Luke 22:14
We’re going to prepare our hearts for the blessing of celebrating the communion ordinance. And in preparing our hearts, it’s the Lord who has brought us into a special text in our study of Luke’s gospel, and it’s the institution of the Lord’s table. This is what the Lord set up for us, set this table, prepared it for us, and invites us to come. So if you would turn to Luke 22 in your Bibles.
Luke 22, and we’ll find ourselves in verse 14, the portrayals of the two ordinances, baptism and the Lord’s Supper; it’s interesting to note that they bracket the ministry of Jesus Christ. His ministry commenced after his own baptism at the baptism of John the Baptist, and his ministry will conclude after instituting communion in the context of the Passover. And both of those acts of our Lord portray the salvation of sinners. It was in the waters of his own baptism where he identifies with sinners, even though he himself committed no sin, nor was any deceit found in his mouth.
He, he identifies nonetheless with sinners as he dies as a substitute to pay for their sins, the due penalty for their sins, and then rise from the dead for their justification in communion, which we’re going to see this morning. The bread and the cup picture Christ’s substitution for sinners again; him dying to forgive sins, to forgive sinners of their sins, and to institute in his blood the new covenant.
So baptism and communion, bookends on Jesus earthly ministry, his first advent, his first coming, bracketed by baptism and communion, each of them portraying the gospel, the good news of Christ’s life, death, burial, and resurrection for all who believe. They join in him in a spiritual participation in his death, burial, and resurrection, and they live because of his eternal life given to them as a gift for faith.
As ordinances for the church, we see in the order that they come in history, communion actually comes first. It’s not until after the resurrection and in just before his ascension when he institutes baptism as the entrance ordinance into the local church to identify who his true church members are. And it’s they, that then participate in the fellowship of communion which he institutes here in our text, Luke 22:14 through 20.
Let’s begin by reading. “And when the hour had come, he,” that’s Jesus, “reclined at the table, and the apostles with him. And he said to them, ‘I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I say to you, I shall never again eat it until it’s fulfilled in the Kingdom of God.’ When he had taken a cup and given thanks, he said, ‘Take this and share it among yourselves. For I say to you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine from now on until the Kingdom of God comes.’ When he had taken some bread and given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, ‘This is my body which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.’ In the same way he took the cup after they had eaten, saying ‘this cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.’” And we’ll stop there.
What Luke has recorded here, Paul received this same pattern from the Lord himself, and it’s recorded in 1 Corinthians Chapter 11. And in 1 Corinthians 11:23 Paul says, “for I receive from the Lord,” that is by special revelation, direct revelation from Christ himself. Paul was visited by Christ the Lord, and he also, what he received from the Lord about this ordinance; that he also delivered to the Corinthian church, and it was, what was delivered, was the truth of this ordinance instituted on the night in which he was betrayed.
This is that night, this is the occasion. These are the circumstances. And This is why we practice the ordinance of communion regularly in our church. That’s why every faithful, true Christian Church practices the ordinance of communion, some weekly, some monthly, some quarterly. I don’t know of anybody who practices it like the Passover only annually, but I know that most churches practice either monthly or even weekly. This is the night where it all began. This is the occasion and the setup for the institution of the Lord’s Supper; these are the circumstances.
The atoning sacrifice that Jesus will provide for his people is going to happen in less than 24 hours from this moment and even though we are very familiar, having many of us having practiced the Lord’s Table for many years, sometimes some of us decades, I do not want the significance of what is going on here in this text to be lost in the familiarity we have with the text and with the ordinance of communion. Because what’s happening here is no small thing at all. It is huge.
Jesus does something totally unprecedented here. He makes what is really an audacious move because here in this text, as we just read it, he calls for a pause on the Passover. Let that register for a minute. Israel had observed Passover ever since the Exodus. This is like 1500 years of practice starting on the night that they left Egypt and ever since they’d practice this. So Passover had become an ordinance even before Israel had become a nation.
Passover had been a practice even before Sinai, before the Law of Moses, before it was written into the law and Jesus calls a halt to it. He pushes pause, calls a time out on Passover. Going further than that, it’s not just that he paused the Passover, it’s that he replaces the Passover with another ordinance, and it’s his own ordinance. It’s to be practiced regularly and in his own name. So he pauses one ordinance and institutes another; a memorial ordinance.
By ordinance, it means order. He’s ordering this to happen. That’s the idea. That’s the strength of it. That’s the authority that’s invested in this. Pauses one ordinance, one authoritative order, and institutes another authoritative order. Calls for a memorial dedicated to himself. He says, do this, be doing this in remembrance of me. If the Jewish leaders had been like the proverbial fly on the wall in the upper room, they’d be losing their minds right now, tearing out their beards, tearing off their clothing, ripping it apart, throwing dust on their heads and saying blasphemy, blasphemy.
They’d come to Jesus after he had cleared the temple. If you remember back in Luke 20 verse 2, demanding, “Tell us by what authority you’re doing these things.” Now, this: Changing the times, changing the seasons, the ordinance of Israel, who does this man think that he is? As Jesus said at the start of Luke 21, the previous chapter, the whole temple edifice, along with all of its sacrifices, along with all of its worship, the whole thing is going to come down. It’s going to be destroyed. He outlined that in the destruction of the Romans in AD70.
In Luke 21, predicted it’s all going to come to an end. And now knowing what’s going to happen, he institutes a new ordinance for his new covenant people to make sure that they are spiritually fed, and provided for, and cared for, and, and have life in themselves, because of these ordinances, far into the future, all the way up to 2000 years later, this very moment.
So folks, in the familiarity of the communion ordinance that many of you have observed for much of your lives, I don’t want you to miss out on the significance of what Jesus does here. Calling time out on Passover, pushing pause on Israel’s feast ordinances; ordinances is no small thing and more significant, still, is to replace it with an ordinance in his own name. That’s audacious. This is huge, but it’s true and it’s completely justified.
