Matthew 26:20

Mat_26:20-25

And as they did eat, He said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray Me.

Self-distrust

Every man is a mystery to himself. In every soul there lie, coiled and dormant, like hybernating snakes, evils that a very slight rise in the temperature will wake up into poisonous activity. Let no man say, in foolish self-confidence, that any form of sin which his brother has ever committed, is impossible for him. Temperament shields us from much, no doubt. There are sins that we are inclined to, and there are sins that we have no mind to. But the identity of human nature is deeper than the diversity of temperament.

I. All sins are at bottom but varying forms of one root. The essence of every evil is selfishness; and when you have that, it is exactly as with cooks who have the stock by the fireside-they can make any kind of soup out of it, with the right flavouring. All sin is living to oneself instead of to God, and it may easily pass from one form of evil into another, just as light and heat, motion and electricity, are all various forms of one force. Doctors will tell you there are forms of disease which slip from one kind of sickness into another; so, if we have got the infection about us, it is a matter very much of accidental circumstances what shape it takes.

II. All sin is gregarious. The tangled mass of sin is like one of those great fields of sea-weed that you sometimes come across upon the ocean, all hanging together by a thousand slimy growths; which, if lifted from the wave at any point, drags up yards of it inextricably grown together. No man commits only one kind of transgression. All sins hunt in couples.

III. All sin is but yielding to tendencies common to us all. The greatest transgressions have resulted from yielding to tendencies which are common to us all. Cain killed his brother from jealousy; David befouled his name and his reign by animal passion; Judas betrayed Christ because he was fond of money. Many a man has murdered another simply because he had a hot temper. And you have got a temper, and love of money, and animal passions, and that which may stir you up into jealousy. Your neighbours house has caught fire and been blown up. Your house, too, is built of wood, and thatched with straw, and you have as much dynamite in your cellars as he had in his. Do not be too sure that yon are safe from the danger of explosion.

IV. All transgression is yielding to temptations that assail all men. Here are one hundred men in a plague-stricken city; they have all got to draw their water from the same well. If five or six of them died of cholera, it would be very foolish of the other ninety-five to say, There is no chance of my being touched. And we all live in the same atmosphere; and the temptations that have overcome these men, that have headed the count of crimes appeal to you.

V. Men will gradually drop down to the level which, before they began the descent, seemed to be impossible to them. First, the imagination is inflamed, then the wish begins to draw the soul to the sin, then conscience pulls it hack, then the fatal decision is made, and the deed is done. Sometimes all the stages are hurried quickly through, and a man spins downhill as cheerily and fast as a diligence down the Alps. Sometimes, as the coast of a country may sink am inch in a century, until long miles of the fiat sea-beach are under water, and towers and cities are buried beneath the barren waves, so our lives may be gradually lowered, with a motion imperceptible but most real, bringing us down within high-water mark, and at last the tide may wash over what was solid land. (A. Maclaren, D. D.)

Is it I?-Sinful possibilities

A moment of dismay among the disciples. The Master had just declared that one of them should commit an act of the basset treachery, and betray Him to His enemies. How do they take His words? Do they break out in indignant remonstrance? Do they fall to accusing one another? Does each draw back from his brother apostle in horror at the thought that possibly that brother apostle is he who is to do this dreadful thing? No; they are all self-engrossed; each mans anxiety is turned, not towards his brother, but towards himself. Now, there are times in the lives of all of us, when that comes to us which came here to Christs disciples.

I. When we see deep and flagrant sin in some other man. While the act from which we recoil is repugnant to our conscientiousness, the powers that did it and the motives that stirred those powers into action are human, and such as we possess and feel.

II. When we do some small sin, and recognize the deep power of sinfulness by which we do it. The slightest crumbling of the earth beneath your feet makes you aware of the precipice. The least impurity makes you ready to cry out, as some image of hideous lust rises before you, Oh, is it I? Can I come to that?

III. The expression of any suspicion about us by another person. Perfectly unwarrantable and false we may know the charge to be; but the mere fastening of the sin and our name together, must turn our eyes in on ourselves and set us to asking, Is it possible? I did not do this thing, indeed. My conscience is clear. But am I not capable of it? Is there not a fund of badness in me which might lead me almost anywhere? And if so, can I blaze up into fiery indignation at mens daring to suspect me? Can I resent suspicion as an angel might, who, standing in the light of God, dreaded and felt sin? No; our disavowal of the sin would be mot boisterously angry, but quiet, and solemn, and humble, with a sense of danger, and gratitude for preservation.

IV. By a strange but very natural process, the same result often comes from just the opposite cause. Unmerited praise reveals to us our unworthiness. A man comes up to our life, and, looking round upon the crowd of our fellow men, he says, See, I will strike the life of this brother of ours, and you shall hear how true it rings. He does strike, and it does seem to them to ring true, and they shout their applause; but we whose life is struck feel running all through us at the stroke the sense of hollowness. Our soul sinks as we hear the praises. They start desire, but they reveal weakness. No true man is ever so humble and so afraid of himself as when others are praising him most loudly.

V. Every temptation which comes to us, however bravely and successfully it may be resisted, opens to us the sight of some of our human capacity for sin. The man who dares to laugh at a temptation which he has felt anal resisted is not yet wholly safe out of its power. (Phillips Brooks, D. D.)

The apostles doubt of themselves

The form of the question in the original suggests that they expected a negative answer, and might be reproduced in English, Surely it is not I? None of them could think that he was the traitor, yet none of them could be sure that he was not. Their Master knew better than they did; and so, from a humble knowledge of what lay in them, coiled and slumbering, but there, they will not meet His words with a contradiction, but with a questions (A. Maclaren, D. D.)

Need for self-control

Do not say. I know when to stop. Do not say, I can go so far; it will not do me any harm. Many a man has said that, and been ruined by it. Do not say, It is natural to me to have these inclinations and tastes, and there can be no harm in yielding to them. It is perfectly natural for a man to stoop down over the edge of a precipice to gather the flowers that are growing in some cranny in the cliff; and it is as natural for him to topple over, and be smashed to a mummy at the bottom! God gave you your dispositions, and your whole nature under lock and key; keep them so! (A. Maclaren, D. D.)

