Matthew 26:23

26:23 eaten from this bowl with me: It was the custom for everyone present to dip their food into a common bowl, which probably contained herbs and fruit puree. Sharing a meal was a sign of friendship and trust, making a betrayer’s presence all the more startling (26:21; but see John 13:26).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Mat 26:23.[1123] Ὁ ἐμβάψας, he that dippeth) The use of the same small dish, of which there were several on the table, and the dipping of the sop in it at the same moment with our Lord, was to be the distinctive mark of the traitor; see Mat 26:25. St Mark uses ἐμβαπτόμενος (present part. middle) to denote the same idea which St Matthew expresses by ἘΜΒΆΨΑς (1st Aor. part. act.); The former therefore employs the present in an indefinite sense.

[1123] Mat 26:21. ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν Verily I say unto you) Our Lord inserted His complaint as to the approaching treachery and uncleanness [Joh 13:10] of Judas in His discourses connected with the washing of the disciples’ feet, and with the Lord’s Supper, on the following day; but on both days the inquiry of the disciples as to the traitor, follows immediately after that complaint which He uttered. Both the complaint and inquiry of the second day are placed in Matthew and Mark, before the Lord’s Supper: in Luke they are placed after it. They are, therefore, to be regarded as simultaneous with it—that is to say, the institution of the Supper held a middle place between the beginning and continuation (progress) of the complaint and inquiry.—Harm., p. 510, 511.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat_26:23. Ὁ ἐμβάψας, κ.τ.λ.] he who has dipped (not: is dipping, Luther, following the Vulgate). We have here no such definite allusion as Joh_13:26 represents Jesus to have made to Judas. For it is not probable that the dipping in question took place subsequent to the intimation by Jesus in Mat_26:21 and the commotion of Mat_26:22,two circumstances calculated to interrupt for a little the progress of the meal,but rather before them, when there may have been others besides Judas dipping into the dish from which Jesus was eating. The allusion can be said to point specially to Judas only in so far as, happening to recline near to Jesus, he must have been eating out of the same dish with Him (for there would be several of such dishes standing on the table). Comp. Grotius. The ἐμβαπτόμενος of Mar_14:20 (see on the passage) is not a substantial variation; neither has it been misunderstood by Matthew (in opposition to Weiss in the Stud. u. Krit. 1861, p. 53 f.), and converted by him into a special means of recognition (Holtzmann). The contents of the dish were the broth charoset (חרוסת), made out of dates, figs, etc., and of the colour of brick (to remind those who partook of it of the bricks of Egypt, Maimonides, ad Pesach. vii. 11). See Buxtorf, Lex. Talm. p. 831.

ἐν τῷ τρυβλίῳ] has dipped in the dish, into which he has put his hand, holding a piece of bread. Hom. Od. ix. 392; Aesch. Prom. 863; LXX. Deu_33:24; Rth_2:14.

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 26:23 . ὁ ἐμβάψας , he who dipped, dips, or shall have dipped. The aorist participle decides nothing as to time, but merely points to a single act, as distinct from a process ( cf. the present in Mk.). The expression in Mt. does not necessarily identify the man unless we render: who has just dipped, and conceive of Jesus as dipping immediately after. (So Weiss.) In favour of this view it may be said that there was no sense in referring to a single act of dipping, when there would be many in the course of the meal, unless the circumstances were such as to make it indicate the individual disciple. The mere dipping in the same dish would not identify the traitor, because there would be several, three or four, doing the same thing, the company being divided into perhaps three groups, each having a separate dish. τὴν χεῖρα . The ancients used their hands, not knives and forks. So still in the East. τρυβλίῳ . Hesychius gives for this word ὀξοβάφιον = acetabulum, a vessel for vinegar. Hence Elsner thinks the reference is to a vessel full of bitter herbs steeped in vinegar, a dish partaken of at the beginning of the meal. More probably the words point to a dish containing a mixture of fruit dates, figs, etc. vinegar and spices, in which bread was dipped, the colour of bricks or mud, to remind them of the Egyptian bondage ( vide Buxtorf, Lex. Talm. , p. 831). The custom of dipping here referred to is illustrated by the following from Furrer ( Wanderungen , p. 133): “Before us stood two plates, one with strongly spiced macaroni, the other with a dish of fine cut leeks and onions. Spoons there were none. There were four of us who dipped into the same dish.”