Not only is it justified as in, it’s vindicated to be true. But, and like it’s okay; he’s got a good excuse for it. No, it’s right, it’s righteous, it is God ordained and determined to happen exactly this way. In the eyes of the world, and especially if we were to transport ourselves back onto this night, in this occasion, following this, Jesus makes us either the greatest movement of iconoclastic rebels ever, engaging in the most hideous and grievous form of idolatry ever committed, or on the other hand, which is true, we’re blessed of God.
We’re able to see what others cannot see, what even the most religious, what other entire religious system could not see; what all the leaders could not see. We are able to hear what they can hear. We’re able to understand things that they rejected and condemned, and indeed even put him on the cross for. By divine grace we’ve been blessed to understand the greatest, the most wondrous of the mysteries of salvation. And so, Christian, that’s what I have prayed.
That is what I pray, even now, as I preach that God will do for you today, that he will cause the weightiness of the ordinance of communion, and I would add also baptism as well. You cause the weightiest, the gravitas of these ordinances to rest on you, not lightly, but heavily, so that you would feel them, so you would know your God and understand how seriously he takes these things, that you would honor baptism and the Lord’s Supper as Christ has.
It’s not just that he paused the Passover, it’s that he replaces the Passover with another ordinance, and it’s his own ordinance. He pauses one ordinance and institutes another; a memorial ordinance. Travis Allen
In this terribly distracted age, in these spiritually dull times in which we live, so many of us raised in profane worldly churches, with no true understanding of the Lord’s Table, or baptism for that matter. On the one hand, we can be so casual and flippant about the ordinances which Christ secured for us by his blood, which he commanded us to observe. Christians in ages past called these sacraments. They were the regular means of God’s grace to us, giving us life, bringing about blessing and benefit to us. In fact, there are many Christians who, differing with the predominant view of the ordinances, especially of communion, paid for their view in blood.
On the other hand, we see today, in the practice of baptism and the Lord’s Table, there are some who act as if they have the authority to practice these ordinances, however they please. I don’t know if you’ve ever heard of spontaneous baptisms, everybody rush up to the stage and jump in the water and we’re going to make you members of the church and call you Christians. Spontaneous baptisms, all done in this euphoria of religious experience and feeling, rush into the waters of baptism. It’s an absolute blasphemy.
There are some who take the prerogative that they have not been given to innovate and do as they please and set aside what Christ ordered, and form it to their own preferences, and do their own thing with it. Is there no fear of God anymore? So my prayer has been that God grants you a renewed understanding of communion, so that you will truly appreciate what Christ has given at the cost of his life and I want you to come to the Lord’s Table whenever it’s set for you, reverently, in an attitude of profound joy and deep, deep gratitude, with a heart of worship in remembrance of Jesus Christ, our Savior and our Lord. That’s my preamble.
I’m going to take three points to guide us through the text: The situation, the expectation, and the institution. The situation, the expectation, and the institution. First, the situation, and you could just fill this in, if you put a little colon there. The situation, colon, the love for his friends, the love for his friends: That’s the situation.
We started this chapter verse 1, with the Passover drawing near. In verse 7, the day of Passover had come, and now in verse 14, the hour itself has come. We kind of see a funneling down of the time frame. Now we’re there. Now we’re where we’re supposed to be. We’ve been looking toward it, we’ve been looking to it, we’ve been anticipating it. Now we’re here, we’re in the room. Jesus is there with his apostles in the upper room, and the context for the situation is his love for them, and by extension, they being the foundation stones of the church, his love for you and me, beloved, his love for us.
When the hour had come, he reclined at the table and the apostles with him. The hour, what’s that hour? It’s sometime after 6:00 PM, could be a little bit later, we don’t know. But it gives them, about, after 6:00 PM, gives them about five or six hours before midnight and that’s enough time for them to eat, drink, observe the Passover, go through the ritual, and the form that it had, the pattern that it had in their day. And at midnight, the meal must come to an end. It’s going to go into a new day, so they must stop the meal and be done with the meal at midnight.
They are reclining, it says here, which is how they ate the Passover meal, lying on dining couches or large pillowed cushions. All these couches and cushions kind of surrounding the dining table. The dining table itself is in the middle of their tables, and it’s a low table with the food on it. They would recline with their head facing the table where the food was; good for them, that’s I agree.
They leaned on their left side and on their left elbow and then they would stretch their feet out behind them, away from the table, which gave Christ, when he washed the disciples’ feet, easy access to all the feet on the outside. After all, you don’t want the feet anywhere near the middle of the table; not good. Those things have been walking around in the mud and everything that flows in the streets. Medieval thinking.
Just leave it to your imagination of what’s flowing in the streets. You don’t want that anywhere near your food. You want it on the outside and that’s what they did. And to think about them, Jesus washing their feet, meaning that they had not washed their feet. Nobody had taken up the service of doing them that service of washing their feet until Jesus stood up and did for them what they would not do for one another. Nevertheless, their feet stretched out behind them, away from the table, and they lean on their left side, on their left elbows, and ate the food, taking from the table with their right hand and having conversation with one another, all their heads and their faces toward one another, toward the middle.
The setting is called a Triclinium table set up and a U-shape table set up, and the couch is set up in a U-shape, like this; with the open part of the U filled in by that rectangular serving table which had all the food. That was where the meal was, bitter herbs and charoset for dipping the bread was on that table, the pascal lamb that Peter and John had sacrificed earlier that day at the temple, which they had been roasting ever since, over fire. No doubt, as they walked into that upper room and took their places around the table. It smelled good, the herbs, spices, making their mouths water.
I just think, ever, every time, Middle Eastern spices and the, the meat, the lamb, festive occasion. They came there to celebrate together God’s deliverance of Israel from Egypt, came there to rejoice in his present faithfulness, to provide for and protect Israel, and also to anticipate a future consummation of God’s deliverance, hopefully in the very near future. They being with the Messiah, they thought, hey, this could be right around the corner. We’re going to see it ourselves.