Reward of treason

Philip, Duke of Austria, paid the ambassadors of Charles IV. (who had betrayed their trust) in counterfeit coin; and when they complained, made reply, that false coin is good enough for false knaves. James I., king of Scotland, was murdered in Perth by Waiter, Earl of Athol, in hope to have the crown; and crowned he was indeed, but with a crown of red-hot iron clapped upon his head, being one of the tortures wherewith he ended at once his wicked days and devices. And Guy Gawkes, that Spanish pioneer, should have received his reward of five hundred pounds at an appointed place in Surrey, but instead thereof, he had been paid home with a brace of bullets for his good service, if justice had not come in with a halter by way of prevention. Thus traitors have always become odious, though the treason were commodious. (Spencer.)

Apostates

In the long line of portraits of the Doges, in the palace at Venice, one space is empty, and the semblance of a black curtain remains as a melancholy record of glory forfeited. Found guilty of treason against the State, Marine Falieri was beheaded, and his image as far as possible blotted from remembrance. As we regarded the singular memorial we thought of Judas and Demas, and then, as we heard in spirit the masters warning word, One of you shall betray Me, we asked within our soul the solemn question, Lord, is it I? Every ones eye rests longer on the one dark vacancy than upon any one of the many fine portraits of the merchant monarchs; and so the apostates of the Church are far more frequently the theme of the worlds talk than the thousands of good men and true who adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things. Hence the more need of care on the part of those of us whose portraits are publicly exhibited as saints, lest we should one day be painted out of the Churchs gallery, and our persons only remembered as having been detestable hypocrites. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Treachery, audacity, and hypocrisy

We have here an example of fixed determination to do evil, unshaken by the clearest knowledge that it is evil. Judas heard his crime described in its own ugly reality. He heard his fate proclaimed by lips of absolute love and truth; and notwithstanding both, he comes unmoved and unshaken with his question. The dogged determination in the man, that dares to see his evil stripped naked and is not ashamed, is even more dreadful than the hypocrisy and sleek simulation of friendship in his face. Most men turn away with horror from even the sins that they are willing to do, when they are put plainly and bluntly before them. We have two sets of names for wrong things; one of which we apply to our brethrens sins and the other to the same sins in ourselves. What I do is prudence, what you do of the same sort is covetousness; what I do is sowing my wild oats, what you do is immorality and dissipation; what I do is generous living, what you do is drunkenness and gluttony; what I do is righteous indignation, what you do is passionate anger. And so you may go the whole round of evil. Very bad are the men who can look at their deed, described in its own inherent deformity, and yet say, Yes, that is it, and I am going to do it. One of you shall betray Me. Yes, I will betray you. It must have taken something to look into the Masters face, and keep the fixed purpose steady. This obstinate condition of dogged determination to do a wrong thing, knowing it to be a wrong thing, is a condition to which all evil steadily tends. We may not come to it in this world, but we are getting towards it in regard of the special wrong deeds and desires that we cherish and commit. And when a man has once reached the point of saying to evil, Be thou my good, then he is a devil, in the true meaning of the word; and wherever he is, he is in hell! (A. Maclaren, D. D.)

Supper with the twelve

On the eve of the crucifixion Jesus sat down to supper with the twelve, in the room which had been provided and prepared for them.

I. A picture of the poverty of Jesus on the eve of discharging the greatest debt ever owed by man. He must borrow a room and accept the hospitality of a stranger. But in a moral sense he was rich and able to atone for the sins of men. We must not judge the worth of a person by outward circumstances.

II. A picture of the calmness of Jesus on the eve of enduring the greatest anguish ever borne by man. With calmness he sat down with the twelve on the eve of the greatest suffering.

III. A picture of the friendlessness of Jesus on the eve of experiencing the greatest desertion ever known by man, He sat down with the very men who were to forsake him; but He utters no word of stern rebuke. (F. W. Brown.)

Christ foretelling the treachery of Judas

I. There is the prediction and it discovers to us-

1. The close and constant view which the Lord Jesus seems to have taken of His final sufferings.

2. The naturalness of our Lords mind; by this I mean its resemblance to our own minds. He has our inward nature. He felt treachery.

3. The exceeding tenderness of Christ. He cared for the love of the men around Him.

4. The wonderful self-denial of our Lord. He did not treat Judas differently from the other disciples, though so long false.

II. The effect produced on the disciples by this prediction.

1. Their simple faith in their Lords prediction.

2. Their warm love for Christ.

3. Their great self-distrust, (C. Bradley.)

Is it I?-

When the wind is rising it is good for each ship at sea to look to its own ropes and sails, and not stand gazing to see how ready the other ships are to meet it. We all feel that we would rather hear a man asking about himself anxiously than to see him so sure of himself that the question never occurred to him. We should be surer of his standing firm if we saw that he knew he was in danger of a fall. Now, all this is illustrated in Christs disciples. (Phillips Brooks.)

Judas rebuked by Christ

You have here an account of how our Lord, whilst partaking of the last supper with His disciples, predicted His betrayal. The disciples were greatly moved by the declaration: it is a good sign when we are less suspicious of others than of ourselves-Lord, is it I?

I. We regard the sayings of our Lord at this time as uttered with special reference to Judas, with the merciful design of warning him of the enormity of his projected crime, and thus, if possible, of withholding him from its commission. It is easy to see an adaptation between the words used by Christ and the feelings which may have been working in Judas. The Son of Man goeth as it is written of Him. Judas may have thought that he was helping forward the work of the Messiah; the crucifixion was a determined thing. Woe unto that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed. Judas was free in his treachery, acted from his own will, in obedience to his depraved passions, as if there had been no Divine foreknowledge. Oh! the vanity of the thought that God ever places us under a necessity of sinning, or that because our sins may turn to His glory they will not also issue in our shame.

II. Let us now glance at another delusion to which it is likely that Judas gave indulgence; this is the delusion as to the consequences, the punishment of sin being exaggerated. There is such energy in conscience that it would hardly let a man run on flagrant acts of sin if there were not some drug by which it were lulled. It may be that Judas could hardly persuade himself that a Being so beneficent as Christ, whom he had seen healing the sick, could lay aside the graciousness of His nature, and avenge a wrong by surrendering the evil doer to interminable woe. But our Lords words meet this delusion-It had been good for that man if he had not been born. We expect to find Judas overawed by this saying.

