Keith Hunt - The Temple - Page Fourteen   Restitution of All Things

  Home Previous Page Next Page

The Temple - Its Ministry and Service #14

The Last Passover Jesus Observed


From the book by the same name by Alfred Edersheim



'And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and
brake, and gave to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is My
body. And He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave to them,
saying, Drink ye all of it; for this is My blood of the New
Testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.'--
MATT. xxvi.26-28.


     JEWISH tradition has this curious conceit: that the most
important events in Israel's history were connected with the
Paschal season. Thus it is said to have been on the present
Paschal night that, after his sacrifice, the 'horror of great
darkness' fell upon Abraham when God revealed to him the future
of his race. 1  Similarly, it is supposed to have been at
Passover time that the patriarch entertained his heavenly guests,
that Sodom was destroyed and Lot escaped, and that the walls of
Jericho fell before the Lord. More than that - the 'cake of
barley bread' seen in the dream, which led to the destruction of
Midian's host, had been prepared from the Omer, presented on the
second day of the feast of unleavened bread; just as at a later
period alike the captains of Sennacherib and the King of Assyria,
who tarried at Nob, were overtaken by the hand of God at the
Passover season. It was at the Paschal 

1 Gen. xv. 

time also that the mysterious handwriting appeared on the wall to
declare Babylon's doom, and again at the Passover that Esther and
the Jews fasted, and that wicked Haman perished. And so also in
the last days it would be the Paschal night when the final
judgments should come upon 'Edom,' and the glorious deliverance
of Israel take place. Hence to this day, in every Jewish home, at
a certain part of the Paschal service - just after the 'third
cup,' or the 'cup of blessing,' has been drunk - the door is
opened to admit Elijah the prophet as forerunner of the Messiah,
while appropriate passages are at the same time read which
foretell the destruction of all heathen nations. 1  It is a
remarkable coincidence that, in instituting His own Supper, the
Lord Jesus connected the symbol, not of judgment, but of His
dying love, with this 'third cup.' (Nothing in the Gospels says
anything about a "third" cup - it's all Jewish ideas - Keith
Hunt) But, in general, it may be interesting to know that no
other service contains within the same space the like ardent
aspirations after a return to Jerusalem and the rebuilding of the
Temple, nor so many allusions to the Messianic hope, as the
liturgy for the night of the Passover now in use among the Jews.

(All Jewish ideas and traditions, as Edersheim put for this
section "Jewish traditions about the Passover" - they are just
that "Jewish traditions" by the Pharisees - Keith Hunt)

     If we could only believe that the prayers and ceremonies
which it embodies were the same as those at the time of our Lord,
we should have it in our power to picture in minutest detail all
that took place when He instituted His own Supper. We should see
the Master as He presided among the festive company of His
disciples, know what prayers He uttered, and at what special
parts of the service, and be able to reproduce the arrangement of
the Paschal table around which they sat.

(Yes, but we CANNOT, for nothing in the Gospels can be tied in
with a relatively modern "Seder" that formulated years later. See
the study on this Website called "Passover - Was it a Seder?" -
Keith Hunt)

1 Psa. Ixxix.6; Ixix. 25; Lament. iii.66.


     At present and for many centuries back the Paschal Supper
has been thus laid out: three large unleavened cakes, wrapped in
the folds of a napkin, are placed on a salver, and on them the
seven articles necessary for the 'Passover Supper' are ranged in
this manner:

A roasted Egg. 
(Instead of the 14th day Chagigah.)     

Roasted Shankbone of a Lamb.
(Instead of the Paschal Lamb.)

(To represent the mortar of Egypt.)

Salt Water.    
Chervil and Parsley.


     But, unfortunately, the analogy does not hold good. As the
present Passover liturgy contains comparatively very few relics
from New Testament times, so also the present arrangement of the
Paschal table evidently dates from a time when sacrifices had

(Yes, the Jewish "Seder" is of a time after the destruction of
Jerusalem and the Temple. You cannot equate the last Passover of
Jesus with the modern "Seder" - the reader is referred to the
study "Passover - Was it a Seder" - Keith Hunt) 

     On the other hand, however, by far the greater number of the
usages observed in our own days are precisely the same as
eighteen hundred years ago. A feeling, not of gratified
curiosity, but of holy awe, comes over us, as thus we are able to
pass back through those many centuries into the upper chamber
where the Lord Jesus partook of that Passover which, with the
loving desire of a Saviour's heart, He had desired to eat with
His disciples. The leading incidents of the feast are all vividly
before us - the handing of 'the sop dipped in the dish,' 'the
breaking of bread,' 'the giving thanks,' 'the distributing of the
cup,' and 'the concluding hymn.' Even the exact posture at the
Supper is known to us. But the words associated with those sacred
memories come with a strange sound when we find in Rabbinical
writings the 'Passover lamb ' designated as 'His body,' or when
our special attention is called to the cup known as 'the cup of
blessing, which we bless;' nay, when the very term for the
Passover liturgy itself, the 'Haggadah,' 2  which means 'showing
forth,' is exactly the same as that used by St.Paul in describing
the service of the Lord's Supper. 3

