From: Over 50 Interpreters Explain the Gospel of
Mark Return to
Home
By
Roland H. Worth, Jr. © 2013
All reproduction of
text in paper, electronic, or computer
form both permitted and encouraged so long as
authorial
and compiler credit is given and the text is
not altered.
CHAPTER 14A:
14:1-14:31
14:1 Translations
WEB: It was
now two days before the feast of the Passover and the unleavened bread, and the
chief priests and the scribes sought how they might seize him by deception, and
kill him.
Young’s: And the passover and the
unleavened food were after two days, and the chief priests and the scribes were
seeking how, by guile, having taken hold of him, they might kill him;
Conte (RC): Now the
feast of Passover and of Unleavened Bread was two days away. And the leaders of
the priests, and the scribes, were seeking a means by which they might
deceitfully seize him and kill him.
14:1 After two days. As the Passover fell this year on
Thursday, the conspiracy was made on Tuesday.
[44]
was the feast of the Passover and of Unleavened
Bread. Two names for the same thing, though slightly
differing in their representation of it.
The Passover was celebrated on a single day, and the seven days that
followed were called "the days of unleavened bread," from the
prohibition of leaven that continued through them (Exodus
and the chief priests and the scribes. The Pharisees were prominent as opposers all through the ministry, but at the end, when the
Passion approached, the chief priests became the leaders of opposition. [23]
sought how they might take Him by craft
[trickery, NKJV]. Mark here goes less into detail than
Matthew. He simply states the fact that
it was now two days to the Passover, while Matthew represents Jesus as
reminding His disciples of this fact, and telling them that then He would be
crucified. Mark also mentions the bare
fact that “the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might take Him by
craft, and put Him to death;” while Matthew describes a formal assemblage for
this consultation at the
by craft [trickery, NKJV]. Not openly, but secretly and treacherously. [35]
There was a great crowd
at the Passover at
and put Him to
death. They were gambling for the highest possible stakes—an innocent man’s
life. There were far too many people who
thought well of Him and would likely react vehemently if they attempted to grab
Him when the crowds were present. [rw]
For a lengthy
historical note on the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread and how it
was observed, consult the extract at the end of this chapter from Alfred Edersheim, The Temple
(1874).
14:2 Translations
WEB: For they
said, "Not during the feast, because there might be a riot of the
people."
Young’s: and they said, 'Not in the feast, lest there shall be a
tumult of the people.'
Conte (RC): But they
said, "Not on the feast day, lest perhaps there may be a tumult among the
people."
14:2 But they said, Not on the feast day. The plans of the Sanhedrin were apparently
changed by the offer of Judas. With his
aid, they were able to do what they had thought to be impossible, viz., to
arrest Jesus during the feast without causing a great disturbance among the
people. [35]
lest there be an uproar of the people. The
feast brought a great multitude of Jews to Jerusalem, amongst whom would be
many who had received bodily or spiritual benefits from Christ, and who
therefore, at least worshipped Him as a Prophet; and the rulers of the people
feared lest these should rise in His defence. [39]
Most of Christ's
followers were Galileans, and the Galileans were ALL considered bold and
quarrelsome. [11]
14:3 Translations
WEB: While he
was at
Young’s: And he,
being in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper, at his reclining (at meat),
there came a woman having an alabaster box of ointment, of spikenard, very
precious, and having broken the alabaster box, did pour on his head;
Conte (RC): And when he
was in Bethania, in the house of Simon the leper, and
was reclining to eat, a woman arrived having an alabaster container of
ointment, of precious spikenard. And breaking open the alabaster container, she
poured it over his head.
14:3 And being in
in the house of Simon the leper. Probably
already healed by Jesus, since otherwise he would have been unclean. He must not be confounded with the Pharisee
called Simon, at whose house in Galilee a similar anointing had taken place
long before (Luke 7:36-50). The two
occurrences are clearly distinguished in many ways. [11]
One tradition makes this
Simon the father of Lazarus; another the husband of
Martha, who served on this occasion.
Both families may have occupied the same house; or Simon may have been
the owner, and Lazarus his tenant. [11]
As He sat at meat [at the table, NKJV] there came a woman. The
woman, we learn from
Having an alabaster box. A soft limestone, resembling onyx and easily cut into various
shapes. [35]
Of ointment of spinenard. A fragrant oil. [35]
A
perfumed unguent the precise nature of which is uncertain. [44]
very
precious [costly, NKJV]. A fact that determines the standing of the family as among the
comparatively rich. [23]
and she brake the box and poured it on His head. The narrow neck of the small phial or flask. She
did not wish to hold back anything:
offered up all, gave all away. [24]
This may mean no more
than that she broke the seal of the box, so that it could be poured out. Boxes of perfumes are often sealed, or made
fast with wax, to prevent the perfume from escaping. It was not likely that she would break the
box itself when it was unnecessary; and when the unguent, being liquid, would
have been wasted, when it was very precious.
Nor from a broken box, or phial, could she easily have poured it on His
head. [42]
In depth:
Is Mark 14:3-9 the same incident narrated in Matthew 26:6-13 and John
12:1-8 [52]? "It appears to me more probable
that Matthew and Mark should have introduced this story a little out of its place; that Lazarus, if he made this
feast (which is not expressly said by John), should have made use of Simon's
house as more convenient; and that Mary should have poured this ointment on
Christ's head and body, as well as on His feet; than that, within the compass
of four days, Christ should have been twice anointed with so costly a perfume;
and that the same fault should be found with the action, and the same value set
on the ointment, and the same words used in defence
of the woman, and all this in the presence of many of the same persons; all
which improbable particulars must be admitted, if the stories be considered as
different" (Doddridge). Neither Matthew
nor Mark says that this occurred no more than two days before the Passover;
they only relate it subsequent to some transactions which took place at that
time.
14:4 Translations
WEB: But there
were some who were indignant among themselves, saying, "Why has this
ointment been wasted?
Young’s: and there
were certain much displeased within themselves, and saying, 'For what hath this
waste of the ointment been made?
Conte (RC): But there
were some who became indignant within themselves and who were saying:
"What is the reason for this waste of the ointment?
14:4 And there were some. Matthew: "His disciples;" John:
"one of His disciples, Judas."
Judas alone spoke out; the feeling was general, though no doubt
instigated by him. [11]
that had indignation. "It is indecent" (say the
within themselves.