This occasion is one that lifted their spirits. So these apostles, as they enter into the room with their Lord, they’re hungry, they’re happy, they are ready to eat. They’re ready to enjoy the food and a meal that’s made even more meaningful by the deep spiritual significance of the meal. Ready to enjoy each other’s company, each other’s friendships, laugh at each other’s jokes and then Jesus says to them, in verse 15, because he’s been pensive about this night, he’s been thinking about this for a long time. And he says, “I’ve earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I say to you, I shall never eat it again until it is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God.”
The literal translation of that opening phrase is, with desire, I desired, or you could say that, instead of, with, in desire, that might even be better. In desire, it’s a dative, in desire, I desired, that’s a Hebraic way of speaking the Hebrew grammar. This is called an infinitive absolute. It’s taking the verb, desire, in its verbal cognate, a noun, and it just conveys a very strong emphasis by using the same word twice.
One is a verb; one is a noun. Here it’s emotional, it’s expressing a deep feeling of affection, and of love and longing. The verb here is eithymao and its cognate epithymia is a general sense of expressing a strong desire, a great longing for something, or for someone. In a negative sense, in the, in the New Testament we see this as the word epithymia, the word translated as, lust or its sinful passion. So think about that, compelling desire is the, is the strength here.
Positively though epithymia and its verb form epithymao expresses this intense, earnest, eager desire, a deep longing, intense, included in all of his enthusiasm for this time, for this occasion, for this meal. You have to understand this is likely the first time in Jesus’ ministry that he led a Passover meal, but that he led one, that he presided over one. All the other Passovers recorded in the Gospels, Jesus seems to be the guest.
Here though he’s the host, he’s the leader. What, what some commentators refer to as the president, in the sense of, he was presiding over the meal. So as the one presiding over the meal with these men, in particular his men, his twelve chosen apostles, he has the special joy, in this occasion, of taking the bread, giving thanks, breaking it, and giving it to them to distribute. Does that pattern and those verbs I just used ring a bell for you? He took bread, he gave thanks, he broke it, and he gave it to them to distribute.
When else did he do that? Remember when he fed the 5000 miraculously with the fish and the loaves? Just kept on handing it out to them; kept on handing out. Just break them up into groups of 50s. You got 5000 men besides women and children. So probably upwards of 10, 15, 20 thousand people, fed them all miraculously. What was the lesson? Don’t worry about you not having bread. Don’t worry about you having enough to eat. I have eternal life in myself. I am your provider. I am the bread who’s come down from heaven and God has given me to you for life. Feed on me.
Same pattern here. It’s just as he did in Luke 9:16, when he fed the 5000. This meal is symbolizing his provision and he gets to show them this here. Going back a bit further in his thinking perhaps, his provision for his people goes all the way back to Israel, doesn’t it? Having left Egypt, sojourning in the wilderness, entering into the promised land.
It’s Paul who drew this out for the Corinthians that all Israel, as he says in 1 Corinthians 10, all ten, all of them ate the same spiritual food and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they were drinking from, get this, a spiritual rock which followed them. Rocks don’t follow anybody. They just sit there. Now this is a spiritual rock that was following them, and the rock was Christ. He is always been providing. The reason, though, in this occasion that Jesus gives for this intense desire is this, “I’ve earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I say to you, I shall never again eat it until it is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God.”
Jesus knows there is a greater provision that these men have need of. There’s a deeper spiritual provision and he’s going to meet their need for them, and they have no idea what it is. They don’t understand it. This provision is going to be one that secures their place in the Kingdom of God. But it’s going to come at a great cost. Which is remarkable, isn’t it, that in thinking about his crucifixion and telling them about it here less than 24 hours away, he’s also talking about his joy in being with them, his desire, his love for them.
I, I can’t imagine the tension between those emotions and feelings that are going on inside of his soul. I can only observe. I can only try to imagine, try to apprehend. It’s Alfred Plummer, who points this out, he says, “The knowledge of the intensity of the suffering does not cancel the intensity of the desire.” His love for his people, at the same time, the realization, the full impact of the weight of the wrath of God, that’s about to hit him on that cross.
Holding those two together, by the way, a very strong statement here, “I say to you,” that has the form of a formal announcement. “I say to you,” and then this, “I will by no means,” oume, in the Greek, it’s the strongest way of negating something. “I will by no means, eat of it.” What’s it? The antecedent there is the Passover. So “I will by no means,” strongest negation, “eat Passover until Passover is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God.”
When is that going to be? Well, we happen to have some revelation on that, God told us about that. This happens when Passover is fulfilled in the Kingdom of God. It happens after the temple of Ezekiel is built. God gives the prophecy about the future temple in Ezekiel 40 and following. So it happens after the temple of Ezekiel is built, when it becomes operational in the millennial Kingdom on earth. As Ezekiel 45:21 says, “In the first month, on the 14th day of the month,” exactly this time, “you shall have the Passover, a feast of seven days. Unleavened bread shall be eaten.” Oh, that’s when.
Now as we get down into the room here, as we think about this scene, what’s going on, it is impossible to be totally dogmatic, because there is so much going on during this time. We don’t have a service order. We don’t have an order of service. We don’t have a, an agenda set out for the meal printed in scripture. But I do believe, as others do, that what John records in John 13:1 to 20, which we read earlier in the service. All that happens right here, all that happens right here at this time.
In fact, turn over to John chapter 13 and let’s just go ahead and hold a finger in Luke 22, if you’d like to for reference. But in John 13, we’re going to unpack this just a little bit for your edification. John 13, “Now before the feast of the Passover, Jesus, knowing that His hour had come, that He would depart out of this world to the Father, having loved His own who were in the world, He loved them to the end.” He loved them to the uttermost, “during supper, the devil having already put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, to betray him, Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into His hands, and He had come forth from God, was going back to God, He got up from supper and he laid aside his garments; taking a towel, he tied it around himself.” And “then he poured water into the washbasin, and began to wash the disciples’ feet and to wipe them with the towel which he had tied around himself.”