III. It reveals his utter moral hardness. Christ had said, Woe unto that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed. At this saying Judas asks, Lord, is it I? Numbers bear themselves proudly against Christ and His gospel and go forth from the very sanctuary, with the words of condemnation in their ears, to do precisely the things by which that sentence is incurred. (H. Melvill, B. D.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat 26:20-25. And when the even was come — At the proper hour; he sat down with the twelve — To taste first, according to the custom of those days, the unleavened bread and the bitter herbs, before the lamb was served up. After which they proceeded as is related in the note on Mat 26:2. And as they did eat he said — One of you shall betray me — He had before told them, namely, Mat 17:22, that the Son of man should be betrayed; he now comes to acquaint them, that one of them would be the traitor, and to point out the guilty person. And they were exceeding sorrowful — They were sorrowful that he should be betrayed by any one, but more so that one of themselves should be the instrument of so horrible a crime: and began every one to say, Lord, is it I, that am this guilty creature? They do not appear to have asked this question because they mistrusted themselves, not knowing to how great a wickedness their hearts might lead them; but because each of them wanted to be freed from the suspicion of such an iniquity. He answered, He that dippeth, &c. — “Grotius and others think this implies that Judas had placed himself so near his Master as to eat out of the same dish with him. But their way of lying on couches at meat must have made it inconvenient for two or more persons to eat in that manner. It is more probable that the disciples, being in the deepest distress, had left off eating, only Judas, to conceal his guilt, continued the meal, and was dipping his meat in a kind of a sauce named haroseth, (which they used on these occasions,) when Jesus happened to be putting his into it; which sauce, according to custom, was served up in a separate dish.” — Macknight. The Son of man goeth through sufferings to glory, as it is written of him — In the Scriptures; and determined in the divine counsels. See note on Act 2:23. Yet this was no excuse for him that betrayed him: but wo to that man, &c. — In pronouncing this wo upon the man by whom he should be betrayed, our Lord manifestly shows that the foreknowledge and prediction that he should suffer, and that by the treachery of Judas, laid no antecedent necessity upon Judas of doing this action, for if it had, it not only would have lessened the wo due to him, but would have taken away all his guilt. For no guilt can attach to any action which a man is laid under an absolute necessity of doing, and which to him is unavoidable. All that the prediction of Judas’s treachery implies is, that God with certainty foreknew how his will, left entirely to its own freedom, would determine on this occasion: and, it must be observed, it would have determined in the same way, if such determination had neither been foreknown nor foretold. See note on 1Pe 1:2. It had been good for that man if he had not been born — May not the same be said of every man that finally perishes? But who can reconcile this, if it were true of Judas alone, with the doctrine of universal salvation? For, if the torments of hell were not eternal, but, after suffering in them, though it might be millions of millions of years, guilty sinners should be rescued from them and brought to the enjoyment of heavenly blessedness, it still would be good for them that they had been born, inasmuch as they would still have a never-ending state of felicity before them. Then Judas, who betrayed him — Who had in fact already betrayed him, Mat 26:15, and was now waiting for an opportunity to deliver him privately into the hands of the chief priests, answered, Master — Gr. Rabbi, or teacher, Is it I? — The other disciples, in asking the same question, said each of them, κυριε, Lord, is it I? a title implying greater reverence than Judas was disposed to show his Master. As Judas was conscious of what he had already done, and was resolved still further to do, in betraying and delivering up his Divine Master, and could not but know that his whole conduct, and the very secrets of his heart, lay open to his inspection, he manifests by this question unparalleled impudence, as well as excessive hardness of heart. One would almost suppose, that he intended to insult Christ’s prescience as well as long-suffering. He, Jesus, said unto him, Thou hast said — That is, It is as thou hast said: thou art the guilty person. Before this, when Christ discovered that he should be betrayed, he only told it in John’s ear, that Judas would be the traitor: and John told it to Peter, (see Joh 13:23-26;) but the rest knew nothing of it. Now Jesus plainly points him out before them all; which, impudent as he was, evidently confounded and struck him speechless. But whether he immediately left the company, as some infer from Joh 13:30; or whether that passage refers to what happened at a former supper, as others think, is a question which it is not easy to decide. One thing seems clear: if he withdrew at this time, he must have soon returned, as it appears, from Luk 22:21, that he was present when the Lord’s supper was instituted.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

§ 122, 124 — SUPPER AND INTIMATION OF HIS BETRAYAL, Mat_26:20-25.

20. Now when the even was come — The passover evening. Between three and six o’clock the paschal lamb was slain. Not less than ten, nor more than twenty persons sat down to the same supper. If our Lord followed in the main the usual custom of the Jews, as described by Maimonides, the following things were done. Our Lord, being master of the family, as they reclined on their meal-couches, took a cup of wine in his right hand, and uttered the prayer of consecration, saying, “Blessed be thy name, O Lord our God, King of the universe, who hast created the fruit of the vine.” He then drank the first cup and was followed by all the others.

Originally the whole service was performed standing; but when the Jews were settled in Canaan they adopted the reclining posture, to symbolize the repose which God had given them.

A service was then brought in, consisting of bitter herbs, unleavened bread, and a sort of fruit-cake made of raisins, figs, dates, etc., pressed together, to represent the clay with which Israel made brick in Egypt, which was called the charoseth; and besides this was the paschal lamb. The master, and then the rest, first ate a bitter herb, and gave thanks for the fruit of the earth. Then a disciple asks, as being one of the family, according to Exo_12:26, “What mean ye by this?” The Lord answers by explaining the historical import of the paschal commemoration. Psalms 113, 114 were then sung. And then the second cup of wine was drunk.

Then occurs that part which our Lord transferred to the new dispensation. Usually the Hebrew officiating householder took cakes and brake them with benediction, and gave to each one a piece, saying, “This is” (that is, this represents) “the bread of affliction which our fathers did eat in the land of Egypt.” This our Lord changed to “This is my body,” that is, represents my body. Then was the paschal flesh eaten, a full meal being taken. After this the third cup, which our Lord applied to its higher use in the new dispensation. The old mode was for the master to take the cup, pronounce a blessing, and drink; his example being followed by the others. This is “the cup of blessing” which the apostle mentions, and identifies with the sacramental cup, in 1Co_10:16. Then by custom followed the fourth cup, (which our Lord omitted,) followed by the chant of the Great Hallel. See note on Mat_26:30.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

THE PASSOVER

Mat 26:20; Mar 14:17; Luk 22:14-18. It is now about 6 P. M. on Thursday preceding our Lord’s crucifixion, when they proceed to eat the Passover meal. “And when the hour arrived, He and His twelve apostles along with Him sat down at the table. And He said to them, With desire I desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffered; for I say unto you, that I no more eat of it until it may be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” This is really not only His last Passover meal, but the last of all that He ate before He laid down His life. I do not wonder that He intensely desired to enjoy this Passover with His disciples, an institution so significant to every faithful Jew, commemorative of their national birth, and of course pre-eminently significant to the Savior, because it emblematized His expiatory death, then looking Him in the face, as the swift hours rolled on and brought the bloody morrow. As the lamb died to provide that meal for the teeming thousands of Israel to feast upon, so the Lamb of God must die in order that the millions of earth may not starve through all eternity, but feast upon that Passover meal through the flight of eternal ages. The Passover “was fulfilled in the kingdom of God” when Jesus bled and died on the cross, the Great Antitype typified by the millions of bleeding lambs the last fifteen hundred years. O what rivers of blood — quantity symbolizing quality!