However wrong, the sentiments were
genuine. There is no incompatibility
between being sincere and genuinely wrong at the same time. [rw]
and said, Why was waste of the ointment made? Sacrifices,
made out of love to Christ, seem wasteful to the world,
and even to the Church when under the influence of a mercantile spirit. [11]
14:5 Translations
Weymouth: For that ointment might have been sold for fifteen pounds or
more, and the money have been given to the poor." And they were
exceedingly angry with her.
WEB: For this
might have been sold for more than three hundred denarii,
and given to the poor." They grumbled against her.
Young’s: for this
could have been sold for more than three hundred denaries,
and given to the poor;' and they were murmuring at her.
Conte (RC): For this
ointment could have been sold for more than three hundred denarii
and been given to the poor." And they murmured against her.
14:5 For it might have been sold. The objection was not that the use was
luxurious and sinful, though this may possibly be implied, but that the value
of the ointment might have been better spent in relieving the suffering poor. [8]
for more than three hundred pence [denarii,
NKJV]. A year's wages of a laborer (cf.
Matthew 20:2). [44]
and have been given to the poor. It
is barely possible that some of the criticism of the woman sprang from the
disciples' exaggeration of the teaching of Jesus about almsgiving. From their point of view it did seem prodigal
to anoint with a perfume worth a year's wages of a laborer. But Jesus would never permit the spontaneous
expression of love to be
misinterpreted. Even the
obligations of charity are subject to love.
[44]
This suggestion, put
forward by Judas, was with him a mere pretext (see John 12:6). Judas may have hoped to get the money in his
possession, but not necessarily to make off with it; his intention was scarcely
ripe enough for such a scheme. [11]
And they murmured
against her [criticized her sharply, NKJV]. Peculiar to Mark. This seems to be the work of more than
Judas: too many of the disciples fell in
with his plausible but heartless [criticism].
This was a mistake of theirs similar to that about the coming of the
little children to Jesus (Mark
14:6 Translations
WEB: But Jesus
said, "Leave her alone. Why do you trouble her? She has done a good work
for me.
Young’s: And Jesus
said, 'Let her alone; why are ye giving her trouble? a
good work she wrought on me;
Conte (RC): But Jesus
said: "Permit her. What is the reason that you trouble her? She has done a
good deed for me.
14:6 And Jesus said, Let her
alone. Leave her,
suffer her to do what she is doing (compare the use of the same verb in
Let her alone; why trouble ye her?
Trouble: literally, give (or
afford) labours, cares, vexations. [3]
She hath wrought [done, NKJV] a good work on [for, NKJV] me. Christ measured the moral quality of the
act by the motive, the disciples by its seeming utility. This utilitarian age presents many
temptations to follow the lead of Judas.
[11]
You see it is very
unlike our conventional notions of what constitutes a “good work." Christ implies that anything, no matter what
are its other characteristics, that is
directed towards Him under the impulse of simple love to Him, is a “good
work;" and the converse follows
that nothing which has not that saving salt of reference to Him in it deserves
the title. [50]
14:7 Translations
Weymouth: For you always have the poor among you, and whenever you
choose you can do acts of kindness to them; but me you have not always.
WEB: For you
always have the poor with you, and whenever you want to, you can do them good;
but you will not always have me.
Young’s: for the
poor always ye have with you, and whenever ye may will ye are able to do them
good, but me ye have not always;
Conte (RC): For the
poor, you have with you always. And whenever you wish, you are able to do good to them. But you do not have me always.
14:7 For ye have the poor with you always. This
suggests that no reorganization of society will ever banish poverty from the
earth. [11]
It is only a perverted
exegesis that sees in these words of Jesus a justification of the
perpetuation of poverty. If His
teachings as to wealth were once operative, poverty would be greatly reduced,
if not destroyed. [44]
poor. In Jesus' time and in His eastern country,
poverty was not as it is with us.
Because of the warm climate and the very simple habits of the people, to
sustain life was a much easier problem.
For those willing and industrious, food and shelter were seldom
difficult to obtain. The poor whom Jesus
knew were chiefly the blind, deaf, crippled, and those in such bodily
affliction that they could not work to sustain even their simple wants. [26]
and whensoever ye will [wish, NKJV] you may do them good. Helpfulness
to the needy is no optional work: it is
one of the duties, and not less one of the privileges, in His kingdom. See how He identifies His needy brethren with
Himself in Matthew 5:40. [23]
Those who talk much about the poor
will have constant opportunities to do much for them. Let them do, as well as talk. Lightfoot conjectures that the Jews thought
there would be no poor in the days of the Messiah. [8]
But Me ye have not always. He had
given such powerful suggestions of approaching death and they allow themselves
to be diverted into a—comparatively—unimportant issue such as this! [rw]
14:8 Translations
WEB: She has
done what she could. She has anointed my body beforehand for the burying.
Young’s: what she
could she did, she anticipated to anoint my body for the embalming.
Conte (RC): But she has
done what she could. She has arrived in advance to anoint my body for burial.
14:8 She hath done what she
could. She seized the opportunity, which might not
occur again, of doing honor to her Lord by anointing Him with her very best. [39]
May not the same Lord
say of us, when we meet Him in the great day, "These were feeble
children, that were not able to do much for Me, but
they have done what they could?"
Angels can do no better, though they may do more. [38]
she is come aforehand. The word thus rendered only occurs three
times in the New Testament: here; 1
Corinthians 11:21; Galatians 6:1. It
denotes (1) to take beforehand; (2) to take before another; (3) to outstrip,
get the start of, anticipate. [3]
to anoint My body to the [for, NKJV] burying.
Such words would scarcely have been spoken if they had not represented
the purpose that was present in Mary's mind.
The time was [soon after] His entrance to
14:9 Translations
WEB: Most
certainly I tell you, wherever this Good News may be preached throughout the
whole world, that which this woman has done will also be spoken of for a
memorial of her."
Young’s: Verily I
say to you, wherever this good news may be proclaimed in the whole world, what
also this woman did shall be spoken of -- for a memorial of her.'
Conte (RC): Amen I say
to you, wherever this Gospel shall be preached throughout the entire world, the
things she has done also shall be told, in memory of her."
14:9 Verily, I say unto you. The
formula of solemn affirmation which we have already met with so repeatedly
(3:28; 6:11; 8:12; 9:1, 41; 10:15, 29; 11:23; 12:43; 13:30). [3]
whersoever this gospel shall be preached throughout the whole world.
