Debate-For MJ's Only Wine and Singing the proof that the Last Supper was the Passover

[AbbaLove]

I'm not sure why the flippant attitude but I will answer your questions even though you chose to ignore what I repeated about the night of Passover singing the Hallel.

I didn't ignore what you posted. What you may currently believe is proof is really just your opinion ... which you have every right to express . Likewise, others can't disprove what you chose to believe. So what's accomplished if more tend to disagree with you than tend to agree with you?

If it seemed flippant to you it's because no matter what other MJs post (e.g. "That is how false teachings arise") you may still hold to your current [Hallel] belief. Thus, my reason for saying that to continue this thread beyond sunset today likely won't resolve your issue in your favor. Instead you may even decide to reconsider that the Lord's last meal ("Last Supper") was more of a "pre-seder" to a New Covenant that Yeshua was looking forward to sharing with His Disciples (Luke 22:14-16). That said, these verses do support your belief that the "Last Supper" had some relevance to a "Passover Meal".

Again, Not understanding what you are trying to say. What 'will' are you talking about?

The same 'will' that you are talking about in your 3. in (#15) above ... "This could have been a matter of opinion or it could have been politically induced as the powers that be in the temple at that time were corrupt." In other words the 'will' of the Pharisees and Sadducees often prevailed even going so far as when Pontius Pilate said, "I find no basis for a charge against this man."

Are you suggesting that we need to stop talking about the greatest event that ever took place on earth?

The greatest event was G-d sacrificing His Only Son (the Lamb of G-d) as an atonement for the sins of Israel and mankind by His shed blood (Isaiah 53). Determining what hymn was sung at the "Last Supper" won't be resolved so to continue this thread beyond sunset today accomplishes WHAT? Time will tell.

I will strongly have to agree to disagree with that and if this subject is worn out for you I would suggest not continuing to post to it and find something less boring for you to share your opinion on.

And you thought i was flippant. Your attitude just goes to show that you don't want to accept the fact that the "Last Supper" was a 'pre-seder' to a New Covenant that would only be confirmed through the shed blood of Yeshua and His Resurrection on the first day of the week. That is the Greatest Event in human history.

Suggesting that we all agree with your current belief is not "flippant" but rather showing respect for your current belief as no one can prove that the hymn Yeshua and His Disciples sang wasn't the Hallel. So, what's to be accomplished other than you maintaining your belief and others suggesting ... "That is how false teachings arise"

You apparently choose to take out your frustration on me ... as so far no other MJ agrees with your current belief. If it helped (#15) relieve some of your frustration so be it. If no one else is willing to give you the benefit of doubt and agree with you before sunset i will agree with your belief just before sunset today that the hymn they sang was the Hallel, and that they drank at least 1 cup of wine and possibly more.

 

[gadar perets]

​

I know we've been over this before, but apparently Lulav believes Luke 22:14-16 is a reliable translation by which she believes the "Last Supper" has some assemblance to a Passover Seder during the 2nd Temple period. Do you really discount that as a real possibility as well as singing part of the Hallel, if not all of Psalms 113-118?

If I didn't "really discount" it, I wouldn't oppose it. I would question it. We cannot isolate that passage from the rest of Scripture or we will end up with the wrong conclusion.

I know YHWH did not sacrifice the true Passover Lamb (Yeshua) at the wrong time. Yeshua's death at 3:00 pm on Abib 14 fulfills Scripture perfectly. So, if he ate a Passover lamb at the "Lord's Supper" at the beginning of Abib 14, then the lamb they ate was killed at the wrong time making it a bogus/unlawful sacrifice. Had Yeshua eaten from such a bogus sacrifice, he would have sinned. If he ate a correctly sacrificed lamb that evening, then his death was at the wrong time. The harmony lies in the belief that Yeshua died at the correct time and that he was NOT celebrating Passover the night before.

 

[Meowzltov]

In the Gospel of John, Jesus was arrested during the day of preparation as Jewish days began at sunset and ended the following sunset.

Two possibilities.
1. John contradicts the other gospels
2. It is talking about preparation for the weekly Shabbat.

 

[Lulav]

The original text reads:
"With you I am holding the Passover with my disciples."

Even so, Christ was arrested and hanged before the Passover began.

It doesn't matter if Yeshua (who would know when the new moon was if no one else) and his disciples were keeping a different calendar. They could still have gone to the temple with a lamb and slaughtered it there and brought it back to prepare. The priests as some wrongly understand did not slaughter the lambs, they only assisted, their job was to collect the blood, the person the lamb belonged to did the slaughtering, just as on the first Passover. Then none of it was left in the Temple but it's blood.

