If it were the Passover Jesus and His disciples ate, why then don't you keep the Passover for Holy Communion?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The Last Supper was not the Passover Meal
- Thread starter Gerhard Ebersoehn
- Start date
As my good old friend - now passed away - always said (in English the old Boer!) - "A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still."
Exodus 13:7 Unleavened bread shall be eaten seven days; and there shall no leavened bread be seen with thee, neither shall there be leaven seen with thee in all thy quarters.Gerhard Ebersoehn said:DHK:
"John 6:48-50 I am that bread of life. Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.
John 6:59 These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum.
--Jesus was teaching to a Jewish audience, in the synagogue itself. If the bread was leavened it would have been abhorrent to them; offensive. He compares himself to the manna which came down from heaven. Manna is unleavened bread. When Jesus referred to himself as the bread of heaven, the picture is still of unleavened bread--that which has no corruption."
GEE
Jesus didn't necessarily by any means here, taught during Passover-time when by exception it would have been un-leavened bread time -- Normally they ate ordinary bread like you and me today.
Manna was manna - we have no idea what it was like -- you cannot make your deductions.
Again, you argue in circles : who says leaven represents corruption --- always; and not good things as well?
But why are you so reluctant to accept the Lord's Supper is just what it says, the Lord's and not the Jews'? Why do you argue insistently it is the Jews' Passover? Christianity has gone ahead --- it has left Judaism behind. (Judaism also entails the pure but redundent OT institutions clung to in spite of Jesus' incarnation and resurrection. Judaism basically developed as the result of nothing but the denial of Christ and the truth of His coming.)
DHKExodus 13:7 Unleavened bread shall be eaten seven days; and there shall no leavened bread be seen with thee, neither shall there be leaven seen with thee in all thy quarters.
Leaven
(1.) Heb seor (Ex 12:15,19; 13:7; Le 2:11), the remnant of dough from the preceding baking which had fermented and become acid.
(2.) Heb hamets, properly "ferment." In Nu 6:3, "vinegar of wine" is more correctly "fermented wine." In Ex 13:7, the proper rendering would be, "Unfermented things [Heb matstsoth] shall be consumed during the seven days; and there shall not be seen with thee fermented things [hamets], and there shall not be seen with thee leavened mass [seor] in all thy borders." The chemical definition of ferment or yeast is "a substance in a state of putrefaction, the atoms of which are in a continual motion."
The use of leaven was strictly forbidden in all offerings made to the Lord by fire (Le 2:11; 7:12; 8:2; Nu 6:15). Its secretly penetrating and diffusive power is referred to in 1Co 5:6. In this respect it is used to illustrate the growth of the kingdom of heaven both in the individual heart and in the world (Mt 13:33). It is a figure also of corruptness and of perverseness of heart and life (Mt 16:6,11; Mr 8:15; 1Co 5:7-8). (Easton's Dictionary)
Please accept my apologies for this mistake: "fohmion" in stead of "psohmion".
Thanks!
Thanks!
Leaven was forbidden DURING, Passover's season of seven days of "without-leaven", correct!
But to get into that status of 'unleavenedness', there had to be, and there was, prescribed, the certain and only day upon which leaven had to be removed -- Nisan 14. Now the Law also prescribed thAt on Nisan 14, the passover lamb must be KILLED.
Then the Law further prescribed that during the following night of Nisan 15, BOTH the lamb and the unleavened bread must be EATEN, and TOGETHER.
I am not talking of anything DURING the seven days or OF the seven days of Unleavened Bread; I talk of its "Preparation-day" --John 19:14.
But to get into that status of 'unleavenedness', there had to be, and there was, prescribed, the certain and only day upon which leaven had to be removed -- Nisan 14. Now the Law also prescribed thAt on Nisan 14, the passover lamb must be KILLED.
Then the Law further prescribed that during the following night of Nisan 15, BOTH the lamb and the unleavened bread must be EATEN, and TOGETHER.
I am not talking of anything DURING the seven days or OF the seven days of Unleavened Bread; I talk of its "Preparation-day" --John 19:14.
DHK (26 Aug):
"Luk 22:11 And ye shall say unto the goodman of the house, The Master saith unto thee, Where is the guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover with my disciples?"
GE:
Marshall: "Where is the guestroom (pou estin to kataluma) where the passover with the disciples of me (hopou to pascha meta tohn mathehtohn mou I MAY EAT (fagoh)" --- subjunctive / conditional -- as a preparation FOR passover --- "and they prepared FOR passover" (13b)
Greek Accusative equivalent for "FOR" passover. Verse eleven contains NO indicative statement, "I shall ..."; it is an unfortunate mistake which later translators must have noticed but for their own agenda just ignored.
"Luk 22:11 And ye shall say unto the goodman of the house, The Master saith unto thee, Where is the guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover with my disciples?"
GE:
Marshall: "Where is the guestroom (pou estin to kataluma) where the passover with the disciples of me (hopou to pascha meta tohn mathehtohn mou I MAY EAT (fagoh)" --- subjunctive / conditional -- as a preparation FOR passover --- "and they prepared FOR passover" (13b)
Greek Accusative equivalent for "FOR" passover. Verse eleven contains NO indicative statement, "I shall ..."; it is an unfortunate mistake which later translators must have noticed but for their own agenda just ignored.