“And receiving the cup, blessing it, He said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves; for I say unto you, that I shall no more drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God may come.” There is a sense in which the kingdom of God has been in the world from the days of Eden, as the redemptive scheme was launched before the expulsion out of Paradise. The advent of Jesus into the world was a glorious epoch in the kingdom; but you must remember He came to die to redeem the lost. Hence His first advent culminates at Calvary, the grandest and most important epoch in the kingdom of God, and here denominated the coming of the kingdom.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat_26:20. Ἀνέκειτο] for the enactment (Exo_12:11) requiring the Passover lamb to be eaten standing, staff in hand, and in travelling attire, had been subsequently superseded by the necessity of reclining. See Hieros Pesachim f. 37. 2 : Mos servorum est, ut edant stantes, at nunc comedant recumbentes, ut dignoscatur, exisse eos e servitute in libertatem. See Usteri, Comment. Joh. ev. genuin. esse. 1823, p. 26 ff.

It was considered desirable that no Passover party should ever consist of fewer than ten guests (Joseph. Bell. vi. 9. 3), for the lamb had to be entirely consumed (Exo_12:4; Exo_12:43 ff.)

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat 26:20-25 . The presence of a traitor announced (Mar 14:18-21 , Luk 22:21-23 ).

Mat 26:20-21 . ὀψίας δὲ γ . It is evening, and the company are at supper, and during the meal ( ἐσθιόντων αὐ ., Mat 26:21 ) Jesus made a startling announcement. At what stage is not indicated. Elsner suggests a late stage: “Cumfere comedissent; vergente ad finem coenâ,” because an early announcement would have killed appetite.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Because the Law appointed them to be shod, and have their staffs in their hands, as though they were in haste, thereby it is to be gathered that they sat not down when they did eat the Passover, but stood, for otherwise when they went to meat, they put off their shoes: therefore he speaketh here in this place, not of the Passover, but of the Supper, which was celebrated after that the Passover was solemnly done.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Verse 20. Now when the even was come, he sat down with the twelve.] It is a common opinion that our Lord ate the passover some hours before the Jews ate it; for the Jews, according to custom, ate theirs at the end of the fourteenth day, but Christ ate his the preceding even, which was the beginning of the same sixth day, or Friday; the Jews begin their day at sunsetting, we at midnight. Thus Christ ate the passover on the same day with the Jews, but not on the same hour. Christ kept this passover the beginning of the fourteenth day, the precise day and hour in which the Jews had eaten their first passover in Egypt. See Ex 12:6-12. And in the same part of the same day in which the Jews had sacrificed their first paschal lamb, viz. between the two evenings, about the ninth hour, or 3 o'clock, Jesus Christ our passover was sacrificed for us: for it was at this hour that he yielded up his last breath; and then it was that, the sacrifice being completed, Jesus said, IT IS FINISHED. See Ex 12:6, c., and De 16:6, &c. See Clarke on Joh 18:28, and the Treatise on the Eucharist, referred to See Clarke on Mt 26:19 and See Clarke on Mt 26:26 and following verses.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(20) He sat down with the twelve.—Reserving special Notes for the Gospels which contain the narratives, we may call to mind here the words of strong emotion with which the feast was opened (Luk_22:15), the dispute among the disciples, probably connected with the places which they were to occupy at the table (Luk_22:24), and our Lord’s practical reproof of that dispute in washing His disciples’ feet (Joh_13:1-11). Picturing the scene to ourselves, we may think of our Lord as reclining—not sitting—in the centre of the middle table, St. John next to Him, and leaning on His bosom (Joh_13:23), St. Peter probably on the other side, and the others sitting in an order corresponding, more or less closely, with the three-fold division of the Twelve into groups of four. Upon the washing of the feet followed the teaching of Joh_13:12-20, and then came the “blessing” or “thanksgiving” which opened the meal. This went on in silence, while the countenance of the Master betrayed the deep emotion which troubled His spirit (Joh_13:21), and then the silence was broken by the awful words which are recorded in the next verse.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

20. he sat down with the twelve] Rather, reclined with. This posture had not only become customary at ordinary meals, but was especially enjoined in the passover ritual. The Paschal ceremonial, so far as it bears on the Gospel narrative, may be described as follows:

(a) The meal began with a cup of red wine mixed with water: this is the first cup mentioned, Luk_22:17. After this the guests washed their hands. Here probably must be placed the washing of the disciples’ feet, John 13.

(b) The bitter herbs, symbolic of the bitter bondage in Egypt, were then brought in together with unleavened cakes, and a sauce called charoseth, made of fruits and vinegar, into which the unleavened bread and bitter herbs were dipped. This explains “He it is, to whom I shall give a sop,” Joh_13:26.

(c) The second cup was then mixed and blessed like the first. The father then explained the meaning of the rite (Exo_13:8). This was the haggadah or “shewing forth,” a term transferred by St Paul to the Christian meaning of the rite (1Co_11:26). The first part of the “hallel” (Psalms 113, 114) was then chanted by the company.

(d) After this the paschal lamb was placed before the guests. This is called in a special sense “the supper.” But at the Last Supper there was no paschal lamb. There was no need now of the typical lamb without blemish, for the antitype was there. Christ Himself was our Passover “sacrificed for us” (1Co_5:7). He was there being slain for us—His body was being given, His blood being shed. At this point, when according to the ordinary ritual the company partook of the paschal lamb, Jesus “took bread and blessed it, and gave it to his disciples” (Mat_26:26).

(e) The third cup, or “cup of blessing,” so called because a special blessing was pronounced upon it, followed: “after supper he took the cup” (Luke). “He took the cup when he had supped” (Paul). This is the “cup” named in Mat_26:27.

(f) After a fourth cup the company chanted (see Mat_26:30) the second part of the “hallel” (Psalms 115-118). (Lightfoot Hor. Hebr. Dr Ginsburg in Kitto’s Encycl., Dr Edersheim Temple Services.)