 

[Lulav]

Wine and song is proof of what? Lol

On topic is posting about wine and song. Lol. OK!

I'm going to bail out of this one. Have a nice day!

Did you not read the title in full?

Wine and Singing the proof that the Last Supper was the Passover

 

[Lulav]

The "Passover" at that time was also the entire Feast of Unleavened Bread in keeping with Ezekiel 45:21;

Of course it was, well known, but THE Passover is the Lamb. That is what took the most preparation.

You neglected to quote Luke 22:7-8;

Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed. And he sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare us the passover, that we may eat.

No I didn't, I was using Matthew and Mark because they speak of the Hymn which this thread is centered on.

Verse 7 means that Abib 14 had begun. Why would they begin preparing for Passover after the sun had set? To prepare the Passover, if that were the Passover meal, would mean to bring the lamb to the priests, have it killed, bleed it, clean it, carry it back to the room that they still needed to get, cook it for hours after they kindled a fire and carve it up. Not to mention the lines of people waiting to have their lambs killed after sunset (thousands of lambs)! Even if they did it by the Essene calendar and there were no lines to wait on, you don't wait until the sun sets to begin to prepare a Passover lamb. That is why YHWH commanded it to be killed hours before the sunset beginning Abib 15.

I will address your other rebuttals but would like to get back to the parts about the hymn.

As I previously stated the priests did not kill the Passover lambs, that was the duty of the owner of the lambs. The Priests captured the blood as they were slain and in an assembly line not unlike that of a Fire brigade the bowls that were used to catch the blood were passed down to the priest nearest the altar where he dashed the blood as per Torah. These lambs were not killed after sunset as you said, but in the end of the 14th. You contradict yourself in that last statement so I won't continue rebutting it.

The Passover meal was a family gathering in which the women and children also participated. When Yeshua attended the Passover as a boy of twelve he accompanied his family (Luke 2:41,42). Yet, in Yeshua’s last supper the women and children are conspicuously absent.

Yes, that is Tradition, not Torah. Yeshua was a Rabbi, a Great one, and he surely had s'mikhah, it was not uncommon for Rabbi's that were of this standing (to be able to make new interpretations and share with their students) to share the Passover Seder with their students if they had something new to teach. I'd say it is evident he had something new to teach, it's all through out what we read what he said and did on that night.

You are building a doctrinal belief based on reading the Hallel into the text. That is how false teachings arise.

I'm not reading it in there it is part of the ancient practice. Please don't say you are accusing me of false teachings?

. Lulav says it was the Hallel because it was Passover. So I showed her it was not Passover which then discredits reading the Hallel into Matthew 26:30.

And the premise of this thread is that it was Passover based on different calendars.

The Greek word for "hymn" in Matthew 26:30 is "humneo". You are assuming it refers to a psalm, in particular the Hallel. Then you make a leap to declare it was Passover because the Jews only sang the Hallel on that one night.

No assumption needed, that is what was sung at that time of year. No leap either. It sounds like convicting evidence to me.

If there's only one time this 'hymn' or the Hallel is sung at night and we've established it was night and the only time that it is sung at night shows it was Passover as stated in the gospel.

So, while you are absolutely correct that the Hallel was not sung on other nights and that it was sung on Passover, you have erred by assuming the "hymn" was the Hallel and that the night they sung it was Passover.

"That is how false teachings arise."

"So I showed her it was not Passover which then discredits reading the Hallel into Matthew 26:30"

"You are assuming it refers to a psalm, in particular the Hallel"

"you have erred by assuming the "hymn" was the Hallel"

Well after these constant accusations that I am assuming it refers to a Psalm (which I was not, the Hallel for those who know it is all about Salvation and it included Psalms 113-118)erring and teaching false doctrines I did some searching and found that I am not the only one, far from it, that has come to this conclusion.
There are many but I'll just quote the one that is available to all and most widely known.

The Complete Jewish Bible

30 After singing the Hallel, they went out to the Mount of Olives. 31 Yeshua then said to them, “Tonight you will all lose faith in me, as the Tanakh says, ‘I will strike the shepherd dead, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered.’​

That's from Matthew 26 and here's from Mark 14 which is very similar.

26 After singing the Hallel, they went out to the Mount of Olives. 27 Yeshua said to them, “You will all lose faith in me, for the Tanakh says,​

‘I will strike the shepherd dead,
and the sheep will be scattered.’​

Seems to me that a Jewish interpretation says it was the Hallel.


