DID CHRIST INSTIGATE
A NEW OBSERVANCE OF THE PASSOVER?
©  Paul Brydson  April 5, 1996
The Church of God in Williamstown
WEB SITE: http://www.alphalink.com.au/~sanhub/index.htm

A NEW PASSOVER?
It is claimed by many Bible scholars and churches that Jesus Christ, on the night before he was murdered, instigated a new way and time for Christians to observe the Passover.
However, Christ claimed that:

The Scriptures tell us that the Passover was established by the Father before the foundation of the world and that at the right time appointed by the Father, Christ was killed: People have given different reasons to try to explain why Christ changed the way Christians are to keep the Passover as laid down in the law according to the foreknowledge of God.
Did Christ in fact change the way Christians are to observe the Passover?

THE TIMING OF THE LAST SUPPER
Matt 26:17 Now on the first day of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying, 'Where will you have us prepare for you to eat the Passover?'

Mk 14:12 And on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they sacrifice the Passover lamb, his disciples said to him, 'Where will you have us go and prepare for you to eat the Passover?'

Lk 22:7 Then came the day of Unleavened Bread, on which the Passover lamb had to sacrificed.

These scriptures seem to indicate that the meal that the disciples were to eat that night was the Passover meal, especially Mark 14:12 which says "on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they sacrificed the Passover lamb."
However, no mention is made of any lamb being present at the meal. Moreover, Luke 22:1 tells us that the whole feast of Unleavened Bread was called the Passover.

John indicates that the Passover was not on the same night as the last supper:

These Scriptures indicate that what Christ ate was not the traditional Passover. That was to happen on the following day.

MARK 14:12-16
These verses describe the activity of Christ and his disciples on the afternoon leading into the beginning of the fourteenth of Nisan. Some have wondered why the disciples apparently treat this seemingly one-day-early observance of the Passover without any qualms. The reason is because there was absolutely nothing out of the ordinary in what they were doing. They were going through the normal process of getting the Passover lamb ready to be sacrificed - the next day, not that afternoon! Then that evening they naturally ate a meal and talked about the coming Passover.

But then how is the phrase "on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they sacrificed the Passover lamb" to be understood? A similar phrase is used in Luke 22:7:

Please read on for the answer.

LUKE 22:15-16
Luke adds some other information not mentioned in the other synoptic gospels:

The Interpreter's Bible makes the following observations (Vol. 8, p.p. 377-8). Although some of the conclusions are obviously wrong (where I have inserted question marks or made emendations), the points it raises about the Last Supper/Passover are interesting:
"Was the Last Supper Jesus' Passover meal? This is the representation both in Mark, Matthew and in Luke, but there are grounds for believing that the meal took place twenty-four hours before that feast was to be celebrated.

The problem is created by a striking conflict between the Synoptic accounts of the date of the crucifixion and that in the Gospel of John. All agree that Jesus died on a Friday (Do they?). But Mark, followed by Matthew and Luke, says that this was the Passover (Do they?) while John declares that it was the day before (Jn 18:28; 19:14, 31,42). In this instance John is almost certainly correct. Mark 14:1-2 looks like an excerpt from an early source that the compiler had not thoroughly revised (No, the Word of God is true, but interpretations or translations may not be). Here we are told that the chief priests and the scribes were anxious to bring about Jesus' death before the beginning of the festival, and there is no reason to believe that they changed their plans. Paul describes Christ as "our paschal lamb [who] has been sacrificed," and compares the Christian era to the Jewish feast of Unleavened Bread (1Cor 5:7-8). The paschal lambs were slaughtered a few hours before the evening that marked the first part of the Passover day. Finally, since the Passover was a sacred day, it is almost inconceivable that Jesus could have been arrested, examined before the Sanhedrin, tried before Pilate, crucified and buried during the course of it.

If Jesus died on the cross some hours before the beginning of Nisan 15, it is clear that the Last Supper was not Jesus' Passover meal. Therefore it should not be interpreted in the light of the Passover symbolism. Nevertheless, the church soon came to think of it as the Christian substitute for the Jewish feast, and the passion narrative was redrafted at some pre-Marcan level to make the two coincide."

