/
6
LAST SUPPER
LAST SUPPER
Last Supper was a Passover, and therefore, as St. John certainly seems to represent the Passover as still to come while the Supper was proceeding,* that there is no discrepancy in the accounts, t
1. In examining the evidence afforded by the four accounts, we find, with satisfaction, that they have been handed down to us intact, and that no attempt was made to harmonize the records, as by the omis- sion of the words to Trdcrxa. from Lk 22'^, which seem at variancj with the statements in St. John. There is one critical problem in St. Luke — the retention, or omission, of the mention of a second cup, and the order of the Bread and the Cup in the Institu- tion ; X but the solution of this problem will not affect the chief thesis in our position. Herein is another pi'oof, if proof be needed, of the honesty and faithfulness of the ancient scribes, who, in the midst of one of the greatest controversies of the early Church, resisted the temptation to accom- modate the records to particular views of the event.
2. The live following indications of time may be collected from the several accounts :
(1) When Jesus had finished His great escliato- logical discourse, and the rulers were forming a plan for His apprehension and condemnation, it wanted two days to the commencement of the Paschal Feast — /xerd 8vo -r^fxepas to wdax"- '/^"^Tai, (Mt 26-, Mk 141, Li^ 22i). 'After two days' must be interpreted according to the reckoning which makes ' after three days ' equivalent to ' on the third day.' This Jewish usage is well known, and is found, e.g., in Mt 20i" parallel with jMk 10^^ and Lk IS-^'', where T-rj TpiTy tj/m pa in the First and Third corresponds to /xerd rpels ij/x^pas in the Second Evan- gelist. § Now the Passover was slain late in the afternoon of the 14th Nisan, and some hours earlier leaven was put out of the houses, in preparation for the ' days of imleavened bread,' which, strictly speaking, began with the eating of the lamb in the early hours of loth Nisan. li The terminus ad quzm of the 'two days' must be the last hours of
1 ttli Nisan. The terminus a quo may be any hour after 12th Nisan had been succeeded by the 13th.
(2) In arranging for the apprehension of Jesus, lh3 rulers decided that it should not be attempted on the Feast Day (Mt 2o^ Mk \4?). If they carried out their intention, it follows that the night of the .•il)[u-ehension and trial was before the slaying of the Passover ; and that the Last Supper, whatever it W'as, did not coincide with tlie Paschal Feast.
* .Jn 15^9. Edersheim(i»7e ami Times, ii. 566 ff.) explains the trayiiv TO ■ru(rx«' of Jn 1828 as referring to sacrifices of the Paschal season._ The opinion of such a writer demands respectful con- sideration, and a similar explanation is adopted by man}-. From
2 Ch 35 we learn that other sacrifices were oifered at the Paschal season besides the lambs ; see vv.7. »• is.
t The position maintained in tliis article is identical with the explanation given by the late G. Wildon Peiritz in The Gospels from the Rabbinical point of view, 1S73. By birth a Jew, of German nationality, a Cambridg-e graduate, " and an Anglican priest, of wide reading and profound learning, Peiritz had, to an exceptional extent, the ability to form a correct opinion on the problem before us.
I The Received Text of Lk 2219- 20 is read in ' codd. Graec. et verss. fere omn.' {Noij. Test., Lloyd-Sandav, Append, p. Ill)— i.e. it lias the very highest diplomatic attestation, including the old uncials. It can be rejected only on a priori grounds. The case illustrates the difference between two schools of criticism -those who follow the testimony of ancient MSS, and those who are influeiioed by subjective considerations. Dr. Sanday (I.e. 636'') sa.vs : ' W e cannot doubt that both these types of text existed early in the 2nd cent. Either may be original. And this is just one of those cases where internal evidence is strongly in favour of the text which we call Western. The temptation to expand was much stronger than to contract; and the double mention of the Cup raises real difficulties of the kind which suggest in- terpolation.' See also a full discussion of the Lukan account of the Institution by Mr. Blakiston, in .JThSt, July 1903, p. 548 f. Dr. Lainbert (ib. Jan. 1903) well sums up the 'arguments and authorities for adhering to the Received Text.
§ As there is a v.l. harmonizing the text of Mk. with that of
and Lk., we may compare Mt 276«, where the text is c'ertain.
So Chwolson in Das letzt'- Passauinhl Christi und der Tan
Serne^To'les, quoted by Mr. Box and Dr. Lambert; see note *,
p. bl' below. Cf. Turner, I.e.
The hurried proceedings of the night suggest an attempt to secure a condemnation within a limited time. This is intelligible if the Feast had not begun ; otherwise it is hai'd to see why men who were, in that case, willing to try a prisoner on the first day should have scrupled about extending the proceedings to any necessary length.