Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
In order to establish the order of events at the "Lord's supper" we first need to understand two
principles of interpretation of scripture. The first is that scripture is not always written in
chronological order. This can be easily established by examining passages which are
obviously out of order, for example, compare Genesis 8:4-5 with Genesis 8:6-12, or by
examining parallel passages where the order does not agree; compare Matthew 4:3-11 with
Luke 4:2-13, and ask yourself which was Jesus' second temptation? There are two main ways
of establishing the correct chronological sequence of events, the first of which is that the
wording of the scripture often indicates it, and when it does this has a high priority. The
second is also the second principle of interpretation, "In the mouth of two or three witnesses
https://www.logosapostolic.org/bible_study/RP126-2OrderLord'sSupper.htm 1/10
14/12/2018 The ORDER of FEET WASHING and the LORD'S SUPPER
every word shall be established" (2 Corinthians 13:1). This principle is confirmed by many
scriptures (Num 35:30; Deut 17:6; 19:15; Matthew 18:16; John 8:17). So when no other
evidence is available, and two witnesses such as Matthew and Mark agree on the order, then
even when a third witness such as Luke disagrees, we can still establish the true sequence of
events by this rule. This is in fact the case here, Matthew and Mark agree totally as far as the
order of events is concerned, while Luke disagrees in some places. John's account misses out
much that the other gospels agree on, but then he also adds much that the other gospels miss
out. We also need to remember that Matthew and John were present at this supper, so we
would need strong evidence from the scripture if we were to rearrange the order of events
which they have recorded. Some have tried to say that Luke's account gives the most accurate
chronological sequence, based on his introduction:
(Luke 1:3-4) "It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things
from the very first, to write unto you in order1, most excellent Theophilus, That you
might know the certainty of those things, in which you have been instructed."
The word translated in order1 (Gr. καθεξῆς Gtr. kathexes) comes from two words, "kata",
which means "according to", and "hexes" which is separately translated "after" (Luke 7:11),
"next" (Luke 9:37; Acts 27:18), and "following" (Acts 21:1). Thus it indicates a sequence of
events which follow each other in order, and some have interpreted this to say that Luke's
gospel records a correct chronological sequence of Jesus' ministry. However, that contradicts
some of the best principles interpreting the word of God (See RP 301 #4), some of which are
being used here, and it is obvious from this study that that is not what it refers to. What it does
refer to is not the order of the events in Luke's writings, but rather the order in which he did
things; namely, that his writing to Theophilus follows his obtaining the records of others
(Luke 1:1-2), and his having perfect understanding (v3). If "kathexes" had been translated, as
it is in some other places, "afterwards" (Luke 8:1), or "after" (Acts 3:24), or even "next", this
would have made the true meaning much clearer. Therefore, as we analyze the situation, we
will use Matthew's account and Mark's account as a basis, fill in the events that only John
records, and establish the rest of the order either from the scriptures themselves or by
reasoning from our scriptural understanding of the situation when we have no other choice.
MARK 14:17
17 And in the evening, he comes with the twelve.
LUKE 22:14
14 And when the hour came, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him.
Note: According to our analysis (See Introduction 2), these three scriptures follow the
preparation of the Passover in the three gospels where they are recorded, so this is our starting
point for the sequence of events at the "Lord's supper". It is obvious that Judas was here at this
point because all scriptures refer to "twelve" apostles.
https://www.logosapostolic.org/bible_study/RP126-2OrderLord'sSupper.htm 2/10
14/12/2018 The ORDER of FEET WASHING and the LORD'S SUPPER
Note: This event only occurs in Luke's account, but we can make this an early event because it
follows Jesus sitting down with his disciples (v14), and precedes Jesus' prophecy of his
betrayal (v21). The context of the speech also suggests that this was at the beginning of the
supper, and as there is no evidence to the contrary, there seems no reason to put it anywhere
else. Some might consider verse 17 to be put with this, the cup being used during the Passover
supper, but it is much more true to context to put it with verse 18, which certainly fits in after
Jesus introduced the wine as representing the blood of the new covenant (See #2.26).
Note: This is a hard scripture to place, because it only occurs in Luke's account, and we have
already seen that the order of that is not reliable. Nevertheless there are a few indications that
this is the correct place for it:
(1) Jesus said to them, "I appoint to you a kingdom ... That you may ... sit on thrones
judging the twelve tribes of Israel" (v29-30), so we can discern that he was speaking to
twelve people, which would include Judas. Some might consider that Jesus would not
make this appointment to Judas, because he knew that he would betray him, but Judas
would certainly be water baptized, he was appointed to preach the gospel and heal the
sick (Mark 3:13-19; Luke 9:1-2), he was given authority over all devils and to cure
diseases (Matthew 10:1; Mark 3:15; Luke 9:1), he was appointed as an apostle (Matthew
10:2-4; Luke 6:13-16; Acts 1:25), he had part of the ministry (Acts 1:17), and was a
bishop in the church of God (Acts 1:20). Until he fell from his position by transgression
(Acts 1:25), which was the act of betrayal, Jesus would not unfairly judge him for what
he had not already done, but would treat him exactly the same as the others, without
respect of persons. Jesus also knew that Peter was about to deny him three times, and he
prophesied it (Matthew 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34; John 13:33-38), but it
didn't prevent him from washing his feet either, did it? We can therefore judge that Judas
was still present at this time.