(Obviously there will be SOME similarities between the Passover
of Jesus and the ancients, and the modern Jewish "seder" - it is
to be expected as the foundation event goes back to the time of
Moses and the very first Passover. By the way, there is no Bible
proof that the Feasts of the Lord were observed before the time
of Moses. But God being in charge of His plan and form of worship
towards Him from those who are His children, can set the rules
for any age as pleases Him. This should be obviously so, as today
the rules of the Temple, sacrifice, circumcision, where to
observe the Feasts, are all null and void, made plain by the New
Testament, as well as the physical reality that there is no
physical Temple in Jerusalem - Keith Hunt) 


     Before proceeding further we may state that, according to
Jewish ordinance, the Paschal lamb was roasted on a spit made of
pomegranate wood, the spit passing right through from mouth to
vent. Special care was to be taken that in roasting the lamb did
not touch the oven, otherwise the part touched had to be cut
away. This can scarcely be regarded as an instance of Rabbinical
punctiliousness. It was intended to carry out the idea that the
lamb was to be undefiled by any contact with foreign matter,
which might otherwise have adhered to it. For everything here was
significant, and the slightest deviation would mar the harmony of
the whole. If it had been said, that not a bone of the Paschal
lamb was to be broken, that it was not to be 'sodden at all with
water, but roast with fire 4 - his head with his legs, and with
the purtenance thereof,' and that none of it was to 'remain until
the morning,' all that

1 The words of the Mishnah (Pes. x. 3) are: 'While the Sanctuary
stood, they brought before him his body of (or for) the
Passover.' The term 'body' also sometimes means 'substance.'
2 The same root as employed in Ex. xiii. 8: 'And thou shalt show
thy son in that day,' and from this the term 'Haggadah' has
unquestionably been derived.
3 1 Cor. xi.23-29.
4 This could certainly have borne no reference to the haste of
the Exodus.

had not been eaten being burnt with fire 1 - such ordinances had
each a typical object. Of all other sacrifices, even the most
holy, 2  it alone was not to be 'sodden,' because the flesh must
remain pure, without the admixture even of water. Then, no bone
of the lamb was to be broken: it was to be served up entire -
none of it was to be left over; and those who gathered around it
were to form one family. All this was intended to express that it
was to be a complete and unbroken sacrifice, on the ground of
which there was complete and unbroken fellowship with the God who
had passed by the blood-sprinkled doors, and with those who
together formed but one family and one body. 'The cup of blessing
which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ?  
The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of
Christ? For we, being many, are one bread and one body; for we
are all partakers of that one bread.' 3
     Such views and feelings, which, no doubt, all truly
spiritual Israelites shared, gave its meaning to the Paschal
feast at which Jesus sat down with His disciples, and which He
transformed into the Lord's Supper by linking it to His Person
and Work. (No, it is still called the Passover, there was no name
change - Keith Hunt). Every sacrifice, indeed, had prefigured His
Work; but none other could so suitably commemorate His death, nor
yet the great deliverance connected with it, and the great union
and fellowship flowing from it. For other reasons also it was
specially suited to be typical of Christ. It was a sacrifice, and
yet quite out of the order of all Levitical sacrifices. For it
had been instituted and observed before Levitical sacrifices 

1 Ex. xii.8-10.     
2 Lev. vi.21.  
3 1 Cor. x.16,17.

existed; before the Law was given; nay, before the Covenant was
ratified by blood. 1  In a sense, it may be said to have been the
cause of all the later sacrifices of the Law, and of the Covenant
itself. Lastly, it belonged neither to one nor to another class
of sacrifices; it was neither exactly a sin-offering nor a
peace-offering, but combined them both. And yet in many respects
it quite differed from them. In short, just as the priesthood of
Christ was a real Old Testament priesthood, yet not after the
order of Aaron, but after the earlier, prophetic, and royal order
of Melchisedek, so the sacrifice also of Christ was a real Old
Testament sacrifice, yet not after the order of Levitical
sacrifices, but after that of the earlier prophetic Passover
sacrifice, by which Israel had become a royal nation.