20–30. The Last Supper

Mar_14:17-26; Luk_22:14-38, where the dispute as to who should be the greatest is recorded, and the warning to Peter related as happening before Jesus departed for the Mount of Olives. St John omits the institution of the Eucharist, but relates the washing of the disciples’ feet by our Lord, and has preserved the discourses of Jesus, chs. 13–17 end. 1Co_11:23-26; where the institution of the Eucharist is narrated nearly in St Luke’s words.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And as they did eat,.... The passover lamb, the unleavened bread, and bitter herbs: he said it was usual, whilst they were thus engaged, to discourse much about the reason and design of this institution. What they talked of may be learnt from what follows (y):

"it is an affirmative precept of the law, to declare the signs and wonders which were done to our fathers in Egypt, on the night of the fifteenth of Nisan, according to Exo 13:3, "remember this day", &c. and from whence on the night of the fifteenth? from Exo 13:8, "and thou shalt show thy son", &c. at the time that the unleavened bread, and bitter herbs lie before thee. And though he has no son, or though they are wise, and grown up, they are bound to declare the going out of Egypt; and everyone that enlarges, or dwells long on the things that happened and came to pass, lo! he is praiseworthy. It is a command to make known to children, even though they do not ask; as it is said, "and thou shalt show thy son": according to the son's knowledge, his father teaches him; how if he is a little one, or foolish? he says to him, my son, all of us were servants, as this handmaid, or this servant, in Egypt; and on this night the holy, blessed God redeemed us, and brought us into liberty: and if the son is grown up and a wise man, he makes known to him what happened to us in Egypt, and the wonders which were done for us by the hands of Moses, our master; all according to the capacity of the son. And it is necessary to make a repetition on this night, that the children may see, and ask, and say, how different is this night from all other nights? until he replies to them, and says to them, so and so it happened, and thus and thus it was.--If he has no son, his wife asks him; and if he has no wife, they ask one another, how different is this night? and though they are all wise men, everyone asks himself alone, how different is this night? and it is necessary to begin with reproaches, and end with praise, how? he begins and declares, how at first our fathers were in the days of Terah, and before him, deniers (of the divine being), and wandering after vanity, and following idolatrous worship; and he ends with the law of truth, how that God brought us near to himself, and separated us from the nations, and caused us to draw nigh to his unity; and so begins and makes known, that we were servants to Pharaoh in Egypt, and all the evils he recompensed us with; and ends with the signs and wonders which were wrought for us, and with our liberties: and he that expounds from--"a Syrian was my father, ready to perish": till he has finished the whole section: and every one that adds and enlarges in expounding this section, lo! he is praiseworthy. And everyone that does not say these three words on the night of the fifteenth, cannot be excused from blame; and they are these, the passover, the unleavened bread, and the bitter herbs: "the passover", because God passed over the houses of our fathers in Egypt, as it is said, Exo 12:27, "the bitter herbs", because the Egyptians made bitter the lives of our fathers in Egypt: "the unleavened bread", because they were redeemed: and these things all of them are called the declaration, or showing forth.''

Christ now took up some part of the time, at least, whilst they were eating, in discoursing with his disciples about the traitor:

he said, verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me; meaning to the chief priests and Scribes, who should condemn him to death, and deliver him to the Gentiles, to be mocked, scourged, and crucified, as he had told them some time before, Mat 20:18, though he did not tell them as now, that it should be done by one of them; he had indeed signified as much as this two days before, at the supper in Bethany, but none seemed to understand whom he meant, but Peter and John, and the thing wore off their minds; and therefore he mentions it again to them, with great seriousness, and in the most solemn manner, declaring it as a certain and undoubted truth.

(y) Maimon. ib. c. 7. sect. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Vid. c. 8. 2, 3, 4, 5. & Haggadah Shel. Pesach. p. 5, 6, 7, 8.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

20 Now when the even was come, he sat down with the twelve.

Ver. 20. He sat down with the twelve] With Judas among the rest; though Hilary hold otherwise, for what reason I know not. Christ sat at the sacrament, when yet the gesture imported in the law was standing; and this sitting at the Passover was nowhere commanded, yet by the godly Jews was generally used. Let this "heap of wheat" (the Lord’s supper, as some interpret it) be "set about with lilies," Son 7:2, that is, with Christians, white, and of holy life; that is the main matter to be looked to.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

When the even was come - The lamb was killed “between the evenings,” Exo 12:6 (Hebrew) - that is between three o’clock, p. m., and nine in the evening. The Jews reckoned two evenings - one from three o’clock p. m. to sunset, the other from sunset to the close of the first watch in the night, or nine o’clock p. m. The paschal supper was commonly eaten after the setting of the sun, and often in the night, Exo 12:8.

He sat down - At first the supper was eaten standing, with their loins girded and their staff in their hand, denoting the haste with which they were about to flee from Egypt. Afterward, however, they introduced the practice, it seems, of partaking of this as they did of their ordinary meals. The original word is, “he reclined” - that is, he placed himself on the couch in a reclining posture, in the usual manner in which they partook of their meals. See the notes at Mat 23:6. While reclining there at the supper, the disciples had a dispute which should be the greatest. See the notes at Luk 22:24-30. At this time, also, before the institution of the Lord’s supper, Jesus washed the feet of his disciples, to teach them humility. See the notes at John 13:1-20.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

When it was evening.[2] St. Luke says, when the hour was come, which was at the latter evening, after sunset. The time of killing and sacrificing the lamb was, according to the 12th of Exodus, to be between the two evenings; (see Mark xiv. 15.) so that we may reasonably suppose, that Christ sent some of his apostles on Thursday, in the afternoon, to perform what was to be done, as to the killing and sacrificing of the lamb, and then to bring it away: and he eat it with his disciples after sunset. --- He sat down, &c. Literally, laid down, in a leaning or lying position. Some pretend, from this circumstance, that he eat not the paschal lamb that year, because it was to be eaten, standing, according to the law. But they might stand at the paschal lamb, and eat the rest of the supper on couches; as it was then the custom. (Witham) --- We must not hence suppose that he transgressed the law. He first eat the Pasch according to the Mosaic rite, standing, and then sat down to supper. (St. John Chrysostom, hom. lxxxii.)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Vespere facto. See the two evenings, Matthew xiv. 15.

