13:21-30)
• Jesus Introduces Major Themes of His Farewell Discourse (13:31-35)
• Jesus Predicts Peter's Denial and Speaks of His Own Departure (13:36-14:4)
• Jesus Declares Himself to Be the Way to the Father (14:5-7)
• Jesus Speaks of Both His Relation to the Father and His Disciples' Relation to the Father (14:8-21)

•        Jesus Contrasts His Disciples' Relation to God with the World's Relation to God (14:22-31)

• Jesus Calls the Disciples to Remain in Him, the True Vine (15:1-17)
• Jesus Declares He Is the True Vine and His Disciples Are the Branches (15:1-6)
• Jesus Applies His Teaching on the Vine and the Branches (15:7-17)
• Jesus Speaks of Conflict with the World and of the Paraclete (15:18-16:15)
• Jesus Explains the Source of the World's Hatred of His Disciples (15:18-25)
• Jesus Says the Paraclete and the Disciples Will Bear Witness to Him (15:26-27)
• Jesus Refers Directly to the Jewish Persecution of His Disciples (16:1-4)
• Jesus Explains the Twofold Work of the Paraclete in More Detail (16:4-15)
• Jesus Predicts Joy and Suffering (16:16-33)
• Jesus Promises That After a Little While the Disciples' Grief Will Turn to Joy (16:16-21)
• Jesus Describes the Reasons for the Joy That the Disciples Are About to Experience (16:22-28)
• Jesus Prepares the Disciples for Their Imminent Desertion of Him (16:29-33)
• Jesus Concludes His Time Alone with His Disciples by Praying to His Father (17:1-26)
• Jesus Prays for the Glorification of the Father and the Son (17:1-5)
• Jesus Begins His Prayer for the Eleven Disciples by Describing Their Situation (17:6-11)
• Jesus Prays for the Eleven Disciples (17:11-19)
• Jesus Prays for All Who Believe in Him Through the Witness of the Eleven (17:20-24)
• Jesus Concludes His Prayer with a Summary and a Pledge (17:25-26)

The third section of John's Gospel, which follows the prologue (1:1-18) and the account of Jesus' public ministry (1:19—12:50), is characterized by Jesus' being alone with his disciples before his betrayal and arrest. While there may have been others present, such as those who were serving the meal, the focus is on the Twelve (so also Mt 26:20 par. Mk 14:17 par. Lk 22:14). The section begins with an account of Jesus washing the disciples' feet and the prediction of Judas' betrayal (13:1-30). Then there is a lengthy section known as the farewell discourse, which consists of teachings (13:31—16:33) and a concluding prayer by Jesus (17:1-26).





The Lord's Supper ordained at (Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:12-25; Luke 22:7-20)

Jesus crucified at the time of (Matthew 26:2; Mark 14:1,2; John 18:28)



 

The Institution of the Lord’s Supper

The institution of the Lord's Supper is recorded in the three Synoptic Gospels and in Paul's first epistle to the Corinthians. The words of institution differ slightly in each account, reflecting a Marcan tradition (upon which Matthew is based) and a Pauline tradition (upon which Luke is based) . In addition, Luke 22:19b-20 is a disputed text, which does not appear in some of the early manuscripts of Luke. Some scholars therefore believe that it is an interpolation, while others have argued that it is original

 [  22][23]

A comparison of the accounts given in the Gospels and 1 Corinthians is shown in the table below, with text from the ASV. The disputed text from Luke 22:19b-20 is in italics.

Mark 14:22-24

And as they were eating, he took bread, and when he had blessed, he brake it, and gave to them, and said, ‘Take ye: this is my body.’   And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave to them: and they all drank of it. And he said unto them, ‘This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many.’

Matthew 26:26-28

And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it; and he gave to the disciples, and said, ‘Take, eat; this is my body.’ And he took a cup, and gave thanks, and gave to them, saying, ‘Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many unto remission of sins.’

1 Corinthians 11:23-25

For I received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which he was betrayed took bread; and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, ‘This is my body, which is for you: this do in remembrance of me.’      In like manner also the cup, after supper, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood: this do, as often as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.’

Luke 22:19-20

And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and gave to them, saying, ‘This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.’   And the cup in like manner after supper, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood, even that which is poured out for you.’