(2) Comparing the order of this with the feet-washing of the disciples, it seems
inconceivable that after Jesus humbled himself in such a manner as to wash their feet that
they would then strive among themselves over how great they were. Throughout this
discourse Jesus is telling them to serve one another (v26-27), and it is a mark of a good
teacher not only to teach by words, but also by example (John 13:15). Therefore it seems
reasonable, that after seeing their self-exaltation, and rebuking them with words as these
scriptures show, he would then go on to demonstrate it by the example of humbling
himself to wash their feet. Thus we can conclude that this striving came before the feet-
washing.
(3) There is little or no evidence to place it anywhere else, as the order of events in
Luke's account has been shown to be totally unreliable in this instance.
https://www.logosapostolic.org/bible_study/RP126-2OrderLord'sSupper.htm 3/10
14/12/2018 The ORDER of FEET WASHING and the LORD'S SUPPER
Note: This account of feet-washing only occurs in John's gospel, so we need to establish our
justification for positioning it here. There are several reasons:
(1) John recorded this feet-washing at the beginning of the Passover supper, and before
the "Lord's supper". We need to remember that John was present at this supper, so he
knew the order in which the events occurred, and without good reason it would be
unwise to alter his recorded sequence. This would certainly place this event before Jesus
prophesied his betrayal (See #2.10), and before Judas left (See #2.20).
(2) The scripture telling us, "supper being ended" (v2), has caused some to place the feet-
washing after the "Lord's supper", and if this were a correct translation there would be
some justification for it. However, the word translated being ended1 (Gr. γενομένου Gtr.
genomenou) is the genitive singular masculine, aorist middle participle, of the verb
"ginomai", and literally means "having been born", or "having come into existence", or
"having been created". This has been incorrectly translated "being ended" in the KJV and
the NKJV, but others (RSV, NASV etc.) translate the same word to read "during supper",
which is more accurate here. [This does not mean that I endorse the RSV or NASV
bibles, which are based upon corrupted manuscripts, but rather that their interpretation of
"genomenou" is more accurate in this instance.] The word does not indicate that supper
had finished, but rather that it had started. This being so, we can definitely place the feet-
washing before the taking of the wine (See #2.26), because we have two scriptures there
which show that the wine was taken after supper (Luke 22:20; 1 Corinthians 11:25).
(3) In the phrase "He rises from supper" (v4), the words "from supper" are translated
from the Greek words ἐκ τοῦ δείπνου (Gtr. ek tou deipnou) which literally mean "out of
the supper". As it is not possible to arise out of something which does not exist, this
confirms the previous point that the feet-washing took place during the Passover supper,
not after it.
https://www.logosapostolic.org/bible_study/RP126-2OrderLord'sSupper.htm 4/10
14/12/2018 The ORDER of FEET WASHING and the LORD'S SUPPER
(4) During the feet-washing, Jesus said, "you are clean, but not all" (v10). The word
translated "you" (Gtr. humeis) is plural, referring to the eleven other than Judas, while
"not all" refers to Judas (v11), and shows that he was present at the feet-washing. Some
may think that it would have been hypocrisy for Jesus to wash Judas’ feet after making
such a statement, but for the reasons which have already been explained (See #2.06 Note
(1)) this is not so.
(5) After Jesus had washed his disciples' feet, he "was set down again" (v12), indicating
that he returned to the table. This would again indicate that the supper was still in
progress after he had finished washing their feet.