     As the guests 2  gathered around the Paschal table, they
came no longer, as at the first celebration, with their 'loins
girded,' with shoes on their feet, and a staff in their hand -
that is, as travellers waiting to take their departure. On the
contrary, they were arrayed in their best festive garments,
joyous and at rest, as became the children of a king. To express
this idea the Rabbis also insisted that the Paschal Supper - or
at least part of it - must be eaten in that recumbent position
with which we are familiar from the New Testament. 'For,' say
they, 'they use this leaning posture, as free men do, in memorial
of their freedom.' And, again, 'Because it is the manner of
slaves to eat standing, therefore now they eat sitting and
leaning, in order to show that they have been delivered from
bondage into freedom. And, finally: 'No, not 

1 Ex, xxiv.
2 The Karaites are alone in not admitting women to the Paschal

the poorest in Israel may eat till he has sat down, leaning.'
But, though it was deemed desirable to 'sit leaning' during the 
whole Paschal Supper, it was only absolutely enjoined while
partaking of the bread and the wine. This recumbent posture so
far resembled that still common in the East, that the body rested
on the feet. Hence, also, the penitent woman at the feast given
by Simon is aid to have 'stood at His feet, behind,' 'weeping.' l
At the same time, the left elbow was placed on the table, and the
head rested on the hand, sufficient room being of course left
between each guest for the free movements of the right hand.     
This explains in what sense John 'was leaning on Jesus' bosom,'
and afterwards 'lying on Jesus' breast,' when he bent back to
speak to Him.' 2


     The use of wine in the Paschal Supper, 3 though not
mentioned in the Law, was strictly enjoined by tradition.
According to the Jerusalem Talmud, it was intended to express
Israel's joy on the Paschal night, and even the poorest must have
at least four cups, though he were to receive the money for it
from the poor's box.' 4  If he cannot otherwise obtain it, the
Talmud adds, 'he must sell or pawn his oat for these four cups of
wine.' The same authority variously accounts for the number
"four" as either corresponding to the four words use about
Israel's redemption (bringing out, delivering, redeeming,
taking), or to the fourfold mention of the cup in

1 Luke vii.38. 
2 John xiii.23,25.
3 Every reader of the Bible knows how symbolically significant
alike the vine and its fruit are throughout Scripture. Over the
entrance to the Sanctuary a golden vine of immense proportions
was suspended. 
4 "Pes." x. i.

connection with the chief butler's dream, 1  or to the four cups
of vengeance which God would in the future give the nations to
drink, 2  while four cups of consolation would be handed to
Israel, as it is written: 'The Lord is the portion of my cup;' 3
My cup runneth over;' 4 'I will take the cup of salvation,' 5
'which,' it is added, 'was two' - perhaps from a second allusion
to it in verse 17. In connection with this the following
parabolic story from the Talmud may possess some interest: 

'The holy and blessed God will make a feast for the righteous in
the day that His mercy shall be shown to the seed of Israel.
After they have eaten and drunk, they give the cup of blessing to
Abraham our father. But he saith: I cannot bless it, because
Ishmael came from me. Then he gives it to Isaac. But he saith: I
cannot bless it, because Esau came from me. Then he hands it to
Jacob. But he saith: I cannot take it, because I married two
sisters, which is forbidden in the Law. He saith to Moses: Take
it and bless it. But he replies: I cannot, because I was not
counted worthy to come into the land of Israel, either alive or
dead. He saith to Joshua: Take it and bless it. But he answers: I
cannot, because I have no son. He saith to David: Take it and
bless it. And he replies: I will bless it, and it is fit for me
so to do, as it is written, "I will take the cup of salvation,
and call upon the name of the Lord."'

     As detailed in the earliest Jewish record of ordinances--the
Mishnah--the service of the Paschal Supper was exceedingly
simple. Indeed, the impression left on the mind is, that, while
all the observances

1 Gen. xl.9-15.     
2 Jer, xxv.15; Ii.7; Psa. Ixxv.8; xi.6.
3 Psa. xvi.5.  
4 Psa. xxiii.5.     
5 Psa. cxvi.13.

were fixed, the prayers, with some exceptions preserved to us,
were free. Rabbi Gamaliel, the teacher of St.Paul, said: 1
'Whoever does not explain three things has not fulfilled the duty
incumbent on him. These three things are: the Passover lamb, the
unleavened bread, and the (bitter herbs. The Passover lamb means
that God passed over the blood-sprinkled place on the houses of
our fathers in Egypt; the unleavened bread means that our fathers
were delivered out of Egypt (in haste); and the bitter herbs mean
that the Egyptians made bitter the lives of our fathers in

     A few additional particulars are necessary to enable the
reader to understand all the arrangements of the Paschal Supper. 


     From the time of the evening-sacrifice nothing was to be
eaten till the Paschal Supper, so that all might come to it with
relish. 2  It is a moot point, whether at the time of our Lord
two, or, as at present, three, large cakes of unleavened bread
were used in the service. The Mishnah mentions 3  these five
kinds as falling within the designation of 'bitter herbs,' viz.
lettuce, endive, succory (garden endive ?), what is called 
'Charchavina'  (urtica, beets ?), and horehound (bitter coriander
?). The 'bitter herbs' seem to have been twice partaken of during
the service, once dipped in salt water or vinegar, and a second
time with Charoseth, a compound of dates, raisins, etc., and
vinegar, though the Mishnah expressly declares 4  that Charoseth
was not obligatory. Red wine alone was to be used at the Paschal
Supper, and always mixed with water.  Each of the four cups must
contain at

1 "Pes." x.15. 
2 "Pes." x 1.  
3 "Pes." ii.6. 
4 "Pes." x.3.

least the fourth of a quarter of an hin (the hin = one gallon two
pints). Lastly, it was a principle that, after the Paschal meal,
they had no Aphikomen (afterdish), an expression which may
perhaps best be rendered 'dessert' .