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

That is to say, whom I vouchsafed to come to my table, alluding to the place, Ps. 41:9, which is not so to be understood, as though at the selfsame instant that the Lord spake these words, Judas had had his hand in the dish (for that had been an undoubted token) but it is meant of his tabling and eating with them.

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

Verse 23. He that dippeth his hand] As the Jews ate the passover a whole family together, it was not convenient for them all to dip their bread in the same dish; they therefore had several little dishes or plates, in which was the juice of the bitter herbs, mentioned Ex 12:8, on different parts of the table; and those who were nigh one of these, dipped their bread in it. As Judas is represented as dipping in the same dish with Christ, it shows that he was either near or opposite to him. If this man's heart had not been hardened, and his conscience seared beyond all precedent, by the deceitfulness of his sin, would he have showed his face in this sacred assembly, or have thus put the seal to his own perdition, by eating of this sacrificial lamb? Is it possible that he could feel no compunction? Alas! having delivered himself up into the hands of the devil, he was capable of delivering up his Master into the hands of the chief priests; and thus, when men are completely hardened by the deceitfulness of sin, they can outwardly perform the most solemn acts of devotion, without feeling any sort of inward concern about the matter.

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

(23) He that dippeth his hand with me.—Better, he that dipped, as of an act just passed. It seems probable from what follows that these words also were spoken to a few only of the disciples, say to the four who were nearest to their Master. We can scarcely think of Judas as asking the question of Mat_26:25, if he had heard the words and knew that they pointed to him as the traitor.

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

23. He that dippeth his hand with me in the dish] “He it is to whom I shall give a sop when I have dipped it,” Joh_13:26; here we have the words of the disciple who heard the reply of Jesus, which was probably whispered and not heard by the rest.

dippeth his hand … in the dish] i. e. in the charoseth, see above, Mat_26:20 (b).

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.

The son of man goeth,.... Meaning himself, not to the Mount of Olives, or Gethsemane, or the garden, whither he went a little after this, but out of the world, to his Father: the phrase is expressive of his death, as in Jos 23:14, and denotes the voluntariness of it, and which is no ways inconsistent with the divine determinations about it: nor the violence that was offered to him by his enemies.

As it is written; in the book of God's eternal purposes and decrees; for Luke says, "as it was determined" Luk 22:22, or as it was recorded in the books of the Old Testament; in Psa 22:1, Isa 53:1 and Dan 9:1 for Christ died for the sins of his people, in perfect agreement with these Scriptures, which were written of him:

but woe unto that man by whom the son of man is betrayed; for God's decrees concerning this matter, and the predictions in the Bible founded on them, did not in the least excuse, or extenuate the blackness of his crime; who did what he did, of his own free will, and wicked heart, voluntarily, and to satisfy his own lusts:

it had been good for that man if he had not been born. This is a Rabbinical phrase, frequently, used in one form or another; sometimes thus; as it is said (f) of such that speak false and lying words, and regard not the glory of their Creator, , it would have been better for them they had never come into the world; and so of any other, notorious sinner, it is at other times said (g), , or (h), , "it would have been better for him if he had not been created"; signifying, that it is better to have no being at all, than to be punished with everlasting destruction; and which was the dreadful case of Judas, who fell by his transgression, and went to his own place.

(f) Zohar in Gen. fol. 41. 1. Vid. Misn. Chagiga, c. 2. sect. 1. T. Bab Chagiga, fol. 16. 1. (g) Zohar in Gen. fol, 46. 4. & in Exod. fol. 1. 4. & 36. 3. & 62. 3. & 66. 3. & 105. 4. & 106. 1. (h) T. Hieros. Sabbat, fol. 3. 2. T. Bab. Beracot, fol. 17. 1. & Erubin, fol. 13. 2. Midrash Kobelet, fol. 79. 1.

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

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

Ver. 23. He that dippeth his hand, &c.] My fellow commoner, my familiar friend, Psa 41:9. This greatly aggravateth the indignity of the matter. He was ex societate Iesu from the company of Jesus that betrayed him. So do the pretended Jesuits, Jebusites, to this day. Julius Caesar was slain in the Senate house by more of his friends than of his enemies, quorum non expleverat spes inexplebiles, of whom he had not offended, saith Seneca. But the wound that went nearest his heart was that he received from his son Brutus. Και συ τεκνον βρουτε, this pierced him worse than any daggar. Queen Elizabeth’s grief and complaint was, that in trust she had found treason.

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.

He that dippeth. He that is associated to me, that eateth bread with me, shall life up his heel against me, according to the prophecy of the psalmist, cited by St. John, xiii. 18. --- Jesus Christ doe not here manifest the traitor; he only aggravates the enormity and malice of the crime.

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).

23. Dippeth his hand with me in the dish — By this it is intimated that it was one who reclined near him, and even supplied himself from the same dish. This forms the second advance of exposure. At the same time in this expression our Lord seems to have aggravated the crime of the traitor by suggesting the language of the Psalmist: “He that did eat my bread hath lifted up his heel against me.” Psa_41:9. But our Lord did not leave the traitor without a third and still more special detection. John tells us (Joh_13:23-26) that at Peter’s request he himself, as reclining nearest his Lord’s bosom, inquired of Jesus in an under tone, “Lord, who is it?” Our Lord replied, doubtless in the same sub-tone, “He it is to whom I shall give a sop.” He then gave the sop to Judas, by which the two disciples knew, the man for certainty. Judas by some tokens sees that he is individualized, and at last himself puts the question, Is it I? (Mat_26:25,) and receives an affirmative answer, as John adds, by which the whole eleven learn the man. Judas then, full rightly, thinks it time to vacate his place.

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

He that dippeth (dipped) his hand with me in the dish. Even now Jesus does not identify the traitor. Many had put their hands into the dish along with Christ. Judas was one of those who had done so. The fact of eating together made in the Easterns" view, the treachery more monstrous. "Mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me". (Psa_41:9) The dish was one of large dimensions, from which each guest took his portion with his fingers. It was truly a common meal in which all shared. Our Lord"s words were spoken in answer to John"s question, "Lord, who is it?". (Joh_12:25) The beloved apostle"s position at table, "lying on Jesus" breast," enabled him to ask this without being overheard. There is a mistake commonly made concerning the shape of the table used on such occasions. It was not of a horseshoe form, but oblong. The couches were arranged round three of its sides, and it extended a little way beyond the divans. The Master"s seat was not at the top or middle couch, but at the side; and from what occurred we should infer that John sat on the right of Jesus at the end of the couch, and Judas on the left of Jesus, the strife about precedency having been thus settled. (The correct shape of the table, and the places of Jesus, John, Judas, and Peter, are delineated in Edersheim"s work, vol. 2. p. 494.)

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

He that dippeth his hand with me in the dish - Which it seems Judas was doing at that very time. This dish was a vessel full of vinegar, wherein they dipped their bitter herbs.

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

Here our Saviour acquaints his disciples who it was that had designed his death, even he that dipped with him in the dish, or he to whom he gave the sop.

Observe, The traitor, whom Christ less loved, he has the sop given to him; the other disciples, whom Christ loved better, had no such particular boon. Outward good things are not always given to the children of men in love, but are sometimes bestowed in displeasure; there is no measuring Christ’s affections by temporal blessings, no concluding either love or hatred by these things.

Observe farther, How Judas could sit still and hear the threats of judgment denounced against himself without concern; he hears Christ say, Woe to the man by whom the Son of man is betrayed, and is no more blanked than innocence itself: resolved sinners run on desperately in their wicked courses, and with open eyes see and meet their own destruction; and are neither dismayed at it, nor concerned about it.

Observe farther, That this shameless man had the impudence to say to Christ, Master, is it I? Our Saviour gives him a direct affirmation, Thou hast said. Did Judas, think ye, blush, and cast down his gulty eyes, and let fall his drooping head, at so galling an intimation. Nothing less.

Lord, how does obduracy in sin steel the brow, and make it incapable of all relenting impressions!

Observe lastly, How Christ prefers nonentity before damnation. It had been better for that man if he had never been born. A temporal miserable being is not worse than no being, but an eternal miserable being is worse than no being at all; eternal misery is much worse than nonentity. It had been better for Judas if he had never been born, than to commit such a sin, and lie under such wrath, and that everlasting. O, better to have no being, than not to have a being in Christ.

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

23. He that dippeth his hand with me in the dish shall betray me. In Oriental meals, instead of plates being used, each one helps himself with his fingers from the dish as he needs. From John 13:23–26, we learn that these words were spoken to the disciple that leaned on the Savior's bosom and were unheard by Judas and the rest.

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.

The Son of Man

Jesus is speaking about himself in the third person. (See: First, Second, or Third Person)

will go

Here "go" is a polite way to refer to dying. AT: "will go to his death" or "will die" (See: Euphemism)

just as it is written about him

This can be stated in active form. AT: "just as the prophets wrote about him in the scriptures" (See: Active or Passive)

that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed

This can be stated in active form. AT: "the man who betrays the Son of Man" (See: Active or Passive)

Is it I, Rabbi?

"Rabbi, am I the one who will betray you?" Judas may be using a rhetorical question to deny that he is the one who will betray Jesus. AT: "Rabbi, surely I am not the one who will betray you" (See: Rhetorical Question)

You have said it yourself

This is an idiom that Jesus uses to mean "yes" without being completely clear about what he means. AT: "You are saying it" or "You are admitting it" (See: Idiom)

translationWords

betray

Son of Man

written

woe

Judas Iscariot

Rabbi

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

23. ὁ ἐμβάψας μετʼ ἐμοῦ κ.τ.λ. Joh 13:26, Ἐκεῖνός ἐστιν ᾦ ἐγὼ βάψω τὸ ψωμίον καὶ δώσω αἠτῷ; here we have the words of the disciple who heard the reply of Jesus, which was probably whispered and not heard by the rest.

Ὁ ἐμβάψας … ἐν τῷ τρυβλίῳ τὴν χεῖρα. i.e. in the charoseth, see above, Mat 26:20 (b).

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.

23.] These first words represent the answer of our Lord to John’s question (Joh 13:26). The latter (ver. 24) were not said now, but (Luke, vv. 21, 22) formed part of the previous announcement in our ver. 21.

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

(M) 23. And He answered and said, He who dipped with Me his hand in the dish, he shall deliver Me up.] Mk. has: “And He said to them, One of the Twelve. He who dippeth with Me into the dish.” “One of the Twelve” reaffirms the treachery of the act. and ὁ ἐμβαπτόμενος, κ.τ.λ., is equivalent to ὁ ἐσθίων μετʼ ἐμοῦ. Not only one of the Twelve, but also a partaker in a common meal. The clause in Mk. does not give any clue to the individuality of the traitor, for probably all dipped into the dish, but only emphasises his treachery. Mt. in substituting ὁ ἐμβάψας—τὴν χεῖρα, and adding οὗτός με παραδώσει, may have understood the words to be a direct clue to the betrayer’s personality. Hastings. DCG. i. p. 464.

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

The dish [τρυβλιω] . Wyc., platter. A dish containing a broth made with nuts, raisins, dates, figs, etc., into which pieces of bread were dipped.

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