The Dipped Bread

cOde_xix · Apr 11, 2006

I have a question for the christians, or anyone who knows the answer.

In the story of Jesus and the last supper, when Jesus dipped the bread that gave to Judas, what did Jesus dip the bread into? I know the bible says it was a dish, but what did the dish contain?

cOde_xix · Apr 11, 2006

Talmidah · Apr 11, 2006

Related question...I have heard some Christians say that the last supper was actually the passover meal. Is this a common belief?

evange · Apr 11, 2006

cOde_xix said:
I have a question for the christians, or anyone who knows the answer.

In the story of Jesus and the last supper, when Jesus dipped the bread that gave to Judas, what did Jesus dip the bread into? I know the bible says it was a dish, but what did the dish contain?

hummus

arunma · Apr 11, 2006

Talmidah said:
Related question...I have heard some Christians say that the last supper was actually the passover meal. Is this a common belief?

Hello Talmidah. As far as I'm aware, this is the only belief. The belief that the Last Supper was the Passover is essential to Christian doctrine on the passion of the Lord. The Bible specifically tells us that the Last Supper was the Passover:

He said to them, "Behold, when you have entered the city, a man carrying a jar of water will meet you. Follow him into the house that he enters and tell the master of the house, 'The Teacher says to you, Where is the guest room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?' And he will show you a large upper room furnished; prepare it there." And they went and found it just as he had told them, and they prepared the Passover. And when the hour came, he reclined at 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 tell you I will not eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God." (St. Luke 22:10-16)

Besides this, the symbolism of the crucifixion and the eucharist would be destroyed if the Last Supper were not the Passover meal. Christians do not simply believe that the passion was merely meant to mimic the Passover, in fact we believe that Christ is the Passover, as it says:

Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. (1 Corinthians 5:7)

In the Law of Moses, it says that in the day that God redeemed Israel from Egypt, the children of Israel stained their doors with the blood of the Passover lamb. When the Lord killed the firstborn of Egypt, the firstborn of Israel were saved by the lamb's blood. The Bible says:

The blood shall be a sign for you, on the houses where you are. And when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and no plague will befall you to destroy you, when I strike the land of Egypt. (Exodus 12:13)

These things may be taken as an allegory. Egypt is the fallen world, Israel is the church of Christ, and the lamb's blood is the blood of Christ.

When the children of Israel were redeemed from Egypt, Moses parted the Red Sea, and by passing through the waters, they were baptized into Moses. Now we may consider the elements of the eucharist. The bread, which is the body of Christ, is the Passover lamb which is slain for the atonement for sin. The wine, which is the blood of Christ, is the the blood of the Passover lamb, by which God passes over the sins of all who believe in Christ, as it says:

For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. (Romans 3:23-25)

Because the Passover and the passion of the Lord are so intimately connected, I think that it would be impossible for the two events to be theologically separated without destroying the meaning of both.

LittleLambofJesus · Apr 11, 2006

Talmidah said:
Related question...I have heard some Christians say that the last supper was actually the passover meal. Is this a common belief?

I believe it was just a common meal. Jesus was to be the True Passover Lamb. The Old was getting ready to "wax away" and the New was coming in. Truth and Spirit.

(NKJV) Hebrews 12:24 to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than [that of] Abel.Hebrews 8:13 In that He says, "A new [covenant,"] He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

Christ and his disciples obviously could not have eaten a Passover lamb with their meal that night. The Scriptures clearly state that Christ was our Passover (I Cor. 5:7). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all record that Christ died at the ninth hour (3:00 p.m.). This is the same time that Josephus records the slaughter of the Passover lambs commenced. Christ fulfilled the symbolism of the Passover lambs exactly by giving his life just as the unblemished Passover lambs began to be slain on the 14th of Nisan!
CONCLUSION

arunma · Apr 11, 2006

LittleLambofJesus said:
I believe it was just a common meal. Jesus was to be the True Passover Lamb. The Old was getting ready to "wax away" and the New was coming in. Truth and Spirit.

I think she meant to ask this literally rather than theologically. Of course you are right that the true Passover is Jesus Christ himself. But in a literal sense, I think you would agree that Jesus ate the Passover with his disciples at the Last Supper, as the Bible says.

Talmidah · Apr 12, 2006

arunma said:
Hello Talmidah. As far as I'm aware, this is the only belief. <snip>

Ah! I see what you're saying, arunma. I disagree (of course ), but I do understand.

I guess my only other question then, has to do with the bread the OP was talking about. I assume it was unleavened bread then. Does the Greek differentiate at all btwn unleavened bread and leavened bread?

Thanks, arunma

cOde_xix · Apr 12, 2006

evange said:
hummus

thanks evange for the responce...

seed757 · Apr 12, 2006

evange said:
hummus

That's it? No verse to back it up? Anything?

evange · Apr 12, 2006

seed757 said:
That's it? No verse to back it up? Anything?

If you like I can share my hummus recipe with you.

seed757 · Apr 12, 2006

evange said:
If you like I can share my hummus recipe with you.