Again, picture the scene. You got that U-shaped seating arrangement, the couches around the middle table. Peter is sitting, if you kind of imagine a U, he’s sitting at the top end of one end of the U-configuration. And that’s good for Peter because he has taken the lowest place at the table. He’s started to really mull over the Lord’s parables about taking the lowest place, about not trying to put himself forward, which he was so prone to do. So he takes the lowest place seated over here at one end of the U, at the top end. He’s taken the lowest place, he’s sitting, that means, across the table from Jesus, who is at the other end.
Verse 24 says, he’s across the table from him because the leader was there presiding over the meal. You know who sits in the highest place to the left of Jesus, in the highest place at the table to the left of the host, to the left of the one presiding over the meal? Judas Iscariot has taken that place. In the white spaces between Luke 22:16 and 17, I believe it’s at this point that Jesus has washed his disciples’ feet. Right after that, Jesus identifies Judas as the betrayer.
Luke, we see that in Luke’s account, he records the identification of the betrayer after the meal in verses 21 to 23. I stopped short of reading that for Matthew and Mark though in their accounts, that happens first. Their accounts here are more strictly chronological. In this place, we’ll get to why Luke has ordered the things and arranged the material as he’s done, for another time. We’ll save that for another time. But all I have to say, Matthew and Mark have kind of followed more of a strictly chronological; agreeing with one another that Jesus identifies the betrayer right after he’s washed his disciples’ feet.
Sometime after that, the meal started, a little bit of the meal is going and he identifies his betrayer during the meal. So after Judas is exposed, he’s expelled, he leaves. This is in clear contrast, isn’t it, to the rest of the apostles; those who stay, those whom he teaches, those for whom he institute’s the Lord’s Supper. Clearly see this if you look down the text in John 13 to verse 17, Jesus says, “If you know these things, you’re blessed if you do them. I don’t speak about all of you.’
“‘I know the ones whom I have chosen; but that the Scripture may be fulfilled, ‘He who eats my bread has lifted up his heel against me.’” And “‘from now on, I’m telling you before it occurs, so that when it does occur, you may believe that I’m He.’” I want you to hear the prediction so that when it happens in real time, you look back on what I said and realize that came from God. I am from God.
He’s validated my word by what has happened. “Truly, truly, I say to you, verse 20, he who receives anyone I send receives me, and he who receives me receives him who sent me. And when Jesus had said these things, he became troubled in spirit, bore witness, and said, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me.’ The disciples began looking at one another, perplexed about whom he had spoken.”
Listen, I’m going to read from Matthew’s account, which along with Mark’s account, as I said, follows the chronology. Here’s what Matthew 26 says, verse 20, “Now when evening had come, he was reclining at the table with the twelve disciples. And as they were eating, he said, ‘Truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me.’” Same thing we see here, continuing in John’s Gospel. See the response? “The disciples, they begin looking at one another. They’re perplexed about whom he spoke and there was reclining on Jesus’ bosom, one of his disciples whom Jesus loved. So Simon Peter,” again, he’s across the table, isn’t he? He, he “gestures to him to inquire who’s the one of whom he’s speaking.”
And leaning back thus on, like, he doesn’t bark it out loud. He’s gesturing to him. He’s mouthing the words, hey, who is it? Who is it? So John leaning back thus on Jesus bosom, he’s at his right. “He leans back and he said to him, ‘Lord, who is it?’” He’s quiet, “Jesus answered, ‘He’s the one for whom I shall dip the piece of bread and give it to him.’ So when he had dipped the piece of bread, he took ,gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot.”
As I said, Peter is on the other side of the table from Jesus, other side of the table, then from John, as well. He’s reclining at the right side of Jesus. He’s able to lean back on Jesus’ chest and as the two of them, John and Peter find out who it is. Meanwhile the rest of the company is in a panic. This is what we read in Matthew’s account. I mean they’re just left with, so “one of you is going to betray me”, and it says in Matthew 26:22, “Being deeply grieved. They each one begin to say to him, ‘surely not I Lord.’”
I mean they’re mortified. Can I just stop, real quick, there and make a footnote? When any true Christian is confronted with sin, even if he doesn’t believe himself or believe herself to have committed that sin, the fact that there’s a confrontation, that there might be something about the reputation that is untoward, that is not befitting of Jesus Christ in his gospel. Every true believer says, and let me clear that up, that’s not, that’s not true.
Surely not I, Lord, surely, it’s not me, is it? “He answered and said, ‘He dipped his hand with me in the bowl is the one who’ll betray me.’” They’re thinking that doesn’t help. We’ve all dipped our hands in the bowl. This lines up with John 13:26. And then Jesus gives this warning. “The Son of Man is to go, just as it is written of him. But woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed. It would have been good for that man if he had not been born.” And then this, “Judas who was betraying him answered and said, ‘Surely it is not I, Rabbi?’ And He said to him, ‘You said it yourself.’” Hard to imagine, isn’t it, the coldness in Judas, hardness of heart in Judas Iscariot, a pride so deeply set in, that he imagines that he has fooled Jesus and the others.
Chilling isn’t it to realize, according to verse 27, that this hypocrisy in Judas Iscariot that happens before Satan entered him again, not after. This hypocrisy, this chilling coldness to his heart, his lack of love for this, for this one that he has called rabbi and friend; whom he will later kiss on the cheek, that he could be so two-faced.