That the gospel is to be thus preached He does not state, but assumes;
it is the woman's part that needs to be mentioned [specifically]. [23]
this also that she hath done shall be spoken of for a memorial of
her. i.e., as a means of keeping her in
remembrance. No one else ever received from the Lord such
a promise. [23]
In
depth: "Impossible" prophecy
as evidence of genuine inspiration [24]. It brings no small authority to
the predictions of the New Testament that, when many of them were made, there
appeared no likelihood that they should ever be made good. When a poor virgin, that
was betrothed to a carpenter, confidently pronounces that "all ages
should call her Blessed," what probability was there that what she said would
come to pass? And when another private
woman, then living in a village, had it foretold her that a censured action of
hers should be reported "through the whole world," to her praise,
what sober man, that were not a prophet, would venture to lose his credit by
making such a promise? And therefore,
since we see such unlikely predictions actually accomplished, it may well
convince an unbiased man, that the authors of them were really endowed with a
true prophetic spirit; and that the events, by that foretold, were not effects
of chance or policy, but of Divine Providence.
WEB: Judas
Iscariot, who was one of the twelve, went away to the chief priests,
that he might deliver him to them.
Young’s: And Judas the Iscariot, one of the twelve, went away unto
the chief priests that he might deliver him up to them,
Conte (RC): And Judas
Iscariot, one of the twelve, went away, to the leaders of the priests, in order
to betray him to them.
one of the twelve. Mentioned as an aggravation
of his guilt. [45]
went unto the chief priests to betray
Him unto them. The motives leading Judas to this act
of treachery are said (John 12:4-6) to have been dishonesty and covetousness,
but doubtless in addition were anger rising from having been, as he supposed,
duped by Jesus into believing that He was the Christ. In the future now outlined by Jesus, he saw
no preferment and no realization of what we may safely believe were his hopes
as to the messianic kingdom. Cupidity
and revenge easily become allies in any man's life. The share of Judas in the conspiracy was
simply that of piloting the servants of the Sanhedrin to some place where Jesus
might be arrested without causing a popular uprising. The arrest was the only time when such a
danger threatened the authorities. If
once Jesus were in the hands of the Romans, no popular movement would be
expected. As, however, the Romans would
not arrest Him, since He had in no way been a disturber of the peace, and as
the priests themselves dared not face openly public opinion, treachery was the
only resource left. [44]
WEB: They,
when they heard it, were glad, and promised to give him money. He sought how he
might conveniently deliver him.
Young’s: and having
heard, they were glad, and promised to give him money, and he was seeking how,
conveniently, he might deliver him up.
Conte (RC): And they,
upon hearing it, were gladdened. And they promised him that they would give him
money. And he sought an opportune means by which he might betray him.
and promised to give him money. Matthew
(26:15) tells of a bargain, in which Judas was paid thirty shekels, the
ordinary price of a slave (Exodus
Thirty pieces of silver
were equivalent to 120 denarii. At this time the ordinary wages for a day’s
labor was one denarius; so that the whole sum
amounted to about four months’ wages of a day laborer. [8]
And he sought how he
might conveniently betray Him. Opportunely, as a good
time, i.e., safely for himself and so as to secure his employers from the
popular commotion which they so much dreaded. [3]
WEB: On the
first day of unleavened bread, when they sacrificed the Passover, his disciples
asked him, "Where do you want us to go and prepare that you may eat the Passover?"
Young’s: And the first day of the unleavened food, when they were killing
the passover, his disciples say to him, 'Where
wilt thou, that, having gone, we may prepare, that thou mayest
eat the passover?'
Conte (RC): And on the
first day of Unleavened Bread, when they immolate the Passover, the disciples
said to him, "Where do you want us to go and prepare for you to eat the
Passover?
These words afford proof that Mark wrote
for Gentiles, for whom the explanation was necessary. [48]
Where wilt thou that we go and prepare. As
to the necessary preparation, (1) originally
the head of the household killed the lamb, which had been selected and kept
four days beforehand; but in later times the lamb was slain by the priests in
the temple, some member of the household presenting it there and assisting. This was a part of the service proposed by
the disciples on this occasion--to buy the lamb and attend to the
sacrificing. (2) It was necessary to attend to the roasting of
the lamb, to provide the bread, wine, bitter herbs, and sweet fruits, and to
spread the table; in this case, also, to provide a place. [23]
that thou mayes
eat the Passover?
A brotherhood like that of the
disciples would naturally, as a family, eat the Passover lamb together. [35]
They do not inquire in
what city or town. The Passover could not
be sacrificed anywhere but in
The question of the
disciples shows clearly that Jesus had not disclosed to them His plans. Perhaps His reticence was due to His
knowledge of the plot of Judas. [44]
Weymouth: So He sent
two of His disciples with instructions, saying, "Go into the city, and you
will meet a man carrying a pitcher of water: follow him,
WEB: He sent
two of his disciples, and said to them, "Go into the city, and there you
will meet a man carrying a pitcher of water. Follow him,
Young’s: And he sendeth forth two of his
disciples, and saith to them, 'Go ye away to the
city, and there shall meet you a man bearing a pitcher of water, follow him;
Conte (RC): And he sent
two of his disciples, and he said to them: "Go into the city. And you will
meet a man carrying a pitcher of water; follow him.
and saith unto them, Go ye into the
city, and there shall meet you a man bearing
a pitcher of water: follow him. It was generally the task
of women to carry water. Among
the thousands at
Nothing could be less
the object of natural sagacity and foresight than the events here
mentioned. Had the two disciples come to
the place specified, rather sooner or latter than they did, the “man bearing
the pitcher of water” would either not have arrived, or he would have
gone. But our Lord knew that the owner
of a certain commodious house in Jerusalem favoured
Him; He foresaw that at a precise time of the day, he would send his servant
for a pitcher of water; that the disciples would meet him just when they
entered the city; that by following him they would find out the person whom He
intended; and that by mentioning Him as "the Master” or "the Teacher" the owner of the house would readily consent
to accommodate them in an upper chamber.
When the disciples found all these circumstances so exactly accord to the
prediction, they could not but be deeply impressed with a conviction of their
Lord's knowledge of every event, and His influence over every heart. [52]
Alternate
interpretation: It is unnecessary to
interpret these words of Jesus as indicating miraculous prescience. The use of the term “My guest chamber”
(vs. 14) clearly indicates that He had had some previous understanding with the
owner of the house. This is supported by
the fact that, in accordance with Jewish law (Exodus 12:3), Jesus must have
chosen a lamb on the 10th of Nisan.
Probably the bearing of a pitcher of water, ordinarily the work of the
women, had been agreed upon as the sign of recognition. By these precautions Jesus was able to select
the room for the Passover feast without disclosing its location to Judas in
time for him to betray the fact to the priests.
[44]
Rebuttal: Our Lord here shows superhuman knowledge,
for even if He had previously arranged with the master of the house--of
which there is no evidence--this [method of recognition] could not have
been preconceived. [11]
Weymouth: and whatever
house he enters, tell the master of the house, 'The Rabbi asks, Where is my room where I can eat the Passover with my
disciples?'
WEB: and
wherever he enters in, tell the master of the house,
'The Teacher says, "Where is the guest room, where I may eat the Passover
with my disciples?"'
Young’s: and
wherever he may go in, say ye to the master of the house -- The
Teacher saith, Where is the guest-chamber, where the passover, with my disciples, I may eat?
Conte (RC): And wherever
he will have entered, say to the owner of the house, 'The Teacher says: Where
is my dining room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?'
The Master saith, Where is the the guestchamber. In the best [Greekl]
text, "my" guest-chamber, which naturally indicates either that He had arranged for the room or that He had used it for some
purpose before. [23]
where I shall eat the Passover with My
disciples? Who constituted,
as it were, His household, and would therefore be expected to unite with Him in
this observance. [3]
In depth:
The nature of the Passover ritual as it eventually existed in its fully
developed form [8]. The
Passover was celebrated among the Jews:
(1) By eating two or three flat cakes of
unleavened bread (Exodus
(2) After those assembled had reclined, he took
one of the four cups, known as the "cup of consecration," in his
right hand and pronounced the benediction over the wine and the feast, saying,
"Blessed be Thou, Jehovah, our God, Thou King of the universe, Who hast
created the fruit of the vine." He
then tasted the cup and passed it round.
(3) Water
was then brought in, and he washed, followed by the rest, the hands being
dipped in water.
(4)
The table was then set out with bitter herbs, such as lettuce, endive, succory, and horehound, the sauce called charoseth, and the passover lamb.
(5) The celebrant then once more blessed God for
the fruits of the earth, and taking a portion of the bitter herbs, dipped it in
the charoseth, and ate a piece of it of
"the size of an olive," and his example was followed by the rest.
(6) The Haggadah
or "shewing forth" (1 Corinthians
(7) Then the second cup of wine was filled, and a
child or proselyte inquired, "What mean ye by this service?" (Exodus 12:26), to which reply was made according to a prescribed
formula or liturgy. The first
part of the "Hallel," Psalms 113-114, was
then sung, and the second cup was solemnly drunk.
(8) The celebrant now washed his hands again, and
taking two of the unleavened cakes, broke one of them and pronounced the
thanksgiving in these words, "Blessed be Thou, O Lord our God, Thou King
of the universe, Who bringest forth fruit out of the
earth." Then he distributed a
portion to each, and all wrapping some bitter herbs
round their portion, dipped it in the charoseth
and ate it.
(9) The flesh of the lamb was now eaten, and
the Master of the house, lifting up his hands, gave thanks over the third cup
of wine, known as the "cup of blessing," and handed it round to each
person.
(10) After thanks for the food of which they had
partaken, and for their redemption from
The Passover meal proper
began with the second cup and ended with the third.
WEB: He will
himself show you a large upper room furnished and ready. Get ready for us
there."
Young’s: and he
will shew you a large upper room, furnished, prepared
-- there make ready for us.'
Conte (RC): And he will
show you a large cenacle, fully furnished. And there, you shall prepare it for
us."
furnished and prepared. This act was one of
hospitality, provided by some pious Jew or disciple, who was prepared to lend
the room to some one. He had made ready the table and couches,
and covered them with carpets, and willingly yielded the use of them to any who
asked him. [25]
there make ready for us. The room was ready but they would have to
provide the lamb, the unleavened bread, wine, and bitter herbs. [45]
WEB: His
disciples went out, and came into the city, and found things as he had said to
them, and they prepared the Passover.
Young’s: And his
disciples went forth, and came to the city, and found as he said to them, and
they made ready the passover.
Conte (RC): And his
disciples departed and went into the city. And they found it just as he had
told them. And they prepared the Passover.
and they made
ready the Passover. This
would consist in obtaining the Paschal lamb and taking it to the temple to be
sacrificed by the priests. It would then
be brought to the house to be cooked; and the unleavened bread, the bitter
herbs, and the wine would be provided, and the water for purification. After all these preparations had been made,
the two disciples would return to their Master.
[39]
WEB: When it
was evening he came with the twelve.
Young’s: And evening having come, he cometh with the twelve,
Conte (RC): Then, when
evening came, he arrived with the twelve.
He cometh. Into the city, to the house
and room prepared for Him. [3]
with the twelve. There
was a somewhat larger circle of near followers but there is no indication that
any of these were now present. [23]
In depth:
Was this observance on the official Passover date [45]? The festival began at sunset of the 14th day
of the month Nisan. That Jesus and the
twelve partook of the feast on the usual day, is the only inference that can be
drawn from the accounts of the first three evangelists; and indeed no other
view seems consistent with their narratives.
Yet there are difficulties in John's gospel which have led many to adopt
the opinion that they kept the Passover a day earlier than usual, on the 13th
of the month. The passages in John,
however, may be harmonized with their keeping the feast at the customary time,
as Mark's narrative seems clearly to indicate.
This question has led to very elaborate discussions.
WEB: As they
sat and were eating, Jesus said, "Most certainly I tell you, one of you
will betray me--he who eats with me."
Young’s: and as
they are reclining, and eating, Jesus said, 'Verily I say to you -- one of you,
who is eating with me -- shall deliver me up.'
Conte (RC): And while
reclining and eating with them at table, Jesus said, "Amen I say to you,
that one of you, who eats with me, will betray me."
Verily [Assuredly, NKJV] I say unto you. Although
they had heard this expression many times during the ministry, this time it had
to be particularly shocking because it concerned the treachery of one of their
inner group and not some action by the broader (and much larger) band of
disciples in general. [rw]
one of
you. This indefinite announcement would give Judas an opportunity of
repentance. But it produced no effect,
except to startle and sadden them all [11]
which eateth with Me shall betray Me.
There may be a reference to Psalms 12:9 [41:9], quoted by John (
WEB: They
began to be sorrowful, and to ask him one by one, "Surely not I?" And
another said, "Surely not I?"
Young’s: And they began to be sorrowful, and to say to him, one by
one, 'Is it I?' and another, 'Is it I?'
Conte (RC): But they
began to be sorrowful and to say to him, one at a time: "Is it I?"
Jesus Himself
“was troubled in spirit" as He made the disclosure (John
and to say unto Him one by one.
There is no sin whatever of which a man ought to think himself capable,
since he has the seed of all in his corrupt will.
[20]
Is it I? No doubt each of the Apostles felt in his
heart that he could not betray his Master, but then each believed the
Lord knew his heart better than he knew it himself. [24]
WEB: He
answered them, "It is one of the twelve, he who dips with me in the dish.
Young’s: And he
answering said to them, 'One of the twelve who is dipping with me in the dish;
Conte (RC): And he said
to them: "It is one of the twelve, who dips his hand with me in the dish.
that dippeth with Me in the dish. This
would indicate that Judas was near Jesus at the table. Those who were near to each other dipped
their bread into the same dish or bowl; but it is implied that not all dipped
into the same one. No doubt several
dishes would be required for the number of persons here partaking of the meal. On this occasion these probably contained
liquid food prepared with the bitter herbs.
[45]
WEB: For the
Son of Man goes, even as it is written about him, but woe to that man by whom
the Son of Man is betrayed! It would be better for that man if he had not been
born."
Young’s: the Son of
Man doth indeed go, as it hath been written concerning him, but woe to that man
through whom the Son of Man is delivered up; good were it to him if that man
had not been born.'
Conte (RC): And indeed,
the Son of man goes, just as it has been written of him. But
woe to that man by whom the Son of man will be betrayed. It would be
better for that man if he had never been born."
indeed goeth as it is written of Him. Written, as in Isaiah 53. [23]
but woe to that man by whom the Son is Man is betrayed! The
guilt of willful human agents is unaffected by prophecies and
predeterminations. So it is said
concerning Judas in the prayer of the apostles (Acts
Good were it for that man if he had never been born.
"A proverbial expression for the most terrible destiny, forbidding
the thought of any deliverance however remote" (Riddle). [45]
WEB: As they
were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had blessed, he broke it, and gave
to them, and said, "Take, eat. This is my body."
Young’s: And as they are eating, Jesus having taken bread, having
blessed, brake, and gave to them, and said, 'Take, eat; this is my body.'
Conte (RC): And while
eating with them, Jesus took bread. And blessing it, he broke it and gave it to
them, and he said: "Take. This is my body."
Jesus took bread. The unleavened bread of the Passover was
doubtless in thin cakes. [35]
As there was no special
preparation for the new institution, so there was no providing of new
materials. No special significance
appears in the fact that the bread was unleavened, and there is nothing to make
us doubt that He would have used leavened bread just as readily, if that had
been before Him. [23]
And blessed. It is not intimated that
the blessing and thanksgiving changed the character of the elements used, any
more than at an ordinary meal. [45]
and brake it. Into
fragments; whether using one loaf or more does not appear. [23]
Its purport is given in Paul's account (1
Corinthians
and gave to them.
The apostles, as they
reclined about the table. [23]
and said, Take. i.e., with the hand, in order
to eat it. There is no spiritual mystery
in the word, as if it related to some mystical appropriation. [23]
eat. The word "eat" is omitted here from
the best [Greek] text, though unquestioned in Matthew; both words are omitted
by Luke and Paul. [23]
this is My body. i.e., it represents my body, as
today we say looking at a picture, "This is my father." [35]
There was no possibility
of a literal acceptation of His words by the disciples, for His body was
visibly and tangibly among them, as real to their senses as their own
bodies. [Hence] any suggestion of
literalism, as if Jesus meant that the bread by miracle was literally
His body, would have amazed the disciples beyond measure. [23]
Alternate interpretation: The copula means neither
"represents" nor "symbolizes," but simply is. The Lord is pleased to establish the most
intimate relation possible between the consecrated elements and His sacred
humanity. The faithful communicant, when
he receives the Eucharistic bread and wine, eats the flesh and drinks the blood
of the Son of Man (John
WEB: He took
the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave to them. They all drank of it.
Young’s: And having taken the cup, having given thanks, he gave to
them, and they drank of it -- all;
Conte (RC): And having
taken the chalice, giving thanks, he gave it to them. And they all drank from
it.
Alternate
interpretation: There is no mention
of wine at the Passover in the Pentateuch, but before our Lord's time the
various "cups" of the feast—never less than four in number--had
become a regular part of the service.
The wine was the common wine of the country, and was mixed with water as
it was drunk. Here, again, our Lord
provided nothing new, but took what was before Him. [23]
and when He had given thanks. The same
word that is used by Luke and Paul of the first prayer. Hence there was no new quality or character
in the second. This too was a simple
"grace before meat." [23]
He gave it to them; and
they all drank of it. Matthew quotes Jesus as saying of the
cup, "Drink ye all of it."
Thus again the one account incidentally supplements the other. [38]
In depth:
At what point in the Passover observance was the Lord's Supper instituted [45]? Many of the
commentators, in explaining the last Passover, and he institution of the Lord's
Supper, endeavor to designate the point or stage in the former ceremony, when
the bread was broken, and then that at which the cup was given. They follow a somewhat complicated ritual of
the Passover, made out chiefly from the Talmud and the writings of Maimonides, a later Jewish author. But that the ceremonies there described were
observed in our Lord's day, cannot be established, and must be regarded as
doubtful; and that there was such a uniform order, as that there was a
particular time for the passing around of each of the four cups, or five
according to some authorities, is not probable.
Those who follow this order in their explanation seem generally to
believe that it was the third cup that our Lord used in instituting the new
sacrament, while others maintain that it was the fourth. Alexander says, "whether
the third or any other of the five cups in the later Jewish ritual, is as
unimportant as it is uncertain."
WEB: He said
to them, "This is my blood of the new covenant, which is poured out for
many.
Young’s: and he
said to them, 'This is my blood of the new covenant, which for many is being
poured out;
Conte (RC): And he said
to them: "This is my blood of the new covenant, which shall be shed for
many.
This is My blood of the new
testament [covenant, NKJV]. The word
"covenant" is probably intended to remind the disciples of the
covenant of Exodus 24:3-8. The blood
sprinkled on the altar and on the people symbolized the covenant of peace
between God and the people, they agreeing to obey Him and He
accepting them. So Jesus shed His
blood--gave His life--that through the shedding of it men might be brought into
fellowship and peace with God. [35]
Probably a reference to
the new covenant of Jeremiah 31:31ff. [44]
which is shed for many. Mark
omits, after this expression, the words "for the remission of sins”
(Matthew 26:26), which declare to what end the blood of Jesus was “shed for
many,” presuming on the information of his readers in regard to the design of
Christ's death. [38]
WEB: Most
certainly I tell you, I will no more drink of the fruit of the vine, until that
day when I drink it anew in the
Young’s: verily I
say to you, that no more may I drink of the produce of the vine till that day
when I may drink it new in the reign of God.'
Conte (RC): Amen I say
to you, that I will no longer drink from this fruit of the vine, until that day
when I will drink it new in the
I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine until that day
when I drink it new in the
Expositors are by no
means agreed in the interpretation of this verse. Some understand it to declare a change of
dispensations; others, to refer to Christ's second coming; others, to the
marriage supper for the church in the new kingdom on earth. Some think it means spiritual communion at
the Lord's table, or more generally in all worship;
and many apply it to the joys of heaven.
[45]
Weymouth: After singing a hymn, they went out to the
WEB: When they
had sung a hymn, they went out to the
Young’s: And having sung an hymn, they went forth to the mount of the
Olives,
Conte (RC): And having
sung a hymn, they went out to the
they went out into the
WEB: Jesus
said to them, "All of you will be made to stumble because of me tonight,
for it is written, 'I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be
scattered.'
Young’s: and Jesus saith to them -- 'All ye shall be stumbled at me this
night, because it hath been written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep
shall be scattered abroad,
Conte (RC): And Jesus
said to them: "You will all fall away from me in this night. For it has
been written: 'I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered.'
this night. The
crisis is that extremely close, “this night.” [rw]
for it is
written. Freely quoted from Zechariah
13:7, not exactly as in the Hebrew or as in the Septuagint, but not diverging
essentially from either. The citation from Zechariah shows (see the
context there) that He was thinking of His death in the spirit of Isaiah
53:5-6, 10. [23]
I will smite the Shepherd. He had called Himself the Good Shepherd who would lay
down His life for the sheep (John
And the sheep shall be scattered. Like frightened
sheep, they will panic and flee. [rw]
WEB: However,
after I am raised up, I will go before you into
Young’s: but after
my having risen I will go before you to
Conte (RC): But after I
have risen again, I will go before you to
I will go before you into
"Go before" is
a pastoral act, referring to the figure of a flock in the preceding verse
(compare John
WEB: But Peter
said to him, "Although all will be offended, yet I will not."
Young’s: And Peter said to him, 'And if all shall be stumbled, yet
not I;'
Conte (RC): Then Peter
said to him, "Even if all will have fallen away from you, yet I will
not."
Although all shall be offended [are made to stumble, NKJV]. All may not be so
sure as I of their own love. Compare the
searching question [to Peter], "Lovest thou no
more than these?" (John 21:15).
"Are you so much more sure of your own
heart? Is your love that stronger love
that you thought it was?" [23]
yet will not I.
Our Lord had just distinctly
stated that they would all be offended and therefore these words of St.
Peter were very presumptuous. [39]
WEB: Jesus
said to him, "Most certainly I tell you, that you today, even this night,
before the rooster crows twice, you will deny me three times."
Young’s: And Jesus said to him, 'Verily I say to thee, that to-day,
this night, before a cock shall crow twice, thrice thou shalt
deny me.'
Conte (RC): And Jesus
said to him, "Amen I say to you, that this day, in this night, before the
rooster has uttered its voice twice, you will deny me three times."
That this day, even in this night. Emphasizing not only the fact
of his coming flight, but its imminence. Not at some indefinite point in
the future, but this very night! [rw]
before the cock [rooster, NKJV] crow. It
is said that the inhabitants of
twice. As the cocks usually crow about
All the other historians
report Jesus as saying, “before the cock crow thou shalt
deny Me thrice,” or, “the cock shall not crow before
thou shall deny Me thrice." This is
no other than an instance in which Mark reports with more exactness a speech
which the other historians report in terms less definite but having in effect
the same meaning. Doubtless, Mark quotes
the exact words of Jesus, but the other writers, knowing that the object of the
mention of cock-crowing was to indicate the time at which the denial would
occur, and knowing that when one cock crows in the morning, he is always
followed by others in rapid succession, saw fit to employ the less definite
style to indicate the same time of night.
[38]
thou shalt
deny Me. i.e., disown Me,
disavow connection with Me or knowledge of Me.
This was fulfilled a few hours later (verses 66-72). [45]
thrice [three times, NKJV]. The
definite announcement of three denials does not look like a forecasting of
probabilities or an inference from Peter's weakness and danger. It is a claim of true foreknowledge. [23]
WEB: But he
spoke all the more, "If I must die with you, I will not deny you."
They all said the same thing.
Young’s: And he spake the more vehemently, 'If it may be necessary for me
to die with thee -- I will in no wise deny thee;' and in like manner also said
they all.
Conte (RC): But he spoke
further, "Even if I must die along with you, I will not deny you."
And they all spoke similarly also.
If I should die with Thee, I will not deny thee in any wise. The
sense is that he went on repeating over and over again, in substance, what he
had before avowed. So far from Peter's being humbled by the prophetic warning of his
Master, his pride and self-confidence rose with the rebuke. There is no surer precursor of a fall,
"When pride cometh, then cometh shame” (Proverbs 11:2;
He was, no doubt, sincere
in all this, but he had yet to learn his own weakness. St. Hilary ways on this, “Peter was so
carried away by the fervour of his zeal and love for
Christ that he regarded neither the weakness of his own flesh nor the truth of
his Master's word." [39]
Likewise also said they all. No less rash than Peter's pledge. [3]
But equally sincere and well intended.
[rw]
A historical note on Passover and
the Feast of Unleavened Bread: From
Alfred Edersheim, The
Temple (1874):
The cycle of Temple-festivals appropriately
opens with "the Passover " and
"Feast of unleavened bread." For, properly speaking, these two are
quite distinct, the "Passover" taking
place on the 14th of Nisan, and the " Feast of unleavened bread" commencing on the 15th, and lasting for seven days, to the 21st of the month. But
from their close connection they are generally treated as one, both in the Old and in the New Testament ; and Josephus, on one occasion, even describes it
as "a feast for “eight days.”
There are peculiarities about the Passover
which mark it as the most important, and, indeed,
take it out of the rank of the
other festivals. It was the first of the three feasts on which all males in
The name of the Passover, in Hebrew Pesach, and
in Aramaean and Greek Pascha,
is derived from a root which means to " step
over," or to "overleap," and thus points back to the historical origin of the festival.
But the circumstances in which the people were placed necessarily rendered its first
celebration, in some particulars, different from its later observance, which,
so far as possible, was brought into harmony with the general
Temple practice. Accordingly, Jewish authorities
rightly distinguish between "the Egyptian"
and the " Permanent
Passover."
On its first institution it was ordained that the head
of every house should, on the 10th of Nisan, select
either a lamb or a kid of the goats, of the first year, and without blemish. Later Jewish
ordinances, dating after the return from Babylon,
limit it to a lamb; and it is explained that the four
days previous to the slaying of the lamb referred to the four
generations that had passed after the children of
Israel went down into Egypt.
The lamb was to be killed on the eve of the 14th, or rather, as the phrase
is, "between the two evenings." According
to the Samaritans, the Karaite Jews, and many modern interpreters, this means
between actual sunset and complete darkness (or, say, between six and seven
P.M.); but from the contemporary testimony of
Josephus, and from Talmudical authorities, there
cannot be a doubt that, at the time of our Lord, it
was regarded as the interval between the sun's commencing to decline and his actual
disappearance. This allows a sufficient period for the numerous
lambs which had to be killed, and agrees with the traditional
account that on the eve of the
Passover the daily evening sacrifice was
offered an hour, or, if it fell on a Friday, two hours, before the usual time.
In the original institution the blood of this sacrifice was to be sprinkled with
hyssop on the lintel and the two
doorposts of the house, probably as being the most prominent place of entrance. Then the whole animal, without breaking i
bone of it, was to be roasted, and eaten by each family—
or, if the number of
its members were too small, by two neighbouring
families—along with unleavened bread and bitter herbs, to symbolise
the bitterness of
their bondage and the haste
of their deliverance, and also to point forward to the
manner in which the true Israel were in all time to have fellowship in the Paschal Lamb. All who were
circumcised were to partake of this meal, and that arrayed as for a journey ; and whatsoever was not consumed was to be burnt on
the spot.
These ordinances in regard to the Passover were afterwards
modified during the journey in the wilderness to the effect, that all males were to appear "in the place which the Lord shall choose,"
and there alike to sacrifice and to eat the lamb or kid, bringing at the same time also another
offering with them. Lastly, it was also ordered that if any man were unclean at
the time of the regular Passover, or " in a journey afar off," he should celebrate it a
month later.
The Mishnah * contains the
following, as the distinctions between the "Egyptian" and the "Permanent"
Passover: "The Egyptian Passover was selected
on the 10th, and the blood
was to be sprinkled with a sprig of hyssop on the lintel
and the two door-posts, and it was to be eaten in
haste in the first night; but the
Permanent Passover is observed all the seven
days;" i.e., the use of unleavened cakes was, on its first observance,
enjoined only for that one night, though, from Israel's haste, it must, for
several days, have been the only available bread ;
while afterwards its exclusive use was ordered during the whole
week. Similarly, also, the journey of the children of
To these distinctions the following are also
added: In Egypt the Passover was selected on the 10th, and killed on the 14th, and they did not,
on account of the Passover, incur the penalty of " cutting off," as in later generations; of the Egyptian Passover it was
said, "Let him and his neighbour next unto his
house take it," while afterwards the Passover-companies might be
indiscriminately chosen; in Egypt it was not ordered to sprinkle the blood and burn the fat on the altar, as afterwards; at
the first Passover it was
said, "None of you shall go out of the door of his house until the morning," which did
not apply to later times; in Egypt it was slain by every one in his own house,
while afterwards it was slain by all Israel in one place; lastly, formerly
where they ate the Passover, there they lodged, but afterwards they might eat it in one,
and lodge in another place.
Scripture records that the Passover was
kept the second year after the
Exodus, and then not again till the Israelites
actually reached the promised land, but, as the Jewish commentators rightly observe, this
intermission was directed by God Himself (Exodus 12:25; 13:5). After that,
public celebrations of the Passover are only
mentioned once during the reign of Solomon (2
Chronicles
On the other hand, a most significant
allusion to the typical meaning of the Passover-blood, as securing immunity from
destruction, occurs in the prophecies of Ezekiel
(9:4-6), where "the man clothed with linen
" is directed to "set a mark upon the foreheads"
of the godly (like the first
Passover-mark), so that they who were to "slay
utterly old and young" might not "come near any" of them. The same symbolic reference and
command occur in the book
of Revelation,1 in regard
to those who have been "sealed as the servants of our God in their foreheads.”
But the inference that the Passover was only celebrated on the
occasions actually mentioned in Scripture seems the
less warranted, that in later times it was so punctiliously and
universally observed.
We can form a sufficiently accurate idea of all the
circumstances attending it at the time of
our Lord. On the 14th of Nisan every Israelite who was physically able, not in a state of Levitical
uncleanness, nor further distant from the city than
fifteen miles, was to appear in
Indeed, it was a joyous time for all
How large the number of worshippers was,
may be gathered from Josephus, who records that, when Cestius
requested the high-priest to make a census, in
order to convince Nero of the importance of
Jerusalem and of the Jewish nation, the number of lambs slain was found to be 256,500, which,
at the lowest computation of ten persons to every
sacrificial lamb, would give a population of 2,565,000, or as Josephus himself
puts it, 2,700,200 persons, while on an earlier occasion
(A.D. 65) he computes the number present at not fewer than three millions.