     The Paschal Supper itself commenced by the head of 'the
company' taking the first cup of wine in his hand, and 'giving
thanks' over it in these words: 'Blessed art Thou, Jehovah our
God, who bast created the fruit of the vine! Blessed art Thou,
Jehovah our God King of the Universe, who hast chosen us from
among all people, and exalted us from among all languages, and
sanctified us with Thy commandments! And Thou bast given us, O
Jehovah our God, in love, the solemn days for joy, and the
festivals and appointed seasons for gladness; and this the day of
the feast of unleavened bread, the season of our freedom, a holy
convocation, the memorial of our departure from Egypt. For us
bast Thou chosen; and us bast Thou sanctified from among all
nations, and Thy holy festivals with joy and with gladness hast
Thou caused us to inherit. Blessed art Thou, O Jehovah, who
sanctifiest Israel and the appointed seasons! Blessed art Thou,
Jehovah, King of the Universe, who hast preserved us alive and
sustained us and brought us to this season!' 1

1 Such, according to the best criticism, were the words of this
prayer at the time of Christ. But I must repeat that in regard to
many of these prayers I cannot help suspecting that they rather
indicate the spirit and direction of a prayer than embody the
"ipsissima verba."


     The first cup of wine was then drunk, and each washed his
hands. 1  It was evidently at this time that the Saviour in His
self humiliation proceeded also to wash the disciples' feet 2 
Our Authorised Version wrongly translates verse 2 by, 'and supper
being ended,' instead of 'and when supper had come,' or 'was

(Edersheim is wrong. Green in his Greek/English Interlinear
translates "having occurred" - the Greek is in the Aorist 2 tense
- an action completed in the past - Keith Hunt)

Similarly, it was, in all probability, (probability is NOT fact -
the truth is we do not know - Keith Hunt) in reference, to the
first cup that Luke gives the following account: 3 'And He took
the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it
among yourselves' - the 'cup of blessing,' which was the third,
and formed part of the new institution of the Lord's Supper,
being afterwards mentioned in verse 20. In washing their hands
this customary prayer was repeated: 'Blessed art Thou, Jehovah
our God, who hast sanctified us with Thy commandments, and hast
enjoined us concerning the washing of our hands.' Two different
kinds of 'washing' were prescribed by tradition - 'dipping' and
'pouring.' At the Paschal Supper the hands were to be 'dipped' in
water. 4
(Again I remind the reader that all of this is from the "Mishnah"
- Pharisee traditions, and it has little if no bearing on how
Jesus with His disciples obserfved the Passover - Keith Hunt)


     These preliminaries ended, the Paschal table was brought
forward. The president of the feast first took some of the orbs,
dipped them in salt water, ate of them, and gave to the others.
Immediately after it, all the dishes were removed from the table
(as it was

1  The modern practice of the Jews slightly differs from the
ancient here, and in some other little matters of detail.
2 John xiii.5. 
3 Luke xxii.17.
4 The distinction is also interesting as explaining Mark vii.3.  
For when water was poured on the hands, they had to be lifted,
yet so that the water should neither run up above the wrist, nor
back again upon the hand; best, therefore, by doubling the
fingers into a fist. Hence (as Lightfoot rightly remarks) Mark
vii. 3, which should be translated 'For the Pharisees . . .
except they wash their hands with the fist, eat not, holding the
tradition of the elders.' The rendering of our Authorised
Version, 'except they wash oft,' has evidently no meaning.

thought so strange a proceeding would tend to excite the more
curiosity), and then the second cup was filled. 


     A very interesting ceremony now took place, been enjoined in
the law that at each Paschal Supper the father was to show his
son the import of this festival. By way of carrying out this
duty, the son (or else the youngest) was directed at this
particular part of the service to make inquiry; and, if the child
were too young or incapable, the father would do it for him.
The son asks: 'Why is this night distinguished from all other
nights? For on all other nights we eat leavened or unleavened
bread, but on this night only unleavened bread? On all other
nights we eat any kind of herbs, but on this night only bitter
herbs? On all other nights we eat meat roasted, stewed, or
boiled, but on this night only roasted? On all other nights we
dip (the herbs) only once, but on this night twice?' Thus far
according to the earliest and most trustworthy tradition. It is
added: 1  'Then the father instructs his child according to the
capacity of his knowledge, beginning with our disgrace and ending
with our glory, and expounding to him from, "A Syrian, ready to
perish, was my father," till he has explained all through, to the
end of the whole section.' 2 
     In other words, the head of the house was to relate the
whole national history, commencing with Terah, Abraham's father,
and telling of his idolatry, and continuing, in due order, the
story of Israel up to their deliverance from Egypt and the giving
of the Law; and the more fully he explained it all, the better.