Don’t ever underestimate the power of sin, to blind, to harden, to cause such hypocrisy. I keep reading in verse 27, “after the piece of bread Satan then entered into him, and therefore Jesus said to him, what you do, do quickly.” Be fast about it. No one of those reclining at the table knew for what purpose he had said this to him. Where some were thinking because Judas had the Money Box, that Jesus was saying to him by the things we have need, need up for the feast, or else that he should give something to the poor.
By the way, if they were to leave the upper room and go over to the temple, they’d find the temple packed with people because they kept the temple open to midnight in order to take offerings and alms for the poor, because so many pilgrims and travelers were in town. So they thought he’s got the money bag, he’s either going to buy something that we need or forgot, or he’s going to take something for the poor. So verse 30, “After receiving the piece of bread, Judas went out immediately. And it was night.”
Evidently the apostles, overhearing this, thought Judas, he who was sitting in the highest seat, at the place of honor, right next to Jesus at the table. They thought Jesus had sent Judas on some special errand. After all, Peter and John had been sent on a special errand. Maybe now it’s Judas’s turn. He’s getting his due. He’s getting sent. Peter and John knew the truth of it. But how? How are they to get their minds around this in the moment?
I mean, of all the potential betrayers sitting at the table, certainly not Judas. I mean, this has completely baffled the two of them. But it is important for us to know. That’s why I’m taking this little detour into John 13. It’s important for us to know that Judas Iscariot was not in the room at the institution of the Lord’s Table, just as Israel was to go through the entire house and scour it, even using a lamp and a, and a light, to go and look through the house, to find every ounce of leaven and purge it from the house and get rid of it, so Jesus finds the leaven in his own midst and purges it before instituting the fellowship ordinance of the church.
Judas had certainly partaken of some of the meal. He had certainly heard Jesus’ teaching, seen the miracles, partaken of the ministry of the Holy Spirit. He’d eaten enough to receive the piece of bread that the Lord dipped into the bowl and gave him. Then, after taking the bread from Jesus, Satan entered him. Judas went out from their midst. He went back to report to Caiaphas on Jesus’s whereabouts in order to lead the detachment of soldiers back into the upper room for the arrest.
Judas thinks he’s got this all under control. This is the opportune time. I’m going to pounce. We’re going to get him. They’re all, they’re trapped in a Passover meal, stuck fast in the upper room, bound by ceremony, bound by ordinance. Religiously, they’re not going to break from this. He’s got the time, he’s got the occasion, he’s got the opportunity. Perfect timing.
Whatever Judas imagines, whatever he thinks, whatever judgment is on his mind, it is the Lord Jesus who’s in complete control here. He is the one calling the shots. He’s the one driving all the action. He’s the one who is exposed. Judas chose the timing, expelled him from the company of true apostles. “I know whom I have chosen. But one of you is a devil.” And Judas is unmasked. This then becomes the basis of our fencing of the Lord’s Table.
I think it was mentioned in the waters of Baptism this morning by one of the, one of these Christians who has watched that practiced in our church and wondered about it. Why do we do that? Why do we say that no one can come, if they’re not in good standing with a faithful gospel preaching church, as they haven’t been baptized since they’ve come to faith in Jesus Christ? Why do we say that? That’s because we’re following the Lord’s example. We’re trying to be obedient to his ordinance.
The pattern that he set up here, Paul told the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 5:6, after he exposed a heinous form of sin in their midst, he said, “a little leaven leavens the whole lump,” of dough. You can’t have that, so clean out the old leaven. So you may be a new lump, as you are in fact unleavened for Christ our Passover has been sacrificed.”
One cup, one bread signifying common fellowship of one people sustained by Christ and his sacrifice, made partakers of the new covenant in his blood. Travis Allen
What does it mean that you are in fact unleavened? He means all of you who are truly Christians. There is no leaven in you. I’ve taken care of that. I’ve forgiven the sin. It’s all gone. Everybody who is part of my true church, you are in fact unleavened. So let the visible conform to the invisible, let the practice conform to the actual reality, so that none but true Christians come to this table. “For Christ our Passover also has been sacrificed. Let us therefore celebrate the feast not with the old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness,” that’s Judas Iscariot, “with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.” Remove the wicked man from your midst, Paul says.
So much more to say and I just have to admit that this passage is so full, I can’t do it justice. It is deep, it is broad, it is comprehensive, it just defies explanation in an hour. So we’re going to go to two. No, I’m just kidding. We’re not going to go two hours. But there’s just, I’m just trying to admit to you that it is hard to get out everything that’s here. And so we’ll just do our best with all, with the time that we have, but we just have to keep moving.
I’d like to camp here even longer. But that’s the situation, the situation for the institution of the Lord’s table. The situation is that Jesus loves his friends. He loves you and me. He loves his apostles and by extension, his entire church for whom he died. He loves his friends. And this leads us to a second point for this morning, the expectation which we see in verses 17 and 18, the expectation which is the hope for the future. “When he had taken up a cup and given thanks, he said take this and share it among yourselves.” Take this, share it among yourselves.
This cup is raised during the meal. The one in verse 20 is raised after the meal. So Luke records two cups. In Matthew and Mark, there’s only one cup recorded, which correspond to Luke 22:20, his second cup. According to tradition, though, we know that in the Passover celebration between 3 to 5, cups were raised at the Passover celebration. Depending on the situation, the circumstances, typically we find a pattern of four cups following the pattern of the Mishnah that identified four cups of blessing or four blessings, in Exodus chapter 6, verses 6 and 7.
You can write those down if you’d like, that verses if you’d like to, Exodus 6:6 and 7 and the four cups responded to the four blessings outlined in Exodus 6:6 and 7. They celebrated each one with a toast of this diluted wine. It wasn’t a, a full potency wine. They didn’t want anybody getting drunk at the Passover. So it was a diluted wine, wine diluted with water for the sake of sobriety, for the sake of thinking through the meaning of the elements here.