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Mark hath the same, Mar 14:17-21; And in the evening he cometh with the twelve. And as they sat and did eat, Jesus said, Verily I say unto you, one of you which eateth with me shall betray me. And they began to be sorrowful, and to say unto him one by one, Is it I? And he answered and said unto them, It is one of the twelve, that dippeth with me in the dish. The Son of man indeed goeth as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! Good were it for that man if he had never been born. Luke saith, Luk 22:14-16, &c., And when the hour was come, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him. And he said unto them, With desire have I desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer: for I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves: for I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come. Then Luke passeth to our Lord’s institution of the supper. Luke mixes the discourse about the person that should betray him with the relation about the institution of the supper, contrary to the relation both of Matthew and Mark, and John, so as we may reasonably think that Luke misplaces it, giving us an account of that passage, Luk 22:21-23, within his relation of the history of his receiving the passover, and instituting of the supper, which immediately followed each other, but not strictly in that order in which our Saviour spake them, which appeareth plainly by the other three evangelists to have been during the eating of the passover, and before the institution of the Lord’s supper. For the understanding of the history, we must understand something of the Jewish order in their eating of the passover: which was this, as we have it described by the learned Doctor Lightfoot;

"Their sitting at meat was commonly upon beds or couches, made for that purpose, with the table before them. Now at other meats they either sat, as we do, with their bodies erect, or when they would enlarge themselves to more freedom of feasting, or refreshing, they sat upon the beds, and leaned upon the table on their left elbow; and this or the other posture they used indifferently at other times, as they were disposed, but on the passover night they thought they were obliged to use this leaning composure, and you may take their reason for it in some of their own words. They used their leaning posture as free men do, in memorial of their freedom. And Levi said, Because it is the manner of servants to eat standing, therefore now they eat sitting and leaning, to show that they were got out of servitude into freedom... Upon this principle and conceit of freedom they used this manner of discumbency frequently at other times, but indispensably this night, so far different from the posture enjoined and practised at the first passover in Egypt, when they ate it with their loins girded, their shoes on their feet, their staves in their hands, and in haste, Exo 12:11. And as the thought of their freedom disposed them to this leaning, reposed, secure composure of their elbow upon the table, and their head leaning on their hand, so, to emblem out the matter the more highly, they laid their legs under them, sitting on them, and laying out their feet behind them."

(Thus the woman, Luk 7:38, could conveniently come at our Saviour’s feet to wash, anoint, and wipe them).

"Thus removing and acquitting their legs and feet, as far as possible, from the least show of standing to attend, or readiness to go upon any one’s employment, which might carry with it the least colour of servitude, or contrariety to their freedom. Now according to the manner of sitting and leaning are the texts to be understood, about the beloved disciple’s leaning in the bosom of Jesus, Joh 13:23, and on the breast of Jesus, Joh 13:25

Joh 21:20. ’Aνακειμενος εν κολπω και επιπεσαν, or επιπεσων επι το στηθος, which some translators not having observed, or at least not expressed, they have intricated the reader in such gross conceptions about this matter, as that some have thought, and some have pictured, John reposing himself or lolling on the breast of Jesus, contrary to all order and decency: whereas the manner of sitting together was only thus, Jesus leaning upon the table with his left elbow, and so turning his face and breast away from the table, on one side; John sat in the same posture next before him, with his back towards Jesus, his breast or bosom not so near as that John’s back and Jesus’s breast did join together, and touch one another, but at such a distance as that there was space for Jesus to use his right hand upon the table, to reach his meat at his pleasure, and so for all the rest, as they sat in like manner. For it is but a strange fancy with which some have satisfied themselves about this matter, conceiving either that they lay upon the beds before the table, one tumbling upon or before the breast of another; or if they sat leaning on the table, that they sat so close that the back of one joined to the breast of another: they sat leaning, but with such distance between each other, that the right hand of every one of them had liberty to come and go between himself and his fellow, to reach his meat, as he had occasion."

Thus far that learned man, in his discourse of the temple service, in the time of our Saviour, in Joh 13:1-38. By which discourse we may learn;

1. That the Jews at the eating of the passover used the very same posture as at other times they did eat their meat in.

2. That this was not lying along, but sitting upon their legs, and sometimes leaning their head upon their left elbow, yet at such a distance one front another, as every one that sat might freely use their right hand to take their meat, and reach it to their mouths: nor did they always sit at meat so leaning, but at their pleasure leaned or not leaned; only at the paschal supper they always leaned, as an emblem of their more perfect liberty. By this we easily understand what is meant by Christ’s sitting down with the twelve, after the manner of that country in eating their meat.

And as they did eat, he said. For the understanding of this we must a little inquire into the Jewish manner of eating that holy supper, which I will take out of the aforementioned learned author in the same book and chapter, paragraph third.

"They being thus set, the first thing towards this passover supper that they went about was, that they every one drank off a cup of wine."

So do their own directories and rituals about this thing inform us. Now the consideration of this is of mighty use to us to help us to understand the two cups mentioned by Luke, Luk 22:17, and again Luk 22:20. The latter was the cup which our Saviour consecrated for the institution of his supper, as is plain by the consecration of the bread mentioned immediately before it, Luk 22:19. The cup mentioned Luk 22:17 was their first cup of wine, which they drank before the passover supper, mentioned by Luke only. Our Saviour’s giving thanks when he took it, was but his blessing of the whole paschal supper. Luke before this mentions some words of our Saviour, Luk 22:15,16, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer: for I say unto you, I will not eat any more thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God: that is, I am now about to suffer, I know that I am betrayed, I have therefore earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I die, to put an end to this legal service, which hath now continued so many years, and hath all this time been but a type of me and my death, and oblation for sin, Joh 1:29; 1Co 5:7. For this is the last passover I shall eat with you or that you shall eat before you see those things fulfilled in gospel providences which this service doth but typify. This indeed was but the preface to the paschal supper, nor doth Luke mention more of it, only addeth, Luk 22:18, For I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come; of which words I shall here say nothing, for they are doubtless by Luke put out of the true order, being both by Mark and Matthew mentioned as spoken after that our Saviour had blessed and taken the sacramental cup. So as, questionless, Luk 17:21,22 should have been before the Luk 17:18, according to the order in which Matthew and Mark put them, and Luk 22:18 should be put after Luk 22:20, and so also both Matthew and Mark do place them. Luke mentions no more of the paschal supper; let us therefore return to our evangelist.

