The Lord's Supper

[Ernie]

The order of things at the Lord's Supper and whether Judas Iscariot was part of communion at the Lord's supper has been debated for millennia, but here is a chance to make your case if you'd like to make one.

From this thread. viewtopic.php?p=203225#p203225

Luke says the cup was given "after they had eaten." No mention is made of when the bread was given.

Matthew and Mark say, "As they were eating Jesus took bread..." No mention is made of the cup being given after they had eaten.

Harmonizing these three, I think the bread was given during the meal and the cup at the end of the meal.

Paul says, "For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”

This seems to imply the same thing as the summary above from the other Gospels.

John does not go into detail about the supper but according to:

KJV/NKJV, John 13, Jesus washed the disciples feet after supper.
All other translations say that it was during supper that he washed their feet.

Judas "dipped the sop" with Jesus, but that could be a different eating of bread than the bread Jesus broke to the disciples.

Many people have tried to harmonize all of these various things, but I don't think we have enough information to make a hard and fast conclusion.

You are welcome to try to convince us.

[NedFlanders]

Is it because of a theology issue in wanting to believe it was a clean communion that John is disregarded?

[Ernie]

Is it because of a theology issue in wanting to believe it was a clean communion that John is disregarded?

Not that I am aware of. There are so many pieces to the story, with so many reporters, that it doesn't all come together nicely. For some reason God didn't think that is something we need to clarify for Him, is the way I look at it.
I would not want to make a doctrinal case either way, based on whether Judas Iscariot was or was not present at the institution of communion.

[NedFlanders]

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.
John 13:11 For he knew who should betray him; therefore said he, Ye are not all clean.

So if Judas wasn’t there then who was Jesus talking about when he said “but not all.” Reference that someone there wasn’t clean?

[NedFlanders]

John 13:17 If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them.
John 13:18 I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: but that the scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me.

Again, who is Christ speaking of when He says, “I speak not of you all…”. If Judas wasn’t there it sounds like Christ had another betrayer in the disciples?

[NedFlanders]

John 13:21 When Jesus had thus said, he was troubled in spirit, and testified, and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.

Now we are getting really serious if Christ specifically says, “one of you…”. Now, I ask again who was the betrayer that was there that Christ was talking to? If not Judas then who?

[NedFlanders]

John 13:26 Jesus answered, He it is, to whom I shall give a sop, when I have dipped it. And when he had dipped the sop, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon.

I think that pretty well answers it.

Are we looking for what the scriptures don’t say? Or what they do say?

[NedFlanders]

Luke 22:14 And when the hour was come, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him.
Luke 22:15 And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer:
Luke 22:16 For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.
Luke 22:19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.
Luke 22:20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.
Luke 22:21 But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table.

The twelve were there.
Jesus specifically says this is His last time eating, until…
Interestingly the manmade titles in my bible separate the Passover meal and the Lords Supper into two separate headings in Matthew and Mark like you suggested Ernie, but Luke squashes that idea with Christs words here in Luke saying this Passover He desired to eat with them was his last time eating, until…

[ohio jones]

Luke says the cup was given "after they had eaten." No mention is made of when the bread was given.

Matthew and Mark say, "As they were eating Jesus took bread..." No mention is made of the cup being given after they had eaten.

Harmonizing these three, I think the bread was given during the meal and the cup at the end of the meal.

Paul says, "For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”

This seems to imply the same thing as the summary above from the other Gospels.

John does not go into detail about the supper but according to:

KJV/NKJV, John 13, Jesus washed the disciples feet after supper.
All other translations say that it was during supper that he washed their feet.

Judas "dipped the sop" with Jesus, but that could be a different eating of bread than the bread Jesus broke to the disciples.

I look at it with the assumption that the order of the Seder was similar to what's practiced today. Mennos (well, Christians in general) tend to forget that the Passover has four cups, not just one. In that sense, even those who use individual portions are "one cuppers."

The bread is broken at the beginning of the meal, after the retelling of the Exodus story, the Four Questions, and the second cup. The passage from 1 Corinthians, quoted above as "he took the cup, after supper, saying..." is misleading because of the comma. It should be understood as Ned quotes from Luke, "the cup after supper" -- the third cup.

I think it's likely that Judas received the bread but not the cup. The broken body, but not the shed blood. Which really makes the medieval practice of receiving the eucharist "in one kind" seem inappropriate.

[NedFlanders]

It would make sense that there were multiple cups.

Luke 22:17 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves:
Luke 22:20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

At least one cup before and one after. So the first cup before the meal wasn’t communion?