The first cup is a cup of sanctification corresponding to Exodus 6:6, which says, “I am Yahweh and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians.” God, Yahweh is making a distinction there between you and the Egyptians. This is why it’s called the cup of sanctification. A setting apart. He sets apart his people. We can imagine Jesus made that toast, offering a short simple prayer, and it’s this prayer, it’s actually recorded. “Blessed are you, Yahweh, our God, who has created the fruit of the vine.” He lifts up the glass, this, is, officially commences the meal.
The second cup of Passover is called the cup of deliverance corresponds to Exodus 6:6, “I will deliver you from bondage.” Deliverance, cup of deliverance, delivering you from bondage, delivering you from servitude. It’s at the raising of this cup by the one presiding over the feast of the youngest member of the table is to ask why this night is different than other nights. If there’s a family celebrating, it’s the youngest child who can participate. He asks why is this night different than any other night? In response, the presiding host is going to tell the Exodus story, reading, explaining Deuteronomy 26:5 to 11.
In this case, since the presiding host was, actually there, must have been an exposition you would not want to have missed. The host would speak of the past, present, future faithfulness of God to Israel. Joel Green says, “The meal,” was, “interpreted as a present act of remembrance of and thanksgiving for God’s past liberation of an oppressed people, a celebration of God’s faithfulness, leads to hope in the future deliverance of God’s people.” So you see a past, present, future aspect of celebration.
The cup of verse 17, Luke 22:17, could refer to either of these first two cups. But if Jesus followed the traditional pattern of the Passover order, it may be slightly better to see this cup as the second of the four cups, since his explanation has to do with looking to the future. Notice again, “When he had taken a cup and given thanks, he said, ‘Take this, share it among yourselves. For I say to you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine from now on until the Kingdom of God comes.’”
Verse 16, we see Jesus there is vowing to abstain from celebrating Passover until it’s fulfilled in the Kingdom of God. And here in verse 18, he avows to abstain not only from wine, but of the fruit of the vine altogether. It’s, it’s like similar to a Nazarite vow. Once again, very strong language here, mirroring verse 16. “I say to you,” again, formal announcement. “I will by no means,” again, oume, strongest negation in the Greek.
“I will by no means drink of the fruit of the vine from now on,” i.e, after this Passover, “until the Kingdom of God comes.” That parallels the language of the Second Coming, doesn’t it? Which is going to coincide with the coming of the Kingdom of God, Jesus. In Jesus, the Kingdom of God came. It was inaugurated in him and through him, but it will not come, it will not be consummated until he comes again to set up that Kingdom on earth. And when that happens, this vow of the abstinence that he took will be lifted.
He will celebrate with his people in the realized Kingdom. See that referred to and if you look ahead to verses 28 and 29, “now you are those who’ve stood by me in my trials, and I grant you a Kingdom just as my Father granted one to me, that you may eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom. And you will sit on Thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” Talking about this deliverance. Yes, a past deliverance.
Yes, God is always delivering us, but there’s a future deliverance coming and there’s a kingdom coming. It’s after the second cup as they made that toast. The group sings the first two songs of the Hillel, Psalms 113 to 114. The whole Hillel section is Psalms 113 to Psalm 118. But they sung at this point Psalm, Psalms 113 and 114, and after the meal is over, there are two more cups, which is when Jesus instituted the ordinance of communion.
We have one more point, which is the institution itself. So point three: The institution, which is the faith of the fellowship, the faith of the fellowship. The I’m using the faith and with the definite article, emphasis on that to emphasize a particular faith, a particular doctrinal content. The institution of the Lord’s table is about a memorial. It’s about a, a remembrance. It’s the heart of which Jude called, “the faith once for all, delivered to the Saints” and the Lord’s table and it’s two very simple elements, bread and cup.
Deeply significant symbols, the bread and the cup, they focus on the theology of this table. They refer to a theological significance, a soteriological meaning. After singing the first two Hillel Psalms, according to Alfred Edersheim, Jesus as the presiding host over this meal; according to Edersheim, he says this, “The host would dip some of the bitter herbs into the saltwater or vinegar,” He’d, “speak a blessing and,” then, “partake of them,” and, “then hand them to each in the company.” And, “next he would break one of the unleavened cakes…, of which half was put aside for after supper. This is called the Aphiqomon or after-dish…
“[The other dish]( not the Aphiqomon),” this is, this other dish, “is elevated and these words are spoken:” about this bread, though he broke. ‘This is the bread of misery which our fathers ate in the land of Egypt. All that are hungry come and eat; all that are needy, come, keep the Pascha,’ the sacrifice, the lamb, End Quote.
After this, after he pronounced this blessing, the guests would eat the meal. So we have the unleavened bread, we have the bitter herbs, we have the, the charoset sauce, the, the roasted lamb. After the meal, the host then returned to that one loaf, the half a loaf that was set aside for after supper; the Aphiqomon, eaten as dessert, so to speak, after the meal. Kind of a, a refresher after the meal.
This is one and the same bread as that referred to as the bread of misery, because it was broken off from the bread of misery. But all who are hungry are encouraged to come and eat of this bread, and all who are needy are encouraged to come and partake of this bread. This is the bread, then, that Jesus appropriates and repurposes and gives new meaning to as a memorial ordinance. According to verse 19, it’s the bread of remembrance.
Look at verse 19, “When he’d taken some bread and given thanks, he broke it, gave it to them, saying, ‘this is my body which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.’” “This is my body”, when Jesus says, this, he is clearly referring to the physical loaf or piece of bread he’s holding in his hand. And notice it’s a physical piece of bread, in his physical hand, which is attached to his physical arm. Physical arm attached to his physical body. We understand.
When he says this is my body, we understand, he’s speaking in a metaphor, isn’t he? Let’s not be confused by the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation in which they believe the bread is literally his body. That it literally changes from physical bread into his physical body. Which means that the priest, every time offering the bread, every time offering the mass, he’s re-sacrificing Christ every time.