As long as it is all halal. Sure, thanks.

evange · Apr 12, 2006

seed757 said:
As long as it is all halal. Sure, thanks.

as far as I know, yes, yes it is.

1 can chickpeas
1 lemon
3 cloves of garlic
1/4 cup olive oil
1/2 cup tahini
paprika

Drain and rinse the chickpeas. put them in a food proccessor and run it. Leave it running while you add the garlic. Keep the food proccessor running. Squeeze the lemon in (maybe through a sive so the seeds dont go in. Add the olive oil, then tahini.

at this point you probibly want to turn the food proccessor off and scrape it all together, but also taste it. Hummus isn't really one of those things where you measure or follow a recipe. It's more like where you add stuff untill it tastes good. If it's not garlicy enough, then add another clove. If it's not sour enough then add more lemon juice, if it's not bitter enough add more tahini.

Then put it in a serving dish and decorate it by putting a paprika x on the top.

tahini is a paste made from sesame seeds, you can make it yourself by roasting then grinding seseme seeds with oil, but it's a lot of work, and what you end up with is really a paste, but bits of seseme suspended in oil. Just buy a jar, it's cheap.

You know, when I go to the grocery store I'm always suprised at how much hummus costs. It's like $4 for a 250ml tub. It's so cheap and easy to make on your own, I dont know why anyone buys it.

evange · Apr 12, 2006

cOde_xix said:
thanks evange for the responce...

oh by the way, hummus was just the first thing that bread can be dipped in that came to mind. I really have no idea what the real answer is.

evange · Apr 12, 2006

http://mcdonald.southern.edu/sermons/01/0324.htm said:
Now, at the last supper they had a very small menu. And I don't think butter was on the menu. I don't like eating dry bread, do you? I'm glad that the Bible says that bread and our water will be sure. I almost wish it says that the peanut butter would be sure. He didn't use butter, so what did they do for this dry bread? They dipped it. They dipped it in a sauce. It's still the custom in the Middle East to do this. The sauce is often made of stewed fruit or bitter herbs, or a combination. They would dip the bread, and that's why in another passage of the Bible it's called the sop (see John 13:26 cf.). They sopped up that moisture and ate the bread. For each person to dip out of the same saucer was very meaningful. What it basically meant is that you and I, all of us that is doing this, are saying by doing this tat we are in unity. We're old friends. We're going to share each other's germs here. We're going to share everything. We would die to protect each other. WE are a bonded unit. We're going to be loyal to each other until death.

And so, for Judas, to be disloyal to Jesus just a few minutes after that was the height of low-down venom. Extremely bad. Because he dipped his bread in the same saucer that Jesus used.

^---says it was a sauce or gravy

http://www.compassionatespirit.com/last_supper.htm said:
According to the gospels, there were at least two, or possibly three items at the Last Supper: bread, a drink, and possibly a dip of some sort. The drink is usually assumed to be wine, but this is not spelled out. Matthew and Mark describe all three; Luke has only bread and a drink; and John mentions only the dip. We have no indication of what was in the dip, but the easiest explanation is that it was vegetarian, since this would probably be the least expensive.

^--- says it was vegetarian

http://www.rainbowcastle.org/maundyth.html says it was dipped in wine

http://www.templetons.com/charles/jesus/chapter20.html says it was dipped in herbs

warghaha · Apr 12, 2006

evange said:
as far as I know, yes, yes it is.

1 can chickpeas
1 lemon
3 cloves of garlic
1/4 cup olive oil
1/2 cup tahini
paprika

Drain and rinse the chickpeas. put them in a food proccessor and run it. Leave it running while you add the garlic. Keep the food proccessor running. Squeeze the lemon in (maybe through a sive so the seeds dont go in. Add the olive oil, then tahini.

at this point you probibly want to turn the food proccessor off and scrape it all together, but also taste it. Hummus isn't really one of those things where you measure or follow a recipe. It's more like where you add stuff untill it tastes good. If it's not garlicy enough, then add another clove. If it's not sour enough then add more lemon juice, if it's not bitter enough add more tahini.

Then put it in a serving dish and decorate it by putting a paprika x on the top.

tahini is a paste made from sesame seeds, you can make it yourself by roasting then grinding seseme seeds with oil, but it's a lot of work, and what you end up with is really a paste, but bits of seseme suspended in oil. Just buy a jar, it's cheap.

You know, when I go to the grocery store I'm always suprised at how much hummus costs. It's like $4 for a 250ml tub. It's so cheap and easy to make on your own, I dont know why anyone buys it.

Sounds delicious. But I'm lousy when it comes to cooking/preparing foods. That's why it's convenient to buy them.

arunma · Apr 12, 2006

Talmidah said:
Ah! I see what you're saying, arunma. I disagree (of course ), but I do understand.

I guess my only other question then, has to do with the bread the OP was talking about. I assume it was unleavened bread then. Does the Greek differentiate at all btwn unleavened bread and leavened bread?