NOTE: for those debating this topic of the 'hymn' being the Hallel, please take time to read it in full. If you kept the Passover last Shabbat you should have recited it then, but if not, give it a read, it is praise for G-d for his Salvation in Egypt and was very apropos to sing at Passover.

Read it for yourself Ps 113-118 or listen to it here.

 

[Lulav]

If I didn't "really discount" it, I wouldn't oppose it. I would question it. We cannot isolate that passage from the rest of Scripture or we will end up with the wrong conclusion.

I know YHWH did not sacrifice the true Passover Lamb (Yeshua) at the wrong time. Yeshua's death at 3:00 pm on Abib 14 fulfills Scripture perfectly. So, if he ate a Passover lamb at the "Lord's Supper" at the beginning of Abib 14, then the lamb they ate was killed at the wrong time making it a bogus/unlawful sacrifice. Had Yeshua eaten from such a bogus sacrifice, he would have sinned. If he ate a correctly sacrificed lamb that evening, then his death was at the wrong time. The harmony lies in the belief that Yeshua died at the correct time and that he was NOT celebrating Passover the night before.

I'd have to disagree with this. Many fail to neglect that Israel was given certain things to look for in nature to know when the Year started.

Firstly Yeshua did not sin and one was not right and the other wrong.

'This month shall be unto you the beginning of months: it shall be the first month of the year to you.'​

In ancient times Rosh Chodesh was declared by the beit din (Jewish court) only after two credible witnesses would testify that they had seen the new moon. The Jewish calendar is based on the lunar cycle. When the Sanhedrin was convened, the months were determined by witnesses who testified that they saw the crescent new-moon.

Since it was determined by humans observing nature the difference of 24 hours would not mean one was sinning and the other not.

Also while Yeshua kept the Passover as he said he wanted to in Luke 22

14 When the hour had come, Jesus reclined at the table with His apostles. 15 And He said to them, “I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before My suffering.
16 For I tell you that I will not eat it again until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.”…

The only way this could have been accomplished is that he was following the observation of the exiled Zadok priesthood beit din and going by their determination when that Aviv started using the moon and the barley as markers. He eats it with his disciples, then as he said in verse 16, he would not eat it again until it is fulfilled speaks of his time on the cross being the sacrificed lamb. At that time he also drinks of the cup of judgement which we will talk about when I post about the wine.

 

[gadar perets]

These lambs were not killed after sunset as you said, but in the end of the 14th. You contradict yourself in that last statement so I won't continue rebutting it.

I did not mean to imply the lambs were normally killed after sunset. I simply meant the lines were so long that the sacrificing lasted until night as in Josiah's day.

Yes, that is Tradition, not Torah. Yeshua was a Rabbi, a Great one, and he surely had s'mikhah, it was not uncommon for Rabbi's that were of this standing (to be able to make new interpretations and share with their students) to share the Passover Seder with their students if they had something new to teach. I'd say it is evident he had something new to teach, it's all through out what we read what he said and did on that night.

If so, what happened to the disciples' families that year? Did they not keep Passover? Did they have to kill their own lamb and celebrate by themselves? Did they have another Passover the next night with their husbands?

I'm not reading it in there it is part of the ancient practice. Please don't say you are accusing me of false teachings?

I simply said false teachings start by reading things into the text. That is a fact. There is no doubt that you are reading the Hallel into the text since the text does NOT use the word "Hallel". You are assuming the "hymn" was the Hallel.

And the premise of this thread is that it was Passover based on different calendars.

Please cite your historical evidence that a different calendar was used that year or is that premise an assumption as well?

If there's only one time this 'hymn' or the Hallel is sung at night and we've established it was night and the only time that it is sung at night shows it was Passover as stated in the gospel.

How do we know the Jews did not sing it on the following night when they celebrated Passover? The Hallel is not "an hymn", but several Psalms.

The Complete Jewish Bible

30 After singing the Hallel, they went out to the Mount of Olives. 31 Yeshua then said to them, “Tonight you will all lose faith in me, as the Tanakh says, ‘I will strike the shepherd dead, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered.’

That's from Matthew 26 and here's from Mark 14 which is very similar.

26 After singing the Hallel, they went out to the Mount of Olives. 27 Yeshua said to them, “You will all lose faith in me, for the Tanakh says,

‘I will strike the shepherd dead,
and the sheep will be scattered.’

Seems to me that a Jewish interpretation says it was the Hallel.

Yes, it does. The author makes the same mistake you are by reading the Hallel into the text. I never use this version because it is full of mistakes like this. In fact, it is not a translation of the Greek text, but a paraphrase. The author makes it say whatever he wants it to say.

 

[gadar perets]

Also while Yeshua kept the Passover as he said he wanted to in Luke 22

14 When the hour had come, Jesus reclined at the table with His apostles. 15 And He said to them, “I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before My suffering.
16 For I tell you that I will not eat it again until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.”…

It was Yeshua's "desire" to eat with them, but he knew he would not be able to because he would die before he could. He ate it the previous year, but would not eat it again until the Kingdom comes.

The only way this could have been accomplished is that he was following the observation of the exiled Zadok priesthood beit din and going by their determination when that Aviv started using the moon and the barley as markers. He eats it with his disciples, then as he said in verse 16, he would not eat it again until it is fulfilled speaks of his time on the cross being the sacrificed lamb. At that time he also drinks of the cup of judgement which we will talk about when I post about the wine.

Please cite your historical evidence concerning the calendar the Zadok priesthood used that year.

 

[gadar perets]

Lulav,

Isn't the calendar the Zadok priesthood used the Enoch solar calendar? If so, is that the calendar you are using to keep Feasts today? If not, why not?

 

[AbbaLove]

I did not mean to imply the lambs were normally killed after sunset. I simply meant the lines were so long that the sacrificing lasted until night as in Josiah's day.

How do we know the Jews did not sing it on the following night when they celebrated Passover? The Hallel is not "an hymn", but several Psalms.

I never use this version because it is full of mistakes like this. In fact, it is not a translation of the Greek text, but a paraphrase. The author makes it say whatever he wants it to say.

You do realize you won't be able to convince Lulav that the hymn is not the Hallel or disprove her belief that there weren't 4 cups of wine at the "Last Supper". She is using the Hallel hymn and 4 cups of wine to qualify the "Last Supper" as a Passover Seder.

This thread is not about who's calendar (sighting of the new moon) is right and whose is suspect. It's not even about leavened or unleavened (at this point) at the "Last Supper". Lulav is taking the tact that the Hallei hymn and 4 cups of wine are proof enough that the "Last Supper" was a Passover Seder and as such then it had to be matzah and not bread. Maybe, you should agree to disagree even if the "Last Supper" was in fact a pre-Seder to a New Covenant.

Lulav,

Isn't the calendar the Zadok priesthood used the Enoch solar calendar? If so, is that the calendar you are using to keep Feasts today? If not, why not?

​

Again, Lulav's contention >>> the thread is about the Hallel hymn and 4 cups of wine as proof it was the "Last Supper" not whose new moon calendar is suspect.

 

[gadar perets]

​

You do realize you won't be able to convince Lulav that the hymn is not the Hallel or disprove her belief that there weren't 4 cups of wine at the "Last Supper". She is using the Hallel hymn and 4 cups of wine to qualify the "Last Supper" as a Passover Seder.

This thread is not about who's calendar (sighting of the new moon) is right and whose is suspect. It's not even about leavened or unleavened (at this point) at the "Last Supper". Lulav is taking the tact that the Hallei hymn and 4 cups of wine are proof enough that the "Last Supper" was a Passover Seder and as such then it had to be matzah and not bread. Maybe, you should agree to disagree even if the "Last Supper" was in fact a pre-Seder to a New Covenant.

​

Again, Lulav's contention >>> the thread is about the Hallel hymn and 4 cups of wine as proof it was the "Last Supper" not whose new moon calendar is suspect.

I understand what she is doing. However, the things she brings up that I am addressing have a direct bearing on the OP. For example, her premise that Yeshua used a different calendar allows for him to be keeping Passover a day earlier than the nation as a whole and therefore, allows him to be singing the Hallel. Everything she is believing is based on assumptions and reading into the text. We haven't even touched on the wine yet, but to read four cups of wine into the Gospels is pure assumption.

 

[AbbaLove]

Wine and Singing the proof that the Last Supper was the Passover

Why didn't you just state what you believe ... "Four Cups of Wine, Singing the Hallel and Matzah proof that the Last Supper was the Passover." One wonders if you have some doubt whether it was matzah or bread? Perhaps the reason you didn't include "Matzah" in your introductory sentence is for two reasons:

(1) The Greek translation is bread not matzah that Yeshua and His Disciples ate.
(2) If i would have posted that interview video with Alex Tennent you wouldn't have justification to delete it.​

So "Wine and Singing" is proof that they ate Unleavened Bread (Matzah), and therefore proof the "Last Supper" was a Passover Seder.