This is what they believe, every time he performs the mass. A new sacrifice every time he gives the bread. This is the Roman Catholic doctrine and it’s a blasphemous, I, I know it’s a harsh word, but it’s true that it’s a blasphemous denial of the gospel. Why is it blasphemous? Why is it a slander, which is what blasphemy means, ultimately, is a lying slander against the gospel. Because the Bible tells us that Jesus’ death is the once for all sacrifice. It is done; his sacrifice on the cross.
That’s why the cross that we have in our church here doesn’t have a body on it, it’s empty. Why? Because that sacrifice is done, it’s complete, it’s perfect. It is the all-sufficient sacrifice that paid for the sins of the people according to Romans 6:10, Hebrews 7:27, Hebrews 10:10, 1 Peter 3:18. Many other scriptures and the theology of the entire New Testament teaches exactly this. This is what the gospel is based on.
So to say we’re re-sacrificing Christ in the mass is a blasphemy, a slander about the efficacy of that once for all sacrifice. It’s saying it wasn’t enough, it’s insufficient, that is a lie, that is not true. Now in the text here, the point of Jesus breaking the bread, I used to think that that was about Jesus illustrating his broken body, broken on the cross. But as we understand from the Gospel narratives, his legs were not broken, were they? Nothing in him.
He was not broken, in broken bones, but he was preserved. Rather his breaking the bread on this occasion not to, not to, illustrate his body broken, but rather to portray simply a single loaf of bread. Just, he just is breaking off pieces of this one bread to give it to many, so one feeding the many. That is what is pictured in the single bread broken for them. It’s the union and identity of those who partake of that single loaf that though being many, they share in one loaf, one bread broken and divided and distributed to them.
In fact, the verb, he broke, is only used in the New Testament to refer to breaking bread at meal time for the purpose of sharing with all those who are at the table. That’s the verb that’s used here, only used in the New Testament for distributing out of this one loaf to feed everybody who were there. It’s sharing. That’s the idea. So just as the one bread sustains the many at a meal, so also the one body of Christ which he gave for his people.
Jesus is very clear here, using substitutionary language and substitutionary nature of his giving. Literally on behalf of you all is what his body is given for, on behalf of you all. His body, by which he means his life-His body is, by metonymy, His life, sacrificed for them. It’ll sustain them, just as bread sustains a physical body. His life sacrificed for them will sustain them, in the remembering of him, in the remembering of his sacrifice for their sins; his death in exchange for their life. This is a spiritual truth that sustains the soul, that sustains the life. It’s God conveying eternal life through these words, through this doctrine, through this theology by which he sustains our spiritual life.
And so it is, that the Aphiqomon, the, the, what, what before was called the bread of misery or came from the bread of misery, now it’s become the bread of remembering. What once was bitter, what, what once was the symbol of misery in the meal has become really the dessert. It’s become the symbol of salvation. One body shared by all, one body that sustains them all and gives them all life. It’s just what Jesus said in John 6:53, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in yourselves. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”
The command that he gives there in verse 19, that last sentence, “do this in remembrance of me.” Do this, it’s a present imperative, so it’s, continually be doing this; continually in order to be remembering me, to keep me in your minds, to keep reminding yourselves of the life that you all possess, because of my death for you.
Second element in the Lord’s table is the cup, verse 20. “This is the cup of the new covenant,” says there in verse 20, “And in the same way he took the cup after they had eaten.” So this is after the meal’s over, he took another cup in the same way he took the cup. Same way as what? Same way as taking the bread. So Luke here is preparing us to, to receive another metaphor, see another analogy here between the cup and something spiritual, some spiritual meaning.
So he says, “In the same way he took the cup after they had eaten, saying this cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.” So here they are, after they’ve eaten their fill, as the meal is winding down, Jesus lifts up another cup. This is the third cup, the cup of redemption. Final line of Exodus 6:6, “I will also redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great judgments,” is what that says. This is the cup, then, the third cup of that Passover Seder meal. This is the cup that Jesus appropriated and repurposed for the Communion Cup when he instituted the Lord’s Supper.
It’s the cup of redemption, which is the perfect cup to symbolize the New Covenant that was ratified by his blood. A cup of redemption. New Covenant is a redemptive covenant. Now depending on what translation you have, not all translations are equally clear at this point, but the New American Standard, the Legacy Standard Bible, which I’m using, also the ESV if you’re using the English Standard Version, they’re most helpful and clear in their translations.
Jesus said, according to the translation here, “this cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.” Okay, so if you’re taking notes, write down the first half of that sentence. But instead of the word, is, which is a copula, an equating verb, right? Instead of the word, is, write an equal sign. Okay? So it should read like this. The cup, this cup which is poured out for you, equals the new covenant in my blood. In other words, the cup poured out for you is not the blood Jesus shed on the cross. The syntax doesn’t allow for that interpretation. The cup is, the cup is, actually, something else. And you say, don’t leave us in suspense. What is the, something else?
Jesus refers to the blood here to provide his apostles with a vivid picture of, of a violent death. It’s a bloodletting. It’s a blood shedding. This is the violent death, the bloodletting of the lamb, that pictured in what happened, literally, Peter and John sacrificing earlier that day at the temple, the blood of that lamb sprinkled at the base of the altar. So they, they’ve got the picture, they understand the blood shed from a lamb. Apostles get that?
So what is the cup then poured out for you? If it’s not the blood poured out for you, what is the cup poured out for you? Look over it in this same chapter in verse 42, verse 42, where Jesus is praying in the Garden of Gethsemane and he says, “Father, if you are willing, remove this cup from me.” That expression, this cup, it is the same exact expression as in verse 20. Literally, it’s this demonstra, near demonstrative pronoun, this the cup, τοῦτο τὸ potērion, the exact same phrase in both locations, both verses.