1 "Mishnah, Pes." x.4.   
2 Deut. xxvi.5-11.


     This done, the Paschal dishes were brought back on the
table. The president now took up in succession the dish with the
Passover lamb, that with the bitter herbs, and that with the
unleavened bread, and briefly explained the import of each; for,
according to Rabbi Gamaliel: 'From generation to generation every
man is bound to look upon himself not otherwise than if he had
himself come forth out of Egypt. For so it is written,' 1  "And
thou shalt show thy son in that day, saying, This is done because
of that which Jehovah did unto me when I came forth out of
Egypt." Therefore,' continues the Mishnah, giving the very words
of the prayer used, 'we are bound to thank, praise, laud,
glorify, extol, honour, bless, exalt, and reverence Him, because
He hath wrought for our fathers, and for us all these miracles.
He brought us forth from bondage into freedom, from sorrow into
joy, from mourning to a festival, from darkness to a great light,
and from slavery to redemption. Therefore let us sing before Him:
     Then the first part of the 'Hallel' was sung, comprising
Psalms cxiii. and cxiv., with this brief thanksgiving at the
close: 'Blessed art Thou, Jehovah our God, King of the Universe,
who hast redeemed us and redeemed our fathers from Egypt.'  Upon
this the second cup was drunk. Hands were now washed a second
time, with the same prayer as before, and one of the two
unleavened cakes broken and 'thanks given.'
     Rabbinical authorities distinctly state that this
thanksgiving was to follow, not to precede, the breaking of
bread, because it was the bread of poverty, 'and the poor have
not whole cakes, but broken

1 Ex. xiii.8.

pieces.' The distinction is important, as proving that since the
Lord in instituting His Supper, according to the uniform
testimony of the three Gospels and of St.Paul, 1  first gave -
thanks and then brake the bread ('having given thanks, He brake
it'), it must have been at a later period of the service.
     Pieces of the broken cake with 'bitter herbs' between them,
and 'dipped' in the Charoseth, were next handed to each in the
company. This, in all probability, was 'the sop' which, in answer
to John's inquiry about the betrayer, the Lord 'gave ' to   
Judas. 2
     The unleavened bread with bitter herbs constituted, in
reality, the beginning of the Paschal Supper, to which the first
part of the service had only served as a kind of introduction.
But as Judas, after 'having received the sop, went immediately
out,' he could not even have partaken of the Paschal lamb, far
less of the Lord's Supper. (Not so! Edersheim does not have the
order of Jesus' last Passover correct as given in the Gospels.
Covered in my various studies on the Passover - Keith Hunt). The
solemn discourses of the Lord recorded by St.John 3  may
therefore be regarded as His last 'table-talk,' and the
intercessory prayer that followed 4  as His 'grace after meat.'


     The Paschal Supper itself consisted of the unleavened bread
with bitter herbs, of the so-called Chagigah, or festive offering
(when brought), and lastly, of the Paschal lamb itself. After
that nothing more was to be eaten, so that the flesh oF the
Paschal Sacrifice might be the last meat partaken of. But since
the cessation of the Paschal Sacrifice the Jews conclude the
Supper with a piece of unleavened

1 Matt. xxvi.26; Mark xiv.22; Luke xxii.19; 1 Con xi.24.
2 John xiii. 25, etc.; compare Matt. xxvi.21, etc.; Mark xiv.18,
3 John xiii.31; xvi.     
4 John xvii.

cake, which they call the "Aphikomen," or after-dish. Then,
having again washed hands, the third cup is filled, and grace
after meat said. Now, it is very remarkable that our Lord seems
so far to have anticipated the present Jewish practice that He
brake the bread 'when He had given thanks,' 1  instead of
adhering to the old injunction of not eating anything after the
Passover lamb. And yet in so doing He only carried out the spirit
of the Paschal feast. For, as we have already explained, it was
commemorative and typical. It commemorated an event which pointed
to and merged in another event - even the offering of the better
Lamb, and the better freedom connected with that sacrifice. 
Hence, after the night of His betrayal, the Paschal lamb could
have no further meaning, and it was right that the commemorative
"Aphikomen" should take its place. The symbolical cord, if the
figure may be allowed, had stretched to its goal - the offering
up of the Lamb of God; and though again continued from that point
onwards till His second coming, yet it was, in a sense, as from a
new beginning.

(Yes, Jesus introduced a NEW Passover service, far from the
rituals of the old, but still real rituals for a NT Passover,
with the emphasis now on the very Lamb of God - His broken body
and His shed blood to take away the sins of all who will accept
Him as the Messiah Lamb of God. Plus an added ritual of "foot
washing" to symbolize the ever truth that we should serve our
fellow manking in many ways as life and opportunity gives us.
Remember God is God and He can lay down the rules as He wishes
and when He wishes, as Jesus said, "Not my will be done, but Thy
will be done" - Keith Hunt)


     Immediately afterwards the third cup was drunk, a special
blessing having been spoken over it. There cannot be any
reasonable doubt that this was the cup which our Lord connected
with His own Supper.     

(Nope Edersheim! Not so fast .... nothing in the Gospels says it
was the "third" cup, your getting this from the Jewish "Seder" -
the reader is encouraged to study the study called "Passover -
Was it a Seder?" on this Website - Keith Hunt)

     It is called in Jewish writings, just as by St.Paul, 2  'the
cup of blessing,' partly because it and the first cup required a
special 'blessing,' and partly because it followed on the 'grace
after meat.' Indeed, such importance attached to it, that the
Talmud 3 notes ten peculiarities, too

(It is called the "cup of blessing" by Paul, not because it was
from a Jewish "seder" which Edersheim admitted early was formed
after sacrifices came to an end in 70 A.D. BUT BECAUSE it was a
cup representing the blood of Christ - truly a blessing - He shed
His blood for the remission of sins - Keith Hunt)

1 See 1 Cor. xi.24, and the Gospels.    
2 1 Cor. x.16, 
3 "Berac." 51, 1

minute indeed for our present consideration, but sufficient to
show the special value set upon it. 1

     The service concluded with the fourth cup, over which the
second portion of the 'Hallel ' was sung, consisting of Psalms
cxv., cxvi., cxvii., and cxviii., the whole ending with the
so-called 'blessing of the song,' which comprised these two brief

'All Thy works shall praise Thee, Jehovah our God. And Thy
saints, the righteous, who do Thy good pleasure, and all Thy
people, the house of Israel, with joyous song let them praise,
and bless, and magnify, and glorify, and exalt, and reverence,
and sanctify, and ascribe the kingdom to Thy name, O our King!
For it is good to praise Thee, and pleasure to sing praises unto
Thy name, for from everlasting to everlasting Thou art God.'

'The breath of all that lives shall praise Thy name, Jehovah our
God. And the spirit of all flesh shall continually glorify and
exalt Thy memorial, O our King! For from everlasting to
everlasting Thou art God, and besides Thee we have no King,
Redeemer, or Saviour,' etc. 2


     In this manner was the Paschal Supper celebrated by the Jews
at the time when our Lord for the last time sat down to it with
His disciples. 

(No, there is no proof that it was the modern "seder" Passover
meal. This "seder" came much later. There was obviously the lamb,
bitter herbs, bread, a hymn, and a "cup" [in the original
Passover nothing is said about a "cup" of anything] as recorded
in the Gospels, and as was ordained by God in the first Passover,
but the groups observing their individual Passover night, as
Jesus and His disciples did, may well have ignored any such
Pharisees teachings as to its observation - Keith Hunt)

     So important is it to have a clear understanding of all
that passed on that occasion, that, at the risk of some
repetition, we shall now

1 It is a curious circumstance that the Mishnah seems to
contemplate the same painful case of drunkenness at the Paschal
Supper, which, as we know, actually occurred in the church at
Corinth, that so closely imitated the Jewish practice. The
Mishnah does not, indeed, speak in so many words of drunkenness,
but it lays down this rule: 'Does any one sleep at the Passover
meal and wake again, he may not eat again after he is awaked.'
2 Exceptionally a fifth cup was drunk, and over it 'the great
Hallel' saw said, comprising Ps. cxx.-cxxxvii.

attempt to piece together the notices in the various Gospels,
adding to them again those explanations which have just been
given in detail. At the outset we may dismiss, as unworthy of
serious discussion, the theory, either that our Lord had observed
the Paschal Supper at another than the regular time for it, or
that St.John meant to intimate that He had partaken of it on the
13th instead of the 14th of Nisan. 

(Here Edersheim is somewhat missed up in the dispute of the time
for the Passover. He goes on as we shall see to give clear proof
that Jesus did OBSERVE the PASSOVER, not some "Lord's supper"
preceding the Passover, but the very "Passover" itself. He goes
on to show and point out that no "passover lambs" could have been
slain in the Temple prior to the 14th. Where he goes wrong and
what he cannot figure out, hence never touches upon it, is the
fact that the religious Pharisees and followers were STILL going
to partake of the Passover AFTER Jesus had died on the cross -
see John 18:28,39; 19:14. It would be all sorted out in the mind
if one realizes that what Edersheim has given you in "Mishnah"
traditions of the Passover and historical records, is that the
Pharisee religion STARTED the Temple Passover rituals shortly
after noon on the 14th, slaying of the lambs in the Temple then
taking place, and they and their followers eating the passover
meal during the evening of the 15th. This was a great Pharisee
ERROR! The true time to observe the Passover was at the BEGINNING
of the 14th, just as Jesus with His disciples did, as recorded in
the Gospels. Edersheim now goes on to prove Jesus DID OBSERVE THE
PASSOVER, not some "early meal" or "Lord's Supper different from
the Passover" - Keith Hunt)