And as they did eat, that is, the paschal supper, which (according to the law, Exo 12:8) was the lamb or kid roasted, which they were to eat with unleavened bread and bitter herbs. The Jews had a hundred traditional rites, which they observed about the paschal supper; but there seems to have none of them been of any Divine institution. The law required no more than the eating of the lamb or kid roasted, with unleavened bread and bitter herbs. As to their drink, it prescribed nothing, they were left to liberty: for their tradition of four cups of wine to be drank, &c., I cannot find any of the evangelists mentioning our Saviour’s usage of any such thing, but very probably he drank wine at his pleasure, as at other meals, keeping only to the rule of the law. Now saith Matthew and Mark, And as they did eat, he said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me. He had before told them the Son of man should be betrayed, Mat 17:22; Mat 20:18, where he had also told them he should be scourged, mocked, and crucified; but he now cometh to discover the traitor to them, One of you. And they were exceeding sorrowful, and began every one to say unto him, Lord, is it I? They were sorrowful that he should be betrayed by any, but more troubled that one of themselves should be so accursed an instrument: every one mistrusts his own heart, and saith, Is it I? Christ replies, He that dippeth his hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me. The dish here could be no other than the dish at the passover supper; probably the hand of Judas was at that time with our Saviour’s in the dish, for we read of no more reply from any but from Judas. Our Saviour addeth, The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! It had been good for that man if he had not been born. By these words our Saviour dooms the traitor, though withal he tells them, that for his suffering it was determined by God, foretold by the prophets, and so eventually necessary; he was not dragged to it, The Son of man goeth. But God’s decree as to the thing did neither take away the liberty of Judas’s will in acting, nor yet excuse the fact he did. Woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! A text worthy of their study, who will not understand how God should decree to permit sin, and make a sinful act as to the event necessary, without being the author of sin. As to our Saviour’s death, God had determined it, foretold it, it was necessary to be; but yet Satan put the evil motion into the heart of Judas, and Judas acted freely in the doing what he did.

Then Judas, which betrayed him, answered and said, Master, is it I? He said unto him, Thou hast said. This (as I said) maketh it very probable that the hand of Judas was in the dish with our Saviour’s, dipping in the sauce, when our Saviour spake these former words. That Judas, as well as the other disciples, was with our Lord at this action, is out of doubt. That he stayed any longer may very well be questioned, not only because Joh 13:30, He then having received the sop went immediately out; but because one cannot in reason think that his guilty conscience should suffer him to stay beyond that word, or that our Saviour would have admitted of the society of so prodigious a traitor at his last supper, the institution of which immediately followed.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Vers. 20-25. The last Supper. Jesus announces his betrayer. (Mar_14:17-21 Luk_22:14, 21-23Jo 13:21-30)

When the even was come; i.e. according to Jewish reckoning, the beginning of the 14th of Nisan; with us, the Thursday evening the eve of Good Friday. He sat down; he was reclining at table. Originally, the Passover was ordered to be eaten standing, in reference to the circumstances of its first institution; (Exo_12:11) but after the settlement in Canaan the posture had been changed to that of reclining in token of rest alter a weary pilgrimage. The rule that obtained concerning the number in one company of partakers of the Paschal feast was that it never should be less than ten, nor more than the lamb would suffice to feed, though a morsel of the flesh was considered to satisfy all requirements.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mark xiv, 17; Luke xxii, 14.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

sat down with the twelve

The order of events on the night of the Passover supper appears to have been:

(1) The taking by our Lord and the disciples of their places at the table;

(2) the contention who should be greatest;

(3) the feet washing;

(4) the identification Judas as the traitor;

(5) the withdrawal of Judas;

(6) the institution of the supper;

(7) the words of Jesus while still in the room Mat 26:26-29; Luk 22:35-38; Joh 13:3-35; Mat 14:1-31

(8) the words of Jesus between the room and the garden Mat 26:31-35; Mar 14:26-31; Joh 15:16; Joh 15:17 it seems probable that the high-priestly prayer Joh 17:1-26 was uttered after they reached the garden;

(9) the agony in the garden;

(10) the betrayal and arrest;

(11) Jesus before Caiaphas; Peter’s denial.

The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The Passover Meal and the Institution of the Lord’s Supper.

The traitor in their midst:

v. 20. Now when the even was come, He sat down with the Twelve.

v. 21. And as they did eat, He said, Verily I say unto you that one of you shall betray Me.

v. 22. And they were exceeding sorrowful, and began every one of them to say unto Him, Lord, is it I?

v. 23. And He answered and said, He that dippeth his hand with Me in the dish, the same shall betray Me.

v. 24. The Son of Man goeth as it is written of Him; but woe unto that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It had been good for that man if he had not been born.

v. 25. Then Judas, which betrayed Him, answered and said, Master, is it I? He said unto him, Thou hast said.

By sundown all the lambs that had been presented in the Temple-courts had been slain, and throughout the city of Jerusalem the little bands of ten to twenty Jews gathered about the commemorative meal. Originally, the supper had been eaten standing, Exo 12:11, but the Jews, after entering the Promised Land, had modified this rule, saying that servants stand, masters recline at the table. Jesus had all twelve of His disciples with Him when the meal began. It began with the benediction over the wine and the feast and the drinking of the first cup, the master of the house drinking first, after him the rest. After all had washed their hands, they ate the bitter herbs, dipped in vinegar or salt water, as a reminder of the sorrows of Egypt. In the meantime the paschal dishes were brought in, the charoseth , or broth, the unleavened loaves, the festal offerings, and, above all, the roasted lamb, after which came the explanation of all these dishes by the head of the household. They now sang the first part of the Hallel, Psa 113:1-9; Psa 114:1-8, and drank the second cup. Hereupon began the feast proper, the householder taking two loaves, breaking one in two, laying this upon the whole loaf, blessing it, wrapping it with bitter herbs, dipping it into the broth, and handing it around the circle, with the words: This is the bread of affliction which our fathers ate in Egypt. The master next blessed the paschal lamb and ate of it; the festal offerings were eaten with the bread, dipped in the broth; and finally also the lamb. The thanksgiving for the meal followed the blessing and the drinking of the third cup. In conclusion, the remainder of the Hallel was sung, Psa 115:1-18; Psa 116:1-19; Psa 117:1-2; Psa 118:1-29, and the fourth cup drunk. "The first cup was thus devoted to the announcement of the feast; and Luke tells us that with this cup Christ announced to the disciples that this was the last feast which He would celebrate with them in this world. The second cup was devoted to the interpretation of the festal act; with it the Apostle Paul connects the exhortation: ’As oft as ye eat of this bread and drink of the cup. ’ The third cup followed the breaking of the loaves, which celebrated the unleavened bread and was the cup of thanksgiving; this the Lord consecrated as the cup of the New Covenant. " It was during the first part of the meal that the Lord made His startling announcement regarding the traitor in their midst. He does not turn directly to the guilty one, but is very considerate with him, as though He were still gently urging him to repentance. Naturally, the greatest consternation and sorrow is caused by these words, and the disciples frantically implore Him: Surely it cannot be I! Jesus gives them a definite sign by which they might know the traitor, namely, the one who with Him would dip his morsel of bread into the broth, and would then receive it at His hands. But in the general excitement, and on account of the fact that all the members of the little circle dipped their bread into the sop, or charoseth , this was overlooked in part. But Christ speaks solemn words of warning in a last effort to keep Judas from carrying out his nefarious undertaking. The Lord must indeed enter upon His Passion according to the Scriptures and the will of God, but he that would betray Him into the hands of His enemies was a cursed being, for whom it would have been far better had he never been born. Judas, however, had utterly hardened his heart. The searching, warning words of Christ only served to make him impudent. Note: While the other disciples all address Jesus as Lord, Judas calls Him merely Rabbi, either from fear of a bad conscience or from the depth of insolence. Also: When people deliberately refuse to accept the sweet promises of the Gospel, this will finally become unto them a savor of death unto death, 2Co 2:15-16.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Observe here, The impudent forehead of this bold traitor, Judas, who presumed, as soon as he had sold his Master, to sit down at the table with him, and partake with the other disciples of the solemn ordinance of the passover; had the presence of Judas polluted the ordinance to any besides himself, doubtless our Saviour would never have permitted this bold intrusion.

