17oct2004

Sullivan church of Christ – Sullivan, MO
Date: October 17, 2004

THE INSTITUTION OF THE LORD’S SUPPER ACCORDING TO LUKE’S
ACCOUNT
Ben Justice

All three Synoptists (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) record Jesus instituting the Lord’s Supper (Matt. 26:26-29;
Mark 14:22-25; Luke 22:15-20). John does not record this episode, although the context is found in John 13.
Matthew and Mark’s account is straightforward. However, Luke’s account is somewhat different, in how he
recorded this institution. The text is found in Luke 22:15-20. The text reads as follows:

“And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer: (16) For I say unto
you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. (17) And he took the cup, and gave
thanks, and said, Take this and divide it among yourselves: (18) For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of
the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come. (19) And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto
them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. (20) Likewise also the cup after
supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.”

A comparison of the three accounts shows that Matthew and Mark’s account places the partaking of the
bread first, then the partaking of the cup, while Luke tells first of partaking of the cup, then of partaking the
bread, then of partaking the cup again.

First, it was Jesus’ desire (lit. greatly desired) to eat the Passover meal with his disciples before he suffered
(v. 15). So, the eating of the Passover is clearly under consideration.

Second, what is said in v. 16-18 was in connection with the Passover. Hence, “the cup” of v. 17 is not the
same as that in v. 20. The cup of v. 17 refers to the last cup passed around during the Passover celebration.
Luke makes this distinction. Note the language carefully. Verse 17 simply says “he took the cup.” In v. 20,
the text says, “Likewise also the cup after supper.” The phrase “after supper” refers to the ending of the
Passover Supper. So, the first cup (v. 17) refers to that cup during the Passover Supper, while the second cup
(v. 20) refers to that cup after the Passover Supper. Biblical expositors say that a total of four cups were
passed around during the Passover Supper.

Third, what are we to make of v. 16 and 18? Remember, unleavened bread was what was eaten during the
Passover supper (Luke 22:7). According to v. 16, Jesus said, “I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in
the kingdom of God.” Since unleavened bread was what they ate, then this is what Jesus was referring to. He
would not eat this unleavened bread “until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.”

During the Passover Supper, they also drank of the fruit of the vine (or grape juice). What Jesus said about
eating the unleavened bread in the kingdom of God, he also said in connection with the fruit of the vine. He
said, “I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come.” Did Jesus mean that he and
his disciples would actually eat the Passover Supper in the kingdom of God? The answer is “no.” Jesus
would, however, eat with his disciples in a new spiritual sense. That this is true is clearly seen from v. 19-
20. It is here that Jesus actually instituted the Lord’s Supper and gave the unleavened bread and the fruit of
the vine a new significance. It would be this new significance that would occur in the kingdom of God.

This Passover Supper that Jesus ate with his disciples was the last. After it was over, He instituted
something brand new, although the same elements would be used, namely unleavened bread and the fruit of
the vine. Thus, the Passover Supper was a type of the Lord’s Supper, which is the antitype. In fact, the
Passover lamb was a type of Christ himself. Paul explicitly declared in I Cor. 5:7, “For even Christ our passover
is sacrificed for us.”

When did the kingdom of God come? It was on the first Pentecost following the Lord’s resurrection. This is
when the kingdom came into existence, which is one and the same as the church (Matt. 16:18-19). Matthew’
s account (26:29) speaks of “that day” and noted that Jesus would drink of the fruit of vine “new” with his
disciples. “That day” is a reference to the Day of Pentecost. Acts 2:42 records, “And they continued steadfastly
in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.” Note the phrase “breaking of
bread.” In the Greek NT, there is the definite article “the” before “breaking” and “bread.” Hence, it is “the
breaking of the bread.” This is an unmistakable reference to the Lord’s Supper. Now, Jesus expressly stated
that he would not partake of the Lord’s Supper “until the kingdom of God come.” But, we see the Lord’s
disciples partaking of the Lord’s Supper. Hence, the kingdom had indeed come.

The Lord’s Supper is a divine ordinance that is to be eaten every first day of the week (Acts 20:7). When we
partake of it, we “show the Lord’s death till he come” (I Cor. 11:26).

“Was Judas Present When Jesus Instituted The Lord’s Supper?”
Ben Justice

All Gospel writers record the occasion when Jesus was in the upper room with his disciples observing the
Passover Meal. By this time, Judas had already made his devilish plans to betray the Lord (Matt. 26:14-16).
Preparations were made for the Passover Meal (Matt. 26:17-19). It was during the eating of the Passover
Meal that Jesus revealed one of his disciples as one who would betray him. (Matt. 26:20-24). It was after the
Passover Supper that Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (Matt. 26:26-29).

John’s account, given in ch. 13, supplies some additional information. While Matthew, Mark and Luke does
not record Judas’ departure, John does record it — “He than having received the sop went immediately out: and it
was night” (John 13:30). John does not record the institution of the Lord’s Supper. However, we should place
it after Judas had received the sop and went out. This would be in between v. 30-31. So, when Judas went
out the disciples were still observing the Passover Feast, as indicated by the “sop” that was given to Judas
(John 13:26, 30). A key word is the word “immediately” in v. 30. It was “immediately” following the receiving
of the sop that Judas went out. Either the Lord’s Supper was instituted before the Passover meal, during the
Passover Meal, or after the Passover Meal. The accounts clearly indicate that it was after the Passover
Meal. Luke 22:20 tells us that Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper “after supper,” that is after the Passover
Supper. But, Judas had already gone out by this time, per John 13:30.

Now, Luke’s account throws a monkey wrench into the above conclusion. The way Luke’s account reads
makes it sound as if Judas was indeed present during the Lord’s Supper. The Lord’s Supper was instituted in
Luke 22:19-20, but yet, in v. 21-22, Jesus identifies the betrayer. A careful study of Matthew, Mark, and John’
s account make it certain that Jesus exposed the betrayer before he instituted the Lord’s Supper. So, how do
we harmonize these with Luke’s account? I believe the answer lies in the fact that Luke does not write in
chronological order, but rather topical. That this seems to be the case is that Luke introduces the
discussion about “greatness” in v. 24-27. This should be connected with John 13:4-17, where Jesus
illustrated greatness by washing the disciples’ feet. However, John clearly places this incident as having
occurred during the Passover Supper, not after it. Again, Luke writes from more of a topical standpoint than
a chronological standpoint. Based upon my study of the four accounts, the conclusion that I draw is this:
Judas was not present when Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (Matt. 26:26-29).