     To such violent hypotheses, which are wholly uncalled for,
there is this one conclusive answer, that, except on the evening
of the 14th of Nisan, no Paschal lamb could have been offered in
the Temple, and therefore no Paschal Supper celebrated in

(Fully wrong as to the idea that no Passover could have been
celebrated in Jerusalem without the lamb being offered in the
Temple. This is a complete theological false idea by Edersheim,
because Edersheim was a Pharisee Jew converted to Christianity.
His entire past theology would have been from the Pharisees
teachings. Edersheim misses the fact that NO Passover lamb HAD to
be slain in the Temple. Such a tradition of doing so came from
the Pharisees. Every family or group had the God given right to
slay the Passover lambs for themselves; no priest was needed.
Nowhere in the laws of Moses can you find the law that stated the
Passover lamb had to be taken to the tabernacle or Temple and
slain by the priest - it just is NOT there! Hence Passover lambs
were being slain by the hundreds who knew the truth, just as
Jesus knew it, and did it, without any Temple or priest having
any part in it - Keith Hunt)

     But abiding by the simple text of Scripture, we have the
following narrative of events:--Early on the forenoon of the 14th
of Nisan, the Lord Jesus having sent Peter and John before Him
'to prepare the Passover,' 

(Edersheim wrong again! It was not the 14th day when Jesus sent
the disciples to "prepare the Passover" - if it had been, then
the events would have gone into the 15th evening and night, and
Jesus would have be crucified on the 15th day - a Sabbath day -
which all scholars should know would have been impossible under
Jewish law, no one was to remain on a death stake on the Sabbath.
Edersheim is here so busy trying to defend Jesus observing the
Passover as the Pharasees did through the Temple etc. and placing
it on the 14th day-time part, when the verses he quotes were
taking place, that it flies right over his head, that this would
mean Jesus died on the 15th Sabbath day of the Feast of
Unleavened Bread. It is laughable if he was not so serious about
it being so - Keith Hunt)

'in the evening He cometh with the twelve' to the
'guest-chamber,' the large upper room furnished's for the Supper,
although He seems to have intended 'after Supper' to spend the
night outside the city. Hence Judas and the band from the chief
priests do not seek for Him where He had eaten the Passover, but
go at once to 'the garden into which He had entered, and His
disciples;' for Judas 'knew the place,'  and it was one to which
'Jesus ofttimes resorted with His disciples.' 'When the hour was
come' for the commencement they Paschal Supper, Jesus 'sat down,
and the twelve apostles with Him,' all, as usual at the feast,
'leaning,' John on 'Jesus' bosom,' being placed next

Mark xiv.17; Luke xxii,11,12.; John xviii.1,2; John xiii. 23.

before Him, and Judas apparently next behind, while Simon Peter
faced John, and was thus able to 'beckon unto him' when he wished
inquiry to be made of the Lord. The disciples being thus ranged,
the Lord Jesus 'took the cup and gave thanks, and said, Take
this, and divide it among yourselves.' 1  This was the first cup,
over which the first prayer in the service was spoken. Next, as
in duty bound, all washed their hands, only that the Lord here
also gave meaning to the observance, when, expanding the service
into Christian fellowship over His broken body, He 'riseth from
Supper,' 'and began to wash the disciples' feet.' 2  It is thus
we explain how this ministry, though calling forth Peter's
resistance to the position which the Master took, did not evoke
any question as to its singularity. As the service proceeded, the
Lord mingled teaching for the present with the customary lessons
of the past; 3  for, as we have seen, considerable freedom was
allowed, provided the instruction proper at the feast were given.
The first part of the `'Hallel' had been sung, and in due order
He had taken the 'bread of poverty' and the 'bitter herbs,'
commemorative of the sorrow and the bitterness of Egypt, when 'He
was troubled in spirit' about the root of bitterness' about to
spring up among, and to 'trouble' them, by which 'many would be
defiled.' The general concern of the disciples as to which of
their number should betray Him, found expression in the gesture
of Peter. His friend John understood its meaning, and 'lying back
on Jesus' breast,' he put the whispered question, to which the
Lord replied by giving 'the sop' of unleavened bread

1 Luke xxii.17.     
2 John xiii.4,5. 
3 John xiii.12-20.

with bitter herbs, 'when He had dipped' it, to Judas Iscariot.
'And after the sop Satan entered into him,' and he 'went out
immediately.' It was an unusual time to leave the Paschal table,
for with 'the sop dipped' into the 'Charoseth' the Paschal Supper
itself had only just begun. But then 'some of them thought' -
perhaps with out fully considering it in their excitement - that
Judas, who 'had the bag,' and on whom, therefore, the care of
such things devolved, had only gone to see after 'those things
that they had need of against the feast,' or to 'give something
to the poor' applying some of the common stock of money in
helping to provide 'peace-offerings' for the poor. This would
have been quite in accordance with the spirit of the ordinance,
while neither supposition necessarily involved a breach of the
law, since it was permitted to prepare all needful provision for
the feast, and of course for the Sabbath, which in this instance,
followed it. 