Jesus' actions in sharing the bread and wine have been linked with Isaiah 53:12,[24] which refers to a blood sacrifice that, as recounted in Exodus 24:8,  [25] Moses offered in order to seal a covenant with God: scholars often interpret the description of Jesus' action as asking his disciples to consider themselves part of a sacrifice, where Jesus is the one due to physically undergo it .  [26]

Although the Gospel of John does not include a description of the bread and wine ritual during the Last Supper, most scholars agree that John 6:58-59 (the Bread of Life Discourse) has the nature of Holy Communion (The Lord’s Supper as we celebrate it today) and resonates with the "words of institution" used in the Synoptic Gospels and the Pauline writings on the Last Supper.  [27]

Also, this passage is the source of three difficult problems to which the careful student of Scripture should have some kind of answer.

The first major problem which we face in this passage is a textual one. One of the Greek manuscripts omits the last half of verse 19 and all of verse 20. It would appear that this deletion was an attempt to solve the problem raised by the reference to two different cups of wine in the passage. Such a change in the text seems completely unnecessary to me.

The second problem is one of harmony and chronology. It hinges on an apparent discrepancy between the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) and the gospel of John. It is a significant problem because of its implications, first with regard to the inspiration and inerrancy of the Scriptures, then for the interpretation of the Last Supper, and finally for a determination of the day on which our Lord was put to death. A casual reading of the synoptic gospels would seem to indicate that Jesus observed the Passover with His disciples, while John’s account would have Him put to death before its enactment (cf. John 18:28). While the explanations of this problem may differ, conservative scholars would agree that there is a solution. (See: “When Does Passover Begin?” above. )

The third problem relates to the great controversy over the precise meaning of the words of Jesus, “This is My body.” Roman Catholicism believes that each remembrance of the Lord’s death is a reenactment of the sacrifice of Christ, and that the elements actually become the literal flesh and blood of the Savior.118 Others hold that while such a miraculous transformation is not necessary, the Lord is somehow present with, but not in, the elements as they are partaken.119 In either of these cases, the observance is regarded as a sacrament, the actual conveyance of grace to the participant. The preferable interpretation, that this is the symbolic remembrance of our Lord’s death, avoids this error, while stressing the significance and symbolic meaning of this ordinance.120

Let us here deal with problems one and two. According to Bible.org:

“The problem, simply stated, is this. John’s gospel clearly sets the time of the death of Christ at the same hour in which the Passover lambs were being slain (John 18:28; 19:14,36). In apparent contradiction to this, the synoptic gospels speak of the last supper as though it were the observance of the actual Passover. There is therefore an apparent 24-hour discrepancy in the gospels. In the Synoptics, Jesus observed the Passover with His disciples; in John, Jesus was the Passover Lamb, put to death at the time of the slaughter of the Passover lamb, before the Passover meal was eaten.

Liberal ‘scholars’ have little difficulty here. They delight in pointing out this ‘error’ to the conservative, who holds to biblical inerrancy. They are free to accept John’s account and discard the Synoptics as inaccurate, or to regard the Synoptics as correct, and John to be in error.

Conservative scholarship has posed several possible ways to harmonize the gospel records, three of which are currently most popular: (1) On the basis of some historical data, it is known that there was a division within the nation as to when the month of Nisan was to commence. Because of this confusion over the calendar, there ended up being two days on which the Passover lambs were slaughtered and two days on which Passover was observed, one, a day earlier than the other. Jesus could then have observed the (first) Passover with the disciples, while He died as the true Passover Lamb on the second, a day later. (2) There is also evidence that some (perhaps the Galilean Jews) commenced the new day in the morning, at daybreak, while the Judean Jews began the new day in the evening at six o’clock. If such were the case, the Synoptics were reckoning from the Galilean time frame, and John from the Judean.

A third view, held by a number of conservative scholars, contends that there is no real discrepancy between John’s account and the Synoptics. Every alleged problem is explained individually. For further reference on this complicated matter, consult: Harold W. Hoehner, Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1977), pp. 75-90; Norval Geldenhuys, Commentary on the Gospel of Luke (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1951), pp. 649-670. R.T. France, I Came to Set the Earth on Fire (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1976), pp. 136-140. Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971), pp. 774-785.”

 

Clarke

John 19:31

31The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the Sabbath day, (for that Sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.



It was the preparation - Every Sabbath had a preparation which began at the ninth hour (that is, three o'clock) the preceding evening. Josephus, Ant. b. xvi. c. 6, s. 2, recites an edict of the Emperor Augustus in favor of the Jews, which orders, "that no one shall be obliged to give bail or surety on the Sabbath day, nor on the preparation before it, after the ninth hour." The time fixed here was undoubtedly in conformity to the Jewish custom, as they began their preparation at three o'clock on the Friday evening.