Learn hence, 1. That nothing is more ordinary than for unholy persons presumptuously to rush in upon the solemn ordinances of God, which they have no right, whilst such, to partake of.

2. That the presence of such persons pollutes the ordinances only to themselves; holy persons are not polluted by the sins of such: for to the pure all things are pure.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

20. Now when the even was come. The lamb was slain “between two evenings,” that is, between three and five o'clock (see Exod. 12:6, margin). The supper followed on the same night. It was probably dark before the Savior and the twelve came to the guest chamber. The band that “sat down” to this supper and this occasion have furnished the subject of one of the greatest paintings ever created.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

he sat down to eat

Use the word for the position people in your culture usually are in when they eat.

Truly I say to you

"I tell you the truth." This adds emphasis to what Jesus says next.

Surely not I, Lord?

"I am surely not the one, am I, Lord?" Possible meanings are 1) this is a rhetorical question since the apostles were sure they would not betray Jesus. AT: "Lord, I would never betray you!" or 2) this was a sincere question since Jesus' statement probably troubled and confused them. (See: Rhetorical Question)

translationWords

amen

betray

lord

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

20–30. THE LAST SUPPER

Mar 14:17-26; Luk 22:14-38, where the dispute as to who should be the greatest is recorded, and the warning to Peter related as happening before Jesus departed for the Mount of Olives. St John omits the institution of the Eucharist, but relates the washing of the disciples’ feet by our Lord, and has preserved the discourses of Jesus, chs. 13–17 end. 1Co 11:23-26; where the institution of the Eucharist is narrated nearly in St Luke’s words.

20. ἀνέκειτο κ.τ.λ. Reclined with the Twelve. ἀνακεῖσθαι in this sense is late for the classical κατακεῖσθαι. This posture had not only become customary at ordinary meals, but was especially enjoined in the passover ritual. The Paschal ceremonial, so far as it bears on the Gospel narrative, may be described as follows:

(a) The meal began with a cup of red wine mixed with water: this is the first cup mentioned, Luk 22:17. After this the guests washed their hands. Here probably must be placed the washing of the disciples’ feet, John 13.

(b) The bitter herbs, symbolic of the bitter bondage in Egypt, were then brought in together with unleavened cakes, and a sauce called charoseth, made of fruits and vinegar, into which the unleavened bread and bitter herbs were dipped. This explains ‘He it is, to whom I shall give a sop,’ Joh 13:26.

(c) The second cup was then mixed and blessed like the first. The father then explained the meaning of the rite (Exo 13:8). This was the haggadah or ‘shewing forth,’ a term transferred by St Paul to the Christian meaning of the rite (1Co 11:26). The first part of the ‘hallel’ (Psalms 113, 114) was then chanted by the company.

(d) After this the paschal lamb was placed before the guests. This is called in a special sense ‘the supper.’ But at the Last Supper there was no paschal lamb. There was no need now of the typical lamb without blemish, for the antitype was there. Christ Himself was our Passover ‘sacrificed for us’ (1Co 5:7). He was there being slain for us—His body was being given, His blood being shed. At this point, when according to the ordinary ritual the company partook of the paschal lamb, Jesus ‘took bread and blessed it, and gave it to his disciples’ (Mat 26:26).

(e) The third cup, or ‘cup of blessing,’ so called because a special blessing was pronounced upon it, followed: ‘after supper he took the cup’ (Luke). ‘He took the cup when he had supped’ (Paul). This is the ‘cup’ named in Mat 26:27.

(f) After a fourth cup the company chanted (see Mat 26:30) the second part of the ‘hallel’ (Psalms 115-118). (Lightfoot Hor. Hebr., Dr Ginsburg in Kitto’s Encycl., Dr Edersheim Temple Services.)

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

20-25.] Jesus, celebrating the Passover, announces His betrayer. Mar 14:17-21. Joh 13:21 ff. Our Lord and the twelve were a full Paschal company; ten persons was the ordinary and minimum number. Here come in (1) the expression of our Lord’s desire to eat this Passover before His suffering, Luk 22:15, Luk 22:16; (2) the division of this first cup, ib. vv. 17, 18:3) the washing of the disciples’ feet, Joh 13:1-20 (? see note, Joh 13:22). I mention these, not that I have any desire to reduce the four accounts to a harmonized narrative, for that I believe to be impossible, and the attempt wholly unprofitable; but because they are additional circumstances, placed by their narrators at this period of the feast. I shall similarly notice all such additional matter, but without any idea of harmonizing the apparent discrepancies of the four (as appears to me) entirely distinct and independent reports.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

(M) 20. And when it was evening, He sat down with the twelve disciples.] Mk. has: “And when it was evening, He cometh with the twelve. And as they were sitting.”—ὀψίας δέ] for καὶ ὀψίας, as often.—ἀνέκειτο] for ἔρχεται—καὶ ἀνακειμένων αὐτῶν, thus omitting the historic present. Cf. Introduction, p. xx.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

He sat down [ανεκειτο] . But this rendering missed the force of the imperfect tense, which denotes something in progress. The Evangelist says he was sitting or reclining, introducing us to something which has been going on for some time.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.