(6) One of the principles of rightly dividing the word of God is that "All scripture ... is
profitable for doctrine" (2 Tim 3:16), and whenever possible we need to consult the Old
Testament "types" and "shadows" for confirmation of the truth of what we teach. Back as
far as the book of Genesis we see a natural feet-washing taking place, which was done to
wash the filth of the world off people's feet when they entered into a tent, or house. It
was always the custom to do it before eating or drinking (Genesis 18:4-5; 24:32-33;
43:24-25; Judges 19:21). Again, under the law of Moses, when the priests were
consecrated to minister unto the Lord, we find another type, where the feet-washing was
the first ordinance done after entering into the tabernacle, even before they approached
the altar (Exodus 30:18-21; 40:30-32). Towards the end of their consecration, they went
on to eat the flesh of the sacrifice, and the bread from the basket of consecrations
(Exodus 29:31-34; Leviticus 8:31-32). Notice the similarity with the statements of Jesus:
Thus we can see that the flesh of the sacrifice, and the bread, are both types of the body of
Jesus, because when he took the bread during the "Lord's" supper, he said, "this is my body"
(Matthew 26:26, Mark 14:22). So in every Old Testament type that we can associate with this
ordinance, the feet-washing always came before the eating and drinking. Jesus would never
turn this around to contradict the scripture - he had to conform to the "types" already
appointed - so again this leads us to conclude that at the last supper, the feet-washing was
done before the ordinances involving the bread and the wine.
MARK 14:18
18 And as they sat and ate, Jesus said, Amen I say to you, One of you who eats with me
shall betray me.
LUKE 22:21
21 But, behold, the hand of him who betrays me is with me on the table.
https://www.logosapostolic.org/bible_study/RP126-2OrderLord'sSupper.htm 5/10
14/12/2018 The ORDER of FEET WASHING and the LORD'S SUPPER
Note: All four accounts here coincide very well, although John adds more detail of what was
said than the others. However, as his additional information is followed by "When Jesus had
thus said" (v21), it is right to include it here rather than preceding the event recorded only by
Luke (See #2.04). It seems obvious also from the scriptures themselves that Judas was still
here at this point.
MARK 14:19
19 And they began to be sorrowful, and to say to him one by one, Is it I? And another said,
Is it I?
LUKE 22:23
23 And they began to enquire among themselves, which one of them it was who should do
this thing.
JOHN 13:22-25
22 Then the disciples looked one on another, doubting of whom he spoke.
23 Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.
24 Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him, that he should ask who it should be of whom he
spoke.
25 He then lying on Jesus' breast says to him, Lord, who is it?
Note: In every account this event follows the previous one, and although John again gives
more information, it seems evident that it is all part of the same event.
MARK 14:20
20 And he answered and said to them, It is one of the twelve, who dips with me in the dish.
Note: This discourse comes only in two accounts, but in both of them the sequence agrees that
it follows the disciples questioning who the betrayer is, and precedes the prophecy of the fate
of the betrayer.
MARK 14:21
21 The Son of man indeed goes, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the
Son of man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had never been born.
LUKE 22:22
22 And truly the Son of man goes, as it was determined: but woe to that man by whom he is
https://www.logosapostolic.org/bible_study/RP126-2OrderLord'sSupper.htm 6/10
14/12/2018 The ORDER of FEET WASHING and the LORD'S SUPPER
betrayed!
Note: Matthew and Mark agree on the order of this event while Luke puts it before the
disciples questioning who the betrayer is, but as we have established the rule earlier (See
Introduction 1), we can continue the sequence according to the two witnesses who agree.
MATTHEW 26:25
25 Then Judas, who betrayed him, answered and said, Master, is it I? He said to him, You
have said.
Note: Matthew is the only one to show the correct position of this event, which is after the
prophecy of the fate of the betrayer (v24), but preceding the blessing of the bread (v26).
John's version is not contrary to Matthew's, but rather supplementary to it, and it seems
evident that John's record comes before Matthew's. Try reversing the order and see if these
verses make sense.
Note: This is recorded by no one except John, but it is obvious (v30) that Judas left
immediately (Gtr. eutheos) after being identified by Jesus. The other disciples did not perceive
this identification (v28), and when Judas left they thought that he had gone to obtain things
for the feast (v29), which also shows that they were still eating the Passover supper at this
time. The fact that Judas left immediately after receiving the piece of bread (v30), also shows
that he was still eating at that time, and again confirms that the Passover supper was still in
progress when he left.
Note: There is no doubt here that this occurred after Judas left, "when he had gone out" (v31)
being a good translation of the two Greek words "hote exelthen". As this occurs only in John's
account, and in scripture sequence it follows directly after Judas' exit, it seems reasonable to
assume that this is the first recorded detail of what was said after Judas left.
MARK 14:22
22 And as they ate1, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave to them, and
said, Take, eat: this is my body.
LUKE 22:19
19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and broke it, and gave to them, saying, This is my
body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.