(Edersheim continues here with his twisted theology of Jesus and
His disciples observing the Passover with the Pharisees teaching,
on the evening of the 15th, which was a Sabbath day, and Judas
could go out and buy stuff for the feast etc. because the
Pharisees law allowed such to be done on such a Sabbath day as
the 15th, the first holy day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread -
Keith Hunt)

For as we have seen, the 15th of Nisan differed in this from the
ordinary Sabbath-law, although there is evidence that even the
latter was at that time by no means so strict as later Jewish
tradition has made it. And then it was, after the regular Paschal
meal, that the Lord instituted His own Supper, for the first time
using the Aphikomen 'when He had given thanks' (after meat), to
symbolise His body, and the third 'cup, or 'cup of blessing which
we bless'  being 'the cup after supper' --to symbolise His blood.
'And when they had sung an hymn ' 'they went out into the mount
of Olives.' 

1 Cor. x.16; Luke xxii.20; Psa.cxv.-cxviii; Matt. xxvi.30.

     Then it was that the Lord's great heaviness and loneliness
came upon Him; when all around seemed to give way, as if crushed
under the terrible burden about to be lifted; when His disciples
could not watch with Him even one hour; when in the agony of His
soul His sweat was as it were great drops of blood, falling down
to the ground; and when He 'prayed, saying: O my Father, if it be
possible, let this cup pass from Me: nevertheless not as I will,
but as Thou wilt.' But 'the cup which the Father' had given Him,
He drank to the bitter dregs; and 'when He had offered up prayers
and supplications with strong crying and tears unto Him that was
able to save Him from death, and was heard in that He feared;
though He were a Son, yet learned He obedience by the things
which He suffered; and being made perfect, He became the author
of eternal salvation unto all them that obey Him.' 

     Thus the 'Lamb without blemish and without spot, who verily
was foreordained before the foundation of the world' and, indeed,
'slain from the foundation of the world'  -- was selected, ready,
willing, and waiting. It only remained, that it should be
actually offered up as 'the propitiation for our sins: and not
for ours only, but also for the whole world.' 

Heb. v.7-9.;2 1 Pet. i.20; Rev, xiii.8; 1 John ii.2.



Edersheim has given you MUCH on Pharisee Mishnah teaching, that
he tries to weave Jesus' last Passover into. On this Website
you find find the in-depth study called "Jesus' Passover - Was it
a Seder" in which the author, step by step, shows the faults of
believing Jesus' last Passover was the Jewish "Seder" service.

Now you see how someone with education and maybe "degrees" or a
PhD after their name, can be so dumb when it comes to putting
Scripture with Scripture, misunderstanding even what history
claims and teaches. Edersheim could not put together correctly
the Pharisee Passover and the true original Passover. He sees
where Jesus DID observe the Passover, not some "early meal" or an
invented "Lord's Supper" service. Yet, because he is so befuddled
with his own past Pharisee teachings, he teaches Jesus was
observing the Passover with the Temple service, as the Pharisees
demanded it. Hence what he has just told you about, to him Jesus
was observing the Passover starting at the afternoon services in
the Temple of the 14th day, and going on into the 15th day. 
Which, though Edersheim never mentions it, but common logic would
mean, Jesus died on the cross on the afternoon of the 15th, a
Sabbath holy day. 
Put all that together with Edersheim not even mentioning the
Pharisees (and followers) STILL, after Jesus' trial and nailing
to the cross, waiting to observe the "Passover" as the Gospel of
John explains, and you then have, with common logic, the
Pharisees and company, observing the Passover on the 16th of the
month, which they never ever did.

Wow........I hope you get the picture of how SILLY and
theologically BRAINLESS at times, some theologians can be, even
with PhDs after their name. You know what an "expert" is do you
not? Well "ex" is an unknown quantity, and "spert" is a drip
under pressure, which means in simple language, "experts" can be
unknown drips under pressure!! I make fun of some experts because
some are so full of scholastical knowledge that they cannot read
the Scriptures as a child, or put all verses together on any
particular subject, hence coming up with many wrong teachings.

We have more of these "experts" in Protestant fundamental
prophets, who teach you the "secret rapture" - the Second coming
of Christ in two phases - one secret and unknown and invisible,
to grab the saints and take them back to heaven for 7 years, then
the next phase of His coming is visible. 

I'm finishing this chapter with a BLAST to those who think they
are Bible teachers, and who cannot see the crazy theology they
teach, who cannot correctly put the Word of truth together. You
just got an eye full of that from Edersheim, who despite all his
"knowledge" and study, could not put together correctly the order
of the Passover, who left out certain passages, who did not even
address the end of his thought, as it would lead to silly
illogical ideas. Take this lesson from Edersheim as to HOW NOT to
study the Bible.

Well, you can know the truth of the matter. I've given it to you
in many studies on the Feasts of the Lord. It's all on this

Keith Hunt 

  Home Previous Page Top of Page Next Page

Navigation List:

Word Search: