The
following statement is an attempt to resolve a problem that has created
arguments amongst expositors for many years.
Dr
R.P.Martin, then of the London Bible College, whose article on the "Lord's
Supper" appears in "The New Bible Dictionary" 1962, began the
section entitled "The Last Supper, was it the Passover?" with these
words, "The precise nature of the meal which the Lord shared with His
disciples on the night in which He was betrayed, is one of the most warmly
debated topics of New Testament history and interpretation." And in
conclusion he says, "Whether the date of the Supper will ever be
conclusively determined is uncertain."
The following synopsis seeks to set out the reasons for this divergence of
opinion, and why the present author believes the answer has to be in a certain
direction, even if it is apparently contradictory to some statements in the
synoptic gospels.
Passages in the Synoptic Gospels that seem to
favour the 15th Nisan for the Passover on first reading.
Matthew
26:17 "The first [day] of the
[feast of] unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto Him, Where
wilt Thou that we prepare for Thee to eat the Passover?" [A
strange contradiction of Mosaic Law as it stands.]
Mark
Luke 22:7
& 15 "Then came the day of
unleavened bread, when the Passover must be killed. . . . .
With desire have I desired to eat this Passover with you before I
suffer." [Here again, the assertion is a clear contradiction of
Mosaic Law.]
Passages in John's Gospel that correctly give
14th Nisan for the Passover.
John
13:1 "Now before the feast
of the Passover . . . and during supper
. . ." [Notice this word "before". It is as clear an
indication as anything that Jesus partook of the Last Supper before everyone else. That was His
intention. He knew He would die at the actual time when the lambs were being
slain on 14th Nisan.
John
John
John
John
Coupled with these Johannine references are the
following in the Synoptics which effectively uphold the chronology of John.
Matthew
26:3-5 "Then assembled together the
chief priests . . . and consulted that they might take Jesus by subtlety and
kill Him. But they said, Not on the Feast Day,
[which was 15th Nisan, the first day of Unleavened
Bread] lest there be an uproar among the people." [Note here that
this flatly contradicts what the synoptists say about the "first day of
unleavened bread", because it would suggest that they decide they could not arrest Jesus on the Feast Day, and
then straightway proceed to do so!]
Matthew
27:62 "Now the next day, that
followed the Day of Preparation, [always a Friday] the Chief Priests and Pharisees came together
to Pilate." [Hence this was Saturday morning.]
Luke
The following additional inferences support the
Johannine chronology.
The feast
of Unleavened Bread was stated in Exodus 12:3-6 to be from 15th to
the 21st Nisan, and the first and last days were specially marked
out as High Days, i.e., equivalent to Sabbaths. No Jew would contemplate
breaking that Sabbath. Furthermore,
as we have seen above, the first day of Unleavened Bread in that year fell also
on the weekday Sabbath, as John said, "That
Sabbath was a High Day." (
But the day
before was traditionally the day when
the Passover lambs were killed, and there was no prohibition to work of any
kind. This is supported by the following facts.
1.
The
holding of a trial, and the unseemly hurry to get it completed.
2.
The
purchase of linen by Joseph of Arimathea,(Mark
3.
The
purchase of items for the Last Supper. (John 13:29)
4.
The
arming of Peter with a sword. (Mark
5.
The
armed multitude with Judas, (it being unlawful to carry arms on the feast day.)
6.
The
crucifixions, and final dispatch of the victims.
7.
The
day was specifically stated to be "the preparation", i.e. Friday.
8.
Simon
of Cyrene "coming out of the country." Literally "out of the
field", by which expression one would understand that he had been about
his day's work, but probably joined the throng of sight-seers out of curiosity.
9.
And
of course, the frequent mention of it being paraskeue, the
"preparation day", clinches it. If no work was allowed, then no one
could "prepare" for the feast.
Further,
(mainly external) evidence may also be adduced, as follows -
1.
In
1 Cor.5:7 Paul tells us that "Christ our Passover has been
slain." There would be little force in this statement if our Lord
had been crucified at some other time than the afternoon of 14th
Nisan.
2.
The
Quartodecimans, (a Latin word meaning ‘fourteenth’) among whom was Polycarp,
held a fast on Nisan 14th as the day of the crucifixion. (Letter of
Irenaeus to Victor) He said, "All these [foregoing mentioned brethren,
including the Apostle John] observed the 14th day for the Passover
according to the Gospel, deviating in no respect, but following the rule of
faith."
3.
Jewish
tradition fixes the crucifixion on erev
Pesach, (Passover eve).
4.
Apollinaris
of
5.
Clement
of
6.
Hippolytus
of Portus declared that Christ ate a supper before
the Passover, "for He was the Paschal Lamb who had been promised, and was
sanctified on the appointed day." This corroborates the verse in John 13:1
7.
Tertullian
(Adv.Jud. 8) suggested Nisan 14th
8.
Irenaeus
(Haer. IV.x.1) discussing Moses' prediction of Jesus, says, "The day of
whose Passion he did not ignore, but foretold it in a figure, calling it
Pascha." Admittedly this is not very precise, but seems to be a memory of
1 Cor 5:7
9.
A
document known as "The Gospel of Peter" contains the following
statement, "Already the Sabbath draws on, for it is written in the law
that the sun must not go down upon a murdered person, on the day before their
feast, the feast of unleavened bread."
[We are not here discussing the authenticity of this document, but
quoting it in support of the above evidence. Whatever may be the origin of this
"Gospel" it clearly speaks about the legal aspect from Moses, and the
statement made is wholly correct.]
Dr.
Chwolson, a Jewish Archaeologist, (in Das letze Passamahl Christi page 3f) maintains
that the synoptists start with an error, for "from the Mosaic writings
down to the Book of Jubilees, (cap.49), Philo, Josephus, the Palestinian Targum
ascribed to Jonathan ben Uziel, the Mishnah, the Talmud, the Rabbinical
writings of the Middle Ages, indeed,
down to the present day, the Jews have always understood by the phrase "the
first day of the feast of unleavened bread" only the 15th,
and not the 14th, so that it would be a contradiction in terms to
say with Mark 14:12, "on the first day of unleavened bread
when they sacrificed the Passover".
Therefore,
in summarising all this information, we must conclude that the Last Supper was
held a day earlier than normal, as John specifically said, "Now before the feast
of the Passover." The synoptic
gospels produce confusing signals about the time, if accepted from the A.V., or
indeed most modern translations. The reason for this strange mix-up may one day
perhaps be determined. However, this may never be possible, simply because of
the passage of two millennia, and the impossibility of determining whether the
original texts were tampered with. Alternatively, we have to suppose that the
wording of the synoptists pointed to a custom in those days that doesn't accord
with modern interpretations. For example, we might ask ourselves, when exactly
did the "days of unleavened bread" start? When did Jewish housewives begin to purge their homes of the
Chametz? Did they leave it until the 14th Nisan, or did they start
the day before, lest on 14th they couldn't find time to complete the
search? If that is the case, then the expression "The first of the (days
of) unleavened bread" may point to this earlier time. This is just a
suggestion, weak perhaps, but necessary under the circumstances.
Another
avenue of enquiry concerns to language of Matthew's gospel. In the 2nd
fragment of Papias, we find him saying, "Matthew, at any rate,
used the Hebrew language in his exposition of the gospel, and each one
translated it as best he could." Irenaeus, quoted by Eusebius, wrote,
"Matthew published a written gospel for the Hebrews in their own tongue while
Peter and Paul were preaching the gospel in
Current
theories abound with suggestions that Matthew and Luke "copied" from
Mark, who is considered the original gospel writer. However, the above
statement seems to squash that idea flat. But the most important point is that
Matthew is twice stated to have written his gospel in Hebrew. That being so,
could there have been some misunderstanding on the part of one of the
translators when reaching chapter 26 verse 17?
Matthew, being an intelligent and intellectual Jew, could never have
made the blunder that the Passover was sacrificed on the first day of the feast
of unleavened bread. Therefore something must have happened to the text in
translation from Hebrew to Greek. Textual criticism gives us no help here.
There are no variant readings of the Greek text at verse 17.
The actual
Greek words are as follows - Th de prwth twn azumwn.
Strictly it
says, "Now the first of the unleavened." Supplying the ellipsis
should give "Now the first of the [days] of unleavened [bread]." Not a word about "the feast", just
days when no leaven should be found in their dwellings. Some have tried to make
the Greek word PROTEE mean "before", based on such texts as John 1:15
& 30, where we read of John the Baptist saying, "He who comes after me
is BEFORE me." But the grammar simply will not allow it, convenient though
it might be to the theory. However, this is an analysis of the Greek, rather
than the Hebrew from which the Greek was derived. Unfortunately no one is able
to produce the original Hebrew document.
Some evangelicals
might be alarmed at the thought of inaccuracies being present in the text of
the New Testament, especially those who adhere to the doctrine of "verbal
inspiration", (a doctrine which has no authority save the disposition of
some to worship the written word to an absurd degree.) I think enough has been said to prove that
John's chronology has to be correct,
according to Mosaic legislation, and the problems associated with the
synoptists' texts left in the query box with no possible means of determining
the source of the errors.