Note: Again the order of this event follows the sequence related by Matthew and Mark. It
follows the prophecy of the betrayer in Mark, and the identification of Judas as the betrayer in
Matthew, which is simply missed out of Mark's account. We have also followed John's
account to see that Judas had left by this time, although Matthew and Mark have both omitted
this, and we now need to consider when exactly this blessing of the bread took place. The two
statements, as they were eating1 (Matthew 26:26), and as they ate1 (Mark 14:22) are both
translated from the same Greek words ἐσθιόντων αὐτῶν (Gtr. esthionton auton) and give the
correct meaning. "Esthionton" is the genitive, plural, masculine, present, active participle, of
the verb "esthio", "I eat", and literally means "while eating". The present participle usually
refers to an action simultaneous with the main verb (DFH p57; JWW p152; WP p96), which
in both of these cases is "broke"; thus indicating that they were still eating the Passover when
Jesus did this. They could not have been eating the "Lord's supper", because that did not take
place until after Jesus had blessed the bread. The blessing and breaking of the bread took
place while they were still eating the Passover supper, and as the Passover bread seems to
have been used, we could conclude that this was instigated as part of the supper. The order of
events was as follows:
(1 Corinthians 11:33-34) "Therefore my brethren, when you come together to eat, wait
one for another. And if any man is hungry, let him eat at home; that you do not come
together to condemnation."
This agrees with how we would eat normally doesn't it? We wouldn't come to the table one by
one and begin eating before others came, but rather we would come together first, say grace,
and then eat together. Even though two different words are used, it is possible that the blessing
and the giving of thanks refer to the same thing. Otherwise, because there are two witnesses
for both, we have no evidence which of these two came first. The word translated blessed2
(Matthew 26:26; Mark 14:22) is the Greek word εὐλογήσας (Gtr. eulogesas) which is the
nominative, singular, masculine, aorist, active participle, of the verb "eulogeo", "I bless", or "I
speak well of", and literally means "having blessed", or "after blessing". This shows that the
blessing took place before the breaking of the bread. The Word translated gave thanks3 (Luke
22:19), and when he had given thanks3 (1 Corinthians 11:24) is the same Greek word
εὐχαριστήσας (Gtr. eucharistesas) which is the nominative, singular, masculine, aorist, active
participle, of the verb "eucharisteo", "I give thanks", and literally means "having given
https://www.logosapostolic.org/bible_study/RP126-2OrderLord'sSupper.htm 8/10
14/12/2018 The ORDER of FEET WASHING and the LORD'S SUPPER
thanks", or "after giving thanks". This confirms that the giving of thanks took place before the
breaking of bread.
MARK 14:23-24
23 And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all
drank of it.
24 And he said to them, This is my blood of the New Covenant, which is shed for many.
LUKE 22:20, 17
20 Likewise also the cup after supper1, saying, This cup is the New Covenant in my blood,
which is shed for you.
17 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among
yourselves:
Note 1: There are two excellent reasons why this follows the blessing of the bread, the first
one being that in the order-sequence it immediately follows it in all of the four accounts where
it is recorded. Also the words translated after supper1 (Luke 22:20) and when he had supped1
(1 Corinthians 11:25) are the same Greek words μετὰ τὸ δειπνῆσαι (Gtr. meta to deipnesai)
which literally means "after supping". Both of these scriptures confirm that this took place
after the eating of bread, which was done during the Passover supper (See #2.24 Note), and
there seems no logical reason to try to position this event anywhere else. This then seems to
be the correct order of events during this ordinance:
Note 2: Some may try to reverse the order of verses 20 and 17 in Luke's account, but in fact
they need to be split, and the correct order compared to the other accounts appears to be as
follows: "Likewise also the cup after supper (v20), he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said,
Take this, and divide it among yourselves: (v17), this cup is the New covenant in my blood,
which is shed for you (v20)."
https://www.logosapostolic.org/bible_study/RP126-2OrderLord'sSupper.htm 9/10
14/12/2018 The ORDER of FEET WASHING and the LORD'S SUPPER
MARK 14:25
25 Amen I say to you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day I drink it
new in the kingdom of God.
LUKE 22:18
18 For I say to you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall
come.
Note: Both Matthew and Mark agree on the placing of this directly after the giving of the cup,
although again Luke is partly out of order. It seems certain that these three verses align
exactly with one another, so this helps us to position Luke 22:17 in the previous section.
Reading all of these scriptures in context, it is obvious that in each case these verses directly
follow the preceding verses, and are part of the preceding discourse.
MARK 14:26
26 And when they had sung a hymn, they went out into the mount of Olives.
LUKE 22:39
39 And he came out, and went as he was accustomed, to the mount of Olives; and his
disciples followed him.
Note: Again the order here is determined by the accounts of Matthew and Mark, Luke's
account still seeming to be out of order. This seems true for the discourse which follows also
when Jesus prophesied Peter's denials. The position of Luke 22:39 here is totally on its
content, which includes "he came out" referring to leaving the supper room, and the going to
the mount of Olives, both of which agree with the other two accounts.
https://www.logosapostolic.org/bible_study/RP126-2OrderLord'sSupper.htm 10/10