Of course, many of these pilgrims must have
camped outside the city walls. Those who lodged within the walls were gratuitously accommodated, and
in return left to their hosts the skins of the Passover lambs and the vessels which they had
used in their sacred services. In such festive "company" the parents of Jesus went
to, and returned from this feast "every year," taking their
"holy child" with them, after He had attained the age of twelve—strictly
in accordance with Rabbinical law (Yoma, 82
a)—when He remained behind, "sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing
them and asking them questions.”
But the preparations for the Passover had begun long before the
I4th of Nisan. Already a month previously (on the I5th
of Adar), bridges and roads had been repaired for the use
of the pilgrims. That was also the time for administering the testing
draught to women suspected of adultery, for burning the red
heifer, and for boring the ears of those who wished
to remain in servitude—in short, for making all kinds of preliminary arrangements
before the festive season began.
One of these is specially interesting as
recalling the words of the Saviour. In general, cemeteries were outside the cities; but any dead body found in the field was (according to an ordinance which tradition
traces up to Joshua) to be buried on the spot where
it had been discovered. Now, as the festive
pilgrims might have contracted "uncleanness" by unwitting contact
with such graves, it was ordered that all " sepulchres " should be "whitened " a
month before the Passover. It was, therefore,
evidently in reference to what He actually saw going on around Him at the time He spoke, that Jesus compared the Pharisees "unto whited
sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward,
but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.”
Then, two weeks before Pesach, and at the corresponding
time before the other two great festivals, the flocks and herds were to be tithed, and also the
The special preparations for the Passover
commenced on the evening of the
13th of Nisan, with which, according to Jewish reckoning, the 14th began, the day being
always computed from evening to evening. Then the head
of the house was to search
with a lighted candle all places where leaven was usually kept, and to put what
of it he found in the house
in a safe place, whence no portion could be carried away by any accident.
Before doing this, he prayed: "Blessed
art Thou, Jehovah, our God, King of the Universe, who hast
sanctified us by Thy commandments, and commanded us to remove the leaven." And after
it he said: "All the leaven that is in my possession, that which I
have seen and that which I have not seen, be it null, be it accounted as the dust of the earth." The search itself was to be
accomplished in perfect silence and with a lighted candle.
To this search the apostle may have
referred in the admonition to "purge out the old leaven" (1 Corinthians 5:7).
Jewish tradition sees a reference to this search with candles in Zephaniah
The question what substances constituted leaven
was thus solved. The unleavened cakes, which were to be the only bread used during the feast, might be made of
these five kinds of grain — wheat, barley, spelt, oats, and rye—the cakes being prepared
before fermentation had begun. Anything prepared of these five kinds of
grain—but only of these—would come within range of the term "leaven,"
that is, if kneaded with water, but not if made with any other fluid, such as
fruit-liquor, etc.
The next care was to select a proper Paschal lamb, which, of course, must
be free from all blemish, and neither less than eight days, nor more than
exactly one year, old. Each Paschal lamb was to serve for a
"company," which was to consist of not less than ten, nor of more
than twenty persons. The company at the "Lord's
Passover Supper" consisted of Himself and His disciples. Two of them,
Peter and John, the Master had sent early forward
to "prepare the Passover," that is, to
see to all that was needful for the due observance
of the Paschal Supper, especially the purchase and sacrifice of the Paschal
lamb.
Probably they may have purchased it in the
While the Saviour still tarried with the other
disciples outside the city, Peter and John were
completing their preparations. They followed the motley
crowd, all leading their sacrificial lambs up the
Temple-mount. Here they were grouped into three divisions. Already the evening sacrifice had been offered,
Ordinarily it was slain at
On the occasion to which we refer the evening sacrifice had been slain at 1.30, and offered
at 2.30. But before the incense
was burned or the lamps
were trimmed, the Paschal
sacrifice had to be offered. It was done on this wise:—
The first of the three festive divisions, with their Paschal
lambs, was admitted within the Court of the Priests. Each division must consist of not less than thirty persons (3
X 10, the
symbolical
number of the
Divine
and of completeness). Immediately the massive gates were closed behind them. The priests drew a threefold
blast from their silver trumpets when the Passover was slain.
Altogether the scene was most impressive. All along the Court up to the altar of burnt-offering
priests stood in two rows, the one holding golden, the other silver bowls. In these the blood of the Paschal lambs, which
each Israelite slew for himself (as representative of his company at the Paschal Supper), was
caught up by a priest, who handed it to his colleague, receiving back an empty
bowl, and so the bowls with the blood were passed up to the priest at the altar, who jerked it in one jet at the base of the altar.
While this was going on, a most solemn
"hymn" of praise was raised, the Levites leading in song, and the offerers either repeating after
them or merely responding. Every first line of a Psalm was repeated by the people, while to each of
the others they responded
"Hallelujah," or "Praise ye the Lord."
This service of song consisted of the so-called "Hallel," which comprised Psalms cxiii.
to cxviii. The singing of the " Hallel" at the Passover dates from very remote antiquity. The Talmud dwells on its peculiar suitableness for the purpose, since it not only recorded the goodness of God towards Israel, but especially their
deliverance from Egypt, and therefore appropriately opened1
with "Praise ye Jehovah, ye servants of Jehovah"—and no longer of
Pharaoh.
Hence also this " Hallel"
is called the Egyptian" or "the Common." The Egyptian
"Hallel," it may here be added, was
altogether sung on eighteen days and on one night in the year.
These eighteen days were, that of the Passover sacrifice, the Feast
of Pentecost, and each of the eight days of the Feasts of Tabernacles and of the
Dedication of the
If the " Hallel" had been finished before the service of one division was completed, it was
repeated a second and, if needful, even a third time. The Mishnah remarks, that as the
Next, the sacrifices were hung up on hooks
along the Court, or laid on staves which rested on the shoulders of two men (on Sabbaths they were not laid
on staves), then flayed, the entrails taken out and
cleansed, and the inside fat separated, put in a
dish, salted, and placed on the fire of the altar of burnt offering. This completed the sacrifice. The first
division of offerers being dismissed, the second entered, and finally the third.
The Passover, or rather the 15th of Nisan, was to be observed like a Sabbath, no
manner of work being allowed. There was, however, one most important exception
to this rule. It was permitted to prepare the necessary
articles of food on the 15th of Nisan. This
explains how the words of Jesus to Judas during the Paschal (not the Lord's)
Supper could be misunderstood by the disciples as
implying that Judas, "who had the bag,"
was to "buy those things" that they had "need of against the feast" (John