I understand what she is doing. However, the things she brings up that I am addressing have a direct bearing on the OP. For example, her premise that Yeshua used a different calendar allows for Him to be keeping Passover a day earlier than the nation as a whole and therefore, allows Him to be singing the Hallel.

Lulav's parameter (conditions of this debate) can only debate "Wine and Singing". What kind of strategy will Lulav allow you to invoke so as to possibly disprove her belief when it comes down to her understanding versus your understanding?

Everything she is believing is based on assumptions and reading into the text. We haven't even touched on the wine yet, but to read four cups of wine into the Gospels is pure assumption.

Maybe, Lulav won't even allow you to invoke a strategy to disprove her belief when it comes down to Lulav's understanding versus your understanding.

Does this debate thread kind of remind you of a difference of understanding between a Messianic husband and a Messianic wife in which the wife is always right because of her imposed conditions?

 

[AbbaLove]

Everything she is believing is based on assumptions and reading into the text. We haven't even touched on the wine yet, but to read four cups of wine into the Gospels is pure assumption.

If i'm following Lulav's tact she will maintain that because of: (1) it lends credence to (2), and therefore (3) is a foregone conclusion.

(1) No one can disprove Yeshua and His Disciples weren't singing the Hallel (Psalms).
(2) No one can disprove Yeshua and His Disciples didn't partake in four cups of wine.
(3) Therefore, the foregone conclusion is that Yeshua gave Judas matzah not bread.
​

Is it really that important that you need to win this debate when Lulav has imposed restrictions (see #25), and is going to believe what she wants to believe no matter what evidence to the contrary you may present?

 

[Lulav]

If so, what happened to the disciples' families that year? Did they not keep Passover? Did they have to kill their own lamb and celebrate by themselves? Did they have another Passover the next night with their husbands?

Most were probably not married. We know that Peter was and as in Exodus it did not have to be just a family that shared but neighbors could as well. I'm not going to get into the details of how it was done as this isn't pertinent to the topic and is basically a strawman.

I simply said false teachings start by reading things into the text. That is a fact. There is no doubt that you are reading the Hallel into the text since the text does NOT use the word "Hallel". You are assuming the "hymn" was the Hallel.

The Hallel is a specific group of songs (psalms) sung at specific occasions in the Jewish life.

How do we know the Jews did not sing it on the following night when they celebrated Passover? The Hallel is not "an hymn", but several Psalms.

Those on a different calendar probably did sing it the following night, which would be appropriate as Yeshua would have then died for them thus completing their Salvation.

Yes, it does. The author makes the same mistake you are by reading the Hallel into the text. I never use this version because it is full of mistakes like this. In fact, it is not a translation of the Greek text, but a paraphrase. The author makes it say whatever he wants it to say.

You are welcome to not use it, I was just using it as an example that most have heard of, but David Stern isn't the first Jew to read the gospels and acknowledge that the singing was of the Hallel.

There are many examples out there, if you don't agree, that's fine but that doesn't mean it's not true.

 

[Lulav]

It was Yeshua's "desire" to eat with them, but he knew he would not be able to because he would die before he could. He ate it the previous year, but would not eat it again until the Kingdom comes.

These passages strongly contradict that.

Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover? Matthew 26:17

26:18 I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples.

19: and they made ready the passover.

Mark 14:14 And wheresoever he shall go in, say ye to the goodman of the house, The Master saith, Where is the guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover with my disciples?

Luke 22:7-8
Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed.
And he sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare us the passover,
that we may eat.

 

[Lulav]

​

I didn't ignore what you posted. What you may currently believe is proof is really just your opinion ... which you have every right to express . Likewise, others can't disprove what you chose to believe. So what's accomplished if more tend to disagree with you than tend to agree with you?

I'm not asking anyone to 'agree' with me, this was to be a discussion on proofs that the Last supper was a Passover meal. But if you are going to try and dispute everything I say and make it about me only thinking this, then it seems to be more personal than on topic which btw is against the rules.

If it seemed flippant to you it's because no matter what other MJs post (e.g. "That is how false teachings arise") you may still hold to your current [Hallel] belief. Thus, my reason for saying that to continue this thread beyond sunset today likely won't resolve your issue in your favor. Instead you may even decide to reconsider that the Lord's last meal ("Last Supper") was more of a "pre-seder" to a New Covenant that Yeshua was looking forward to sharing with His Disciples (Luke 22:14-16). That said, these verses do support your belief that the "Last Supper" had some relevance to a "Passover Meal".