And on pages 378-9:
"If these verses were part of some special Lukan tradition it would appear also to have identified the supper with the Passover meal. Another interpretation is possible but remote: Jesus fervent desire to eat this Passover before his death will not be realized. This latter construction is more attractive when we omit "again" with several ancient MSS - an emendation of the text favoured by Wescott and Hort and RSV."
Leon Morris' commentary on Luke says of this verse:
'It is not clear whether Jesus is saying that He desired to eat the Passover and is eating it, or that despite His desire He will not eat until it is fulfilled in God's kingdom. Perhaps the former view is correct.'
I believe that the latter view is the correct one.

Some modern scholars hold that a passover lamb was part of the meal the last night Jesus ate with the apostles (Luke, Darrell L. Bock; BECNT; 1994; p.p. 1719-21).

The Companion Bible presents an alternate view in its footnote to this verse about the meal that they were eating that night: "... this Passover. Not the eating of the Lamb, but the Chagigah or feast which precedes it...."

I do not believe that this meal was the Passover or that Christ changed the time and symbols of its observance. According to footnote 1 in 'The Life of Christ' by Farrer, page 675, early Christian tradition was predominant in the assertion that the Last Supper was different from the Passover.

WHAT WAS THE LAST SUPPER?
Christ told the disciples to take of the bread and the wine in remembrance of Him (Lk 22:19). Paul tells us that by taking of the bread and the wine we proclaim the Lord's death until He comes (1Cor 11:26). Paul does not call this ceremony the Passover. The symbols of the bread and wine, Paul tells us, represent our participation in the body and blood of Jesus Christ, i.e. our participation in the death of Jesus Christ:

They do not picture something separate from us, but something that we are to also experience: death to sin.

The symbols of the bread and wine are not New Testament replacements for the Passover. They are to help us to fully experience the Passover, in spirit. They do not replace it. We are told by Paul that we must become fully united with Christ in a death like His:

This is further verified in Matt 10:38; 16:24; Gal 2:20; 5:24; 6:14; Rom 8:13; Col 3:3-5.

When we take of the bread and wine at the beginning of the fourteenth of Nisan, they should direct our minds to focus fully on the events to unfold over that coming day. We should, over that evening and the next day, participate in the beating that Christ suffered, the stripes that heal us. We should crucify our flesh along with His. We should allow the full impact of the innocent shed blood of Christ to impact on the guilt of our conscience. That is the Christian observance of the Passover; on the same day that the Lamb of God was killed. The Cross of Christ is a synonym for the Passover. The true Passover is the power of God at work in us (1Cor 1:18). Anything else creates confusion and hides the true Passover.

The consuming of the bread and the wine at the beginning of the fourteenth of Nisan does nothing to justify a person before God. It is the reality of what the ritual represents that gains approval before God. It is a prophetic gesture and parable.

WHERE DID THE SYMBOLS OF THE BREAD AND WINE COME FROM?
Were the symbols of bread and wine something new that Christ instigated, or was he giving the true meaning of something already given in the Law of God?

In 1Cor 10:14-22 Paul gives us the context of the origin of the symbols. He describes those who ate of similar sacrifices in ancient Israel as being partners in the altar (1Cor 10:18). He further says that drinking of the cup of the Lord is a partaking of the table of the Lord (10:21). Heb 13:10 says that the saints have an altar from which others cannot eat.

In the tabernacle we find that the table that stood before the veil in front of the Holy of Holies had drink offerings and the Bread of the Presence on it (Ex 25:28-30). These drink offerings were to be poured out before God (Num 28:7), just as the blood of Christ was to be (Matt 26:28), and as Paul was poured out in service to the saints (Phil 2:17).

CONCLUSION
So what can be learned from these scriptures? It seems that Christ was revealing that the disciples (and the elect) were the spiritual priests who could eat the spiritual food and drink in fellowship before God. The bread and wine represent the Bread of Life and the Blood of the Covenant that give a person fellowship and life with God within His sanctuary.

Therefore Christ was not implementing new symbols but showing how the bread and the wine in the physical temple were relevant symbols within the spiritual temple of the Church, symbols which found their fulfillment in the bloody beating and death of Jesus Christ, and which are likewise fulfilled by the Christian's willingness to participate in that same death.

Go back to our Home Page