Institution of the Lord’s Supper (Luke 22:1-20)

At this time of year in Jerusalem, two of the seven annual feasts of Israel took place. The Passover was followed by the week-long feast of unleavened bread and since the Passover was followed immediately by the other feast it is not surprising that they became identified with one another, as Luke does in verse 1.

Plot (vv. 1-6)

We can imagine that there would be a great diversity of religious reaction at such a time. Some would gather to thank God for his amazing deliverance of his people at the Exodus and they would also recall how they had been delivered by him from the exile in Babylon. Such would probably wonder if he would come and rescue them from their current bondage to the Roman empire. Others would see it as a time of meeting up with relatives because every male Jew was meant to attend the Passover.

Luke also informs us of what one group of individuals were planning. The religious leaders were eager to have Jesus put to death, but they sensed that the crowd of pilgrims in the city would object to such an action being done in public. What those leaders wanted was information about when they could find him away from the crowds, arrest him, and then dispose of him. Imagine their amazement when one of the twelve closest disciples of Jesus volunteered to provide it.

Judas was the one who came to the leaders and offered to betray Jesus. We are told that Satan entered into him, took control of him in some way. Exactly how this happened is not revealed. John tells us that after people had stopped following Jesus after the feeding of the five thousand, he asked the twelve if they also would go away from him. Although Peter affirmed that they would adhere to Jesus, he told them that one of them was a devil. So Jesus knew about the wickedness of Judas although Peter and the others had not realised it. What this tells us is that Satan did not realise that his defeat by Jesus would occur while he was hanging on the cross, otherwise he would not have tried to have Jesus executed. So the plot to get rid of Jesus was gathering momentum.

Preparation (vv. 7-13)

The Passover could only be held in Jerusalem. One reason was that the Passover Lamb was slain at the temple. So Jesus and his disciples could not have held the Passover in Capernaum or even in Bethany which was only a Sabbath day’s journey from the city. Another aspect of the Passover was that it was a family meal, so that would raise the question as to whom Jesus would eat the Passover with. We know from elsewhere in the gospels that his mother was in Jerusalem at that time as was the mother of James and John. Maybe their families were with them as well. Nevertheless, Jesus chose not to have the Passover with his family but with his disciples. Of course, in another and a profound sense they were his family, and this relationship is one of the important aspects of the new meal that he was going to inaugurate.

An obvious feature of the meal that Jesus arranged was the secrecy about where they would hold it. He did not tell the address to Peter and John when he sent them to prepare the Passover. Probably, Jesus was hiding the location from Judas because a private meeting in a house would have been the kind of gathering that could have been used by Judas to betray him to the religious rulers. So he gave to Peter and John an unusual way of finding the address of the home that would be used – they would see a man carrying a jar of water and they were to follow him. In this we have an example of the control of events and their timing that Jesus possessed.

The task of preparation involved several activities such as purchasing various items and obtaining the lamb from the temple. Another activity was the removal of leaven from the room in which they would gather. The search for any leaven had to be done in a careful manner. This ritual was a reminder of the pervasiveness of sin and was intended to remind the participants that their involvement in the feast was more than a celebration of an historical event, it was also a spiritual occasion when they met to worship the God of salvation who had provided a way by which their sins could be dealt with.

There are New Testament references that use the preparation for the Passover in a spiritual way. In 1 Corinthians 11:28, Paul reminds the believers in Corinth of their responsibility to examine themselves before participating in the Lord’s Supper: ‘Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup.’ Given that at that time, every service included the Lord’s Supper we can see that self-examination should take place before every Christian worship service. In the Passover, no leaven was allowed to be present; and no Christian should be content with the presence of unconfessed sin in his life. He needs to be pardoned and cleansed from the guilt and defiling effects of sin.

Promise (vv. 14-18)

The host at the Passover would usually address those gathered for the feast in his home. Jesus addresses the ones gathered with him and his words highlight how he felt, what he was about to experience, and what he knew about his future. First, he told the disciples that he ‘earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer’ (v. 16). His feelings were strongly moved, and not merely because it was the last time that they would sit together at it. Rather they were the objects of his affection, a sample of the ones that he had come to die for.

We can see from Luke’s account that Jesus may have used two different cups. If he used two cups, it means that Matthew and Mark combine what he said about the first cup with what he said about the second cup. It is possible that he had taken the cup, then spoke about the bread, and then resumed speaking about the cup; and if that is what happened, then he would have used one cup.

Four cups were used at the Passover, and it has been suggested that Jesus took the fourth cup and gave thanks, although we are not told what he said in his thanksgiving. Given that before and after he gave thanks he spoke about the future celebration in the kingdom of God, maybe he mentioned that wonderful gathering. Although we are not told what he said in his prayer to God, we are told that he was speaking to the disciples about that great future meeting with all his redeemed. And it is appropriate for us to think of it when we gather at the Lord’s Supper.

It is important for us to note the certainty with which Jesus spoke on this occasion. Although he knew that he was going to die an awful death within the next twenty-four hours, he also knew that there was an eternity of celebration ahead in which he and his people would rejoice together. The certainty includes physical participation even among the glorified.

Participation (vv. 15-20)

Luke tells his readers that Jesus then took some bread, gave thanks for it, broke it and gave it to the disciples. Again we are not told what he said in his thanksgiving nor are we told how he broke it – we don’t know if he broke each piece for each disciple or if he broke the bread into two and handed one half to those on one side of the table and one half to those on the other side. But we are told his interpretation of what he had done.

The phrase ‘this is my body’ has been interpreted in different ways. The Roman Catholic idea of transubstantiation regards the word ‘is’ as meaning ‘becomes’. But the meaning is ‘represents’ rather than ‘becomes’. Probably since the bread had been broken, we should see it as highlighting his body broken on the cross. His suffering was voluntary on their behalf.

They may not have realised at the moment he said those words, but he meant that he was going to suffer instead of them having to suffer. He was about to take their place, be their substitute, to fulfil what Isaiah had predicted about the Messiah being bruised for our iniquities, with his face marred more than any other person had ever been. In his body, he would suffer at the hand of God and pay the penalty for the sins of his people.

The Saviour also instructed them to remember him in this particular way by gathering together and visibly partaking of this meal. He makes very clear that it has to be a communal remembrance even as the Passover was a communal meal. No longer were they to sit at a communal meal that recalled the benefits of the Exodus that made them a special nation; instead they were to sit at a new communal meal that recalled the sacrifice that brought to them the benefits of salvation.

Then the Saviour took a cup (maybe the one that had been the fourth cup of the Passover) and spoke about the significance of what was illustrated by the wine within it. Luke makes clear that Jesus waited until they had eaten the bread before telling them to take the cup, so we should not take them together. The wine depicts the blood that confirms the new covenant.

The new covenant had been promised by God through Jeremiah. In that prediction, God revealed several benefits that would come to his people. First, he would write his law on their hearts, which means that they would love his law and experience genuine sanctification; second, they would all be his people, unlike the Israelites who forsook God despite being in a covenant with him; third, they would all know him in a real, personal way unlike the Israelites for whom knowledge of God was often nominal; and fourth, all their sins would be forgiven and forgotten by him (Jer. 31:33-34).

No doubt, many Israelites since Jeremiah had made the prediction had wondered when it would be fulfilled. Now, here was Jesus saying that the days of the new covenant were about to begin, that his death would bring it about. He was also indicating that unlike the sacrifices that accompanied the old covenant his sacrifice would never be repeated.