Accusations that I am presenting false teachings is not about what this debate is about, nor again is it in line with the rules here. I am not asking everyone to agree, but it seems everyone wants to disagree if not for the only reason that I am presenting it.

I wonder then why all those against this do not want to believe it wasn't a Passover meal? And why they can't believe there were at least two in Jerusalem that year?

There's no issue to resolve so time doesn't play any part in this discussion that is why I asked and said what I did.

​

The same 'will' that you are talking about in your 3. in (#15) above ... "This could have been a matter of opinion or it could have been politically induced as the powers that be in the temple at that time were corrupt." In other words the 'will' of the Pharisees and Sadducees often prevailed even going so far as when Pontius Pilate said, "I find no basis for a charge against this man."

Thus why I said 'politically induced'.

​

The greatest event was G-d sacrificing His Only Son (the Lamb of G-d) as an atonement for the sins of Israel and mankind by His shed blood (Isaiah 53). Determining what hymn was sung at the "Last Supper" won't be resolved so to continue this thread beyond sunset today accomplishes WHAT? Time will tell.

I disagree, there were thousands of Jews crucified in that time period, but only ONE came back from the dead.

As far as resolving this, that is what research and discussion is for.

What will it accomplish? How about the Truth about what happened back then, is it as the Gentiles have interpreted without Jewish understanding of the time period and workings of the Hebrews/Israelites for thousands of years or was it something much more Jewish?

​

And you thought i was flippant. Your attitude just goes to show that you don't want to accept the fact that the "Last Supper" was a 'pre-seder' to a New Covenant that would only be confirmed through the shed blood of Yeshua and His Resurrection on the first day of the week. That is the Greatest Event in human history.

So you are saying it is 'fact' even though I've presented evidence against that. Not only that but the scriptures I've posted where Yeshua actually says he will eat the Passover with his disciples, I guess we should throw that out as well?

I see you changed your mind about what was the greatest event, so now we agree, on something at least.

Suggesting that we all agree with your current belief is not "flippant" but rather showing respect for your current belief as no one can prove that the hymn Yeshua and His Disciples sang wasn't the Hallel. So, what's to be accomplished other than you maintaining your belief and others suggesting ... "That is how false teachings arise"

Please copy where I suggested that all agree with me, I never did any such thing and that is a false accusation.

You apparently choose to take out your frustration on me ... as so far no other MJ agrees with your current belief. If it helped (#15) relieve some of your frustration so be it. If no one else is willing to give you the benefit of doubt and agree with you before sunset i will agree with your belief just before sunset today that the hymn they sang was the Hallel, and that they drank at least 1 cup of wine and possibly more.

I haven't gotten to the wine part yet and since this has received so much response I think I'll save that for a Part 2 thread.

However I'd like to set the record straight.

1. I am not trying to make anyone think like I do but an presenting things I believe show it was what was a Passover meal at the time. Why no one here (a very small faction) wants to believe it was the Hallel is beyond my understanding. In GT here at CF I could understand but not here.

2. I am not frustrated nor taking anything out on anyone. However I see my screen name repeatedly mentioned in many of the posts here and would just like to remind those posting that you are to address the post and not the poster otherwise it is considered flaming.

3. It does not matter to me if anyone believes what I believe by sunset (already past now) but this subject should not be dropped.

 

[pat34lee]

That is no proof. There would be wine, a meal as well as hymns sung at a Seudah also. Also, if it were an actual Pesakh meal "seder", would they have gone out at night afterwards (I don't know if that was the tradition then or not)?????

I've brought that up before. It is against the scripture
to leave the house before morning on Passover.
Deuteronomy 16:7

 

[pat34lee]

The Hallel is a specific group of songs (psalms) sung at specific occasions in the Jewish life.

You are welcome to no use it, I was just using it as an example that most have heard of, but David Stern isn't the first Jew to read the gospels and acknowledge that the singing was of the Hallel.

The Hallel is practiced now, as are other traditions.
Nothing says Yeshua practiced any of them, IF they
were even in vogue at that time, which is doubtful.

David Stern has a habit of writing his opinion into
the scriptures he 'translates'.

 

[pat34lee]

For every 'this could prove the last supper was a seder"
there are more saying it's impossible.

In the other thread, I didn't see any try to answer
why the gospels never mention unleavened bread
when talking about the last supper, or the prophecy
in Psalms 41:9 which specified lechem.