So it’s not the blood being poured out, it is the cup poured out, that is to say, the cup of suffering which the Father gave to the Son, that he should drink the cup of suffering, that he should drink the cup of God’s full wrath to secure the redemption of his people in the new covenant which was ratified in his blood. For without the shedding of blood, Hebrews 9:22, says, “There is no remission for sins.”
The Mosaic covenant according to Exodus 24, we read this in verses 6 to 8. And this is about the Mosaic covenant and the gathering up of blood from bulls sacrificed as burnt offerings and fellowship offerings on behalf of Israel. And it says there in Exodus 24, verse 6, “Moses took half of that blood and put it in basins,” a lot of basins, a lot of containers of blood. “The other half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar.” I would imagine half of that blood sprinkled on the altar had to drench that altar in blood. “And then he took the book of the covenant, and he read it in the hearing of the people, and they said, ‘All that Yahweh has spoken, we will do and we will be obedient.’”
Not even ten chapters later, what are they doing? Dancing around a golden calf, aren’t they? And yet, “hear all that Yahweh has spoken, we will do and we will be obedient.” I think they’re sincere. I think they mean it. And “so Moses took the blood,” verse 8, Exodus 24, “sprinkled it on the people, and he said, ‘Behold the blood of the covenant which Yahweh has made with you in accordance with all these words.’”
That’s the same language that Peter uses. 1 Peter 1:2, “that those who are chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, that they may obey Jesus Christ,” and then what? “Be sprinkled with his blood?” Same thing here, you people sprinkled by his blood, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, chosen by the foreknowledge of God the Father, “to you people,” Peter says, “may grace and peace be yours in fullest measure.”
The first covenant entered into by their voluntary, “all that the Lord has spoken, we will do.” Then the blood is sprinkled. You know what happens here? The blood is sprinkled and then he draws the people in. It’s unilateral, it’s unconditional, it’s God doing on behalf of his people, what they cannot do for themselves. He gives the Lamb of sacrifice. He does the work. It’s all of God, all of his grace, all his redemption.
There was a fourth cup, the cup of praise according to Exodus 6, verse 7. “I will take you for my people. I will be your God, and you shall know I am Yahweh, your God.” It’s because of the third cup though, not the cup lifted up at the Passover, but the cup poured out on Christ at his death, when he, which he drank to the dregs, the cup of divine wrath on behalf of you, his people, on behalf of me.
It’s because of that cup that we’re able to partake of the new covenant in his blood, and we’re able to think about that fourth cup, the cup of praise, the language of Exodus 6:7. “I will take you for my people. I will be your God. You shall know I am Yahweh, your God.” You know that language is further expanded in the new covenant in Jeremiah 31. Write that down in your notes somewhere. Jeremiah 31:31 to 34. God says about this. He says, “I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah,” it’s, “not like the one I made with their fathers, which they broke.”
But this is the one, I’ll put my law within them; no longer an external law, all written on tablets of stone. I’ll put my law within them; it will be on their heart that I’ll write it. “I will be their God and they will be my people. And they will not teach again, each man his neighbor, and each man his brother, saying, ‘Know Yahweh, know Yahweh, know Yahweh.’ For they will all know me from the least of them to the greatest of them,’ declares Yahweh, ‘for I will forgive their iniquity and their sin, I will remember no more.’”
So Jesus told the apostles in verse 17, to take the cup, his cup. He said take this, share it among yourselves. He took one bread in verse 19, gave thanks for it, broke it, gave it to them. One cup, one bread, signifying the common fellowship of one people. This is the cup now that he refers to in verse 20. It’s the third cup that he repurposes for this Passover; not for the Passover, for this institution of the Lord’s Table, the Lord’s Supper, communion. But it points to the cup that was poured out on him when he suffered on the cross.
One cup, one bread signifying common fellowship of one people sustained by Christ and his sacrifice, made partakers of the new covenant in his blood. Paul says, “is not the cup of blessing which we bless a sharing.” The word sharing is Koinonia. The word fellowship. It could mean also, partnering, is another translation, for that. Is not the cup of blessing, which we bless, a Koinonia?
A partnering in the blood of Christ, is not the bread which we break, a sharing? Again, Koinonia in the body of Christ, since there’s one bread. We who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread, all of us sustained by this offering, all of this sustained by this eternal life in Christ; he being the bread that comes down from heaven for us. And beloved, this is what communion means. This is what the Lord’s Table is all about.
The Lord’s Table is about the love of Christ for all of his friends, whom he loved perfectly to the uttermost to the very end, by dying for their sins. He loved them to the very end, to the very uttermost, to the fullest extent that he could, by dying for their sins. Lord’s table is about hope for the future, as Paul puts it in 1 Corinthians 11:26, “For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.”
And that’s an affirmation of our hope, isn’t it, that he is risen from the dead, that he is coming back. He will return. And all this is true. We live our lives in light of that hope, in light of that eschatology, really. That’s when he returns again. That’s when we will share the Passover meal with the true final Passover lamb, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. And then thirdly, we see that the Lord’s Table is about a deep theology, the faith, soteriological truth about the faith, once for all delivered to the Saints.
“For Christ also died for sins, once for all, the just, for the unjust, that he might bring us to God.” This is about reconciliation. “He,” himself, “being put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit.” We too then being put to death. It’s the end of us when we come to Christ. Luke 9:23, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself, take up his cross and follow me.” Coming to Christ means the end of you. It means the death of self, the death of all your old man, old nature. It’s gone, but then made alive in the Spirit.
We have a life because of his resurrection life that raised him from the dead, and we partake of that true spiritual life, an eternal life, that continues to grow us in sanctification to be like him. Faith, hope, and love: These three are pictured in this text, in the love of Christ, the hope of resurrection, according to the faith, we share regularly in his table with the church that gathers in his name. That’s the appropriate way to have this institution of the Lord’s Table, as a gathered church in remembrance of him.