Well, yes and no. There is a Greek word for unleavened bread, as well as one for bread of unspecified type. But both are used in the Greek New Testament. For example, in St. Mark 14:1, the word for unleavened bread is used to refer to the Feast of Unleavened Bread. But in St. Mark 14:22, the same author uses the word for any type of bread in reference to the bread that Jesus blessed and gave to the disciples. It is clear that the author of the text was not ignorant of the word for unleavened bread, so it can be assumed that he expects us to know, from context, that the bread which Jesus broke was the unleavened bread.

I think it is also noteworthy that in the Greek, the Greek words for 'unleavened' and 'bread' are never used together. Now, I am still in the process of learning Greek, so my analysis of this may very well be flawed. But since the author refers to the Feast of Unleavened Bread as literally, "the Feast of the Unleavened," it is probable that he used the word for unspecified types of bread in verse 22 so as to not confuse the bread itself with the Feast of Unleavened Bread.

Talmidah · Apr 12, 2006

arunma said:
Well, yes and no. There is a Greek word for unleavened bread, as well as one for bread of unspecified type. But both are used in the Greek New Testament. For example, in St. Mark 14:1, the word for unleavened bread is used to refer to the Feast of Unleavened Bread. But in St. Mark 14:22, the same author uses the word for any type of bread in reference to the bread that Jesus blessed and gave to the disciples. It is clear that the author of the text was not ignorant of the word for unleavened bread, so it can be assumed that he expects us to know, from context, that the bread which Jesus broke was the unleavened bread.

OK that makes sense. Now, one more question (and I'm operating on very little sleep so I apologize if I'm incoherent ) Thinking back to your previous post and that of LittleLamb...if Jesus was the Passover lamb, how is it that he was eating the Passover meal (which would have included the Passover lamb)?

arunma · Apr 12, 2006

Talmidah said:
OK that makes sense. Now, one more question (and I'm operating on very little sleep so I apologize if I'm incoherent ) Thinking back to your previous post and that of LittleLamb...if Jesus was the Passover lamb, how is it that he was eating the Passover meal (which would have included the Passover lamb)?

No problem! I as a college student have great respect for those who operate on very little sleep.

When we say that Christ is the Passover Lamb, we mean to say that Christ is the means by which God saved the children of Israel during the first Passover. As it says:

Now I want to remind you, although you once fully knew it, that Jesus, who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. (Jude 1:5)

Before I continue, a note on this text. Manuscripts of the epistle of Jude differ on this verse. Some replace "Jesus" with "the Lord." Therefore, this should either be taken as the words of God, or as a later Christian's understanding of the Scripture as accurately rendered. In any case, the theology that it teaches is certainly true.

Because Jesus is the Passover, it is by his glory that the Israelites were able to travel to Sinai by both day and night, and he was present as the voice of God who spoke to Moses from the cloud.

Now every Passover that has succeeded the first, including the church's regular celebration of the eucharist, is a memorial of the first Passover, and it is meant to remind us of those events. However, just as the children of Israel are not once again delivered from Egypt at every Passover, so too does Christ not literally lead them out of Egypt. Therefore, when Christ at the Passover with his disciples, this was meant to act as a symbolism of the true Passover, which is salvation in Jesus Christ.

Talmidah · Apr 12, 2006

arunma said:
No problem! I as a college student have great respect for those who operate on very little sleep.

When we say that Christ is the Passover Lamb, we mean to say that Christ is the means by which God saved the children of Israel during the first Passover. As it says:
Now I want to remind you, although you once fully knew it, that Jesus, who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. (Jude 1:5)

Before I continue, a note on this text. Manuscripts of the epistle of Jude differ on this verse. Some replace "Jesus" with "the Lord." Therefore, this should either be taken as the words of God, or as a later Christian's understanding of the Scripture as accurately rendered. In any case, the theology that it teaches is certainly true.

Because Jesus is the Passover, it is by his glory that the Israelites were able to travel to Sinai by both day and night, and he was present as the voice of God who spoke to Moses from the cloud.

Now every Passover that has succeeded the first, including the church's regular celebration of the eucharist, is a memorial of the first Passover, and it is meant to remind us of those events. However, just as the children of Israel are not once again delivered from Egypt at every Passover, so too does Christ not literally lead them out of Egypt. Therefore, when Christ at the Passover with his disciples, this was meant to act as a symbolism of the true Passover, which is salvation in Jesus Christ.

Ah symbolism! Thank you for the explanations, arunma. I appreciate it. I won't back online until early next week, but I'm sure I'll have some interesting discussions to read when I do! Take care

The Dipped Bread

Member

Member

היום כולם יודעים - הרב כהנא צדק

Eu amo anchova

Flaming Calvinist

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!

Flaming Calvinist

היום כולם יודעים - הרב כהנא צדק

Member

fanatically balanced/radically compassionate

Eu amo anchova

fanatically balanced/radically compassionate

Eu amo anchova

Eu amo anchova

Eu amo anchova

Senior Member

Flaming Calvinist

היום כולם יודעים - הרב כהנא צדק

Flaming Calvinist

היום כולם יודעים - הרב כהנא צדק

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency