The One Leavened Bread and the True Communion

So what did the Lord mean in the Last Supper parable with the one leavened bread? In Course 1 of my book The Messianic Feast: Moving Beyond the Ritual, it was thoroughly proven that the Lord held, and then broke into pieces, one leavened bread at this meal. Since the Passover lamb would be sacrificed the following day, then leavened bread was perfectly legal as per God’s law this previous night. In fact, all of the scriptures use the Greek word for daily leavened bread to refer to what was shared at this supper. But what does this mean?

First and foremost, it means that the unleavened bread ritual passed down since Roman times was not what the Lord wanted or what the Jewish disciples taught. Instead, they knew the Messiah was teaching spiritual truth in parables as he so often did. To ascertain what the pieces of the one leavened bread that Jesus broke represent, one only needs to see what the original followers all taught—that WE are the members of the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:27, etc.). The bread and its pieces did not represent Christ’s human body as the Romans believed, but us, the members of his spiritual body.

This is what Paul understood and what he received from the Lord concerning what the Last Supper parables really meant:

NAS 1 Corinthians 11:23  For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread…

The Greek word for bread that Paul uses above (arton) is the one for daily leavened bread. It is also singular and therefore should read “a bread.” Below, Paul also refers to this one bread Jesus broke (and gave to the disciples at the Last Supper and told them to partake, and that it was his body). Now, we know that Roman theologians mistakenly believed this was the Passover (where unleavened bread was required by God) and that they also took the words of Jesus literally (and not as a parable), thus creating their unleavened bread Communion ritual. But this is not what the Jewish Paul understood concerning what he said he received from the Lord:

NAS 1 Corinthians 10:17  Since there is one bread, we who are many are one body; for we all partake of the one bread.

This is the understanding of what Jesus really meant. This is the true spiritual communion that we are to share—partaking and sharing God’s love (and His word) with His spirit in the midst of the members of the spiritual body. This will be part of how Christ is formed in us according to the scriptures. This will fulfill the new commandment for the new covenant as given by Jesus at this Last Supper:

NAS John 13:34  A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another.

This is a spiritual communion, not a ritual. The ritual was simply a man-made tradition that has voided the word of God by missing what Jesus meant, something Jesus actually warned against:

NAS Mark 7:9  He was also saying to them, “You nicely set aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition.

NAS Mark 7:13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”

The unleavened bread ritual as kept by almost all churches has confused what Jesus really meant in his parable, turning his spiritual teaching on sharing God’s word (the bread of life) and His love (the new wine of the spirit) into a ritualistic man-made tradition with unleavened bread (called “the bread of affliction,” Deuteronomy 16:3). These are a few of the many truths that are made clear in this book and that shed light on what the fulfillment will be of the long-time Jewish history of a coming Messianic banquet or feast.

Purchase the book The Messianic Feast

Comments

  1. Happy to see this understanding gain wider acceptance. Of a far greater concern however, is “Christianity’s” continuing belief in the deity of “Jesus” (real name: Yeshua, Hebrew (Strong’s H3442) for “he will save” according to the instruction from the Father via the angel Gabriel in Matthew 1:21). Yeshua he explicitly denied that he was God (John 17:3), as did Paul (1 Cor. 8:6; 1 Tim. 2:5; Eph. 4:6). This was a purely pagan concept made law by the pagan Roman emperor Constantine at the Council of Nicæa in 325AD. This issue is salvational, for anyone who believes “Jesus”/Yeshua to be GOD is worshiping a FALSE God, is guilty of IDOLATRY. And, according to Messiah’s own words, we are all responsible for obeying “every word which comes from the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4). One of those “words from the mouth of God” is found in Leviticus 5:17: “Now if a person sins and does any of the things which YHVH has commanded not to be done, though he was unaware, still he is guilty and shall bear his punishment.”
    Details on request from ru12 at runbox dot com.

    • Hello Bob,
      Thank you for your comment. I agree that understanding the true nature of the man Christ and who he was (and is) is extremely important.
      I also agree that his true Hebrew name was Yeshua, and that those around him would have known this, yet there is no proof that he ever went by that name. All the scriptures show that he went by his Greek name (pronounced ee-ay-sooce) which has come down in English as “Jesus.” The “J” sound was not used in Greek or early English. The earliest English translations used “Iesu”, and instead of “Jew” they used “Iewe.” So to be technical the words Jew and Jewish are also not correct, but that’s how they came down in English. The bible name Joshua is also Yeshua in Hebrew, but most people use the “J” pronunciation of Joshua.

      I often prefer the name Yeshua because to me “Jesus” connects too closely to the Roman grid of Christianity that has been handed down, yet I still often use the name Jesus because that’s what most people use.

      You mention idolatry, and it is true Christianity has accepted the Trinity doctrine that was handed down by Rome, and that this was not what the original Jewish disciples taught. This doctrine turned the man Christ into a God (similar to their other Roman leaders who were considered as deities). In the second chapter of my book (Setting the Table 2) I show how the word Trinity originated, and some will not be happy about this clear history. In Course 8, I have a section on the “logos” and explain the difference on how the Jews used this word and how it developed in Rome. I explain the logos in John 1:1 in that section as well.

      Although I agree with you that Jesus was not God as to his identity, we also know that he was the express image of God’s likeness (Heb. 1:3). He was the first man in God’s image and likeness that Gen. 1:26 pointed to. God also told Moses that He made him (i.e. Moses) to be a God (or “as God”) to Pharaoh (Exo. 7:1). And Yeshua quoted the scripture of David showing that the leaders were called Gods (John 10:34, 35). We also know the scripture refers to Jesus as “God with us” (which is what the name Immanuel means, Matt 1:23). It is important to understand who Jesus really was because the scripture says we will be like him, and God plans to bring many into His image and likeness (Rom 8:29; 1 John 3:2).

      I said all that to say that I personally do not believe that all the believers who do not understand Christ’s true nature have lost their salvation because of this. They may not understand that Jesus was a sinless man who was fully indwelt by the God of Abraham (Col. 1:19; 2:9), but believers are cleansed by appropriating the blood of Christ’s sacrifice, and nowhere does it say we are only saved if we have every doctrine down perfect.

      I do not at all think they are committing idolatry, only that they are missing the full truth on this. I believe they love God, and are right with God, even though they have not come into all truth yet.

      I agree that the understanding of who Yeshua was is of great importance, but I do not see this as being of “far greater importance” than the other major truths that the book brings out. For instance, seeing what the Messiah actually meant in his Last Supper parables is also extremely important, for this shows what the true “communion” is and what is needed for the spiritual bride to make ready (Rev. 19:7). Thank you again for your comments Bob, may the Lord bless you.

      • Bob, you sent me an email directly and just so we keep our conversation in order I have pasted your comments here:
        I agree that it would be truly horrific if so many hundreds of millions of sweet, loving people could be condemned simply because of their believing false teachers. But, I still come up against “YHVH Elohim doesn’t change” (Malachi 3:6) and the unequivocal testimony of Leviticus 5:17:
        “If anyone sins and does what is forbidden in any of YHVH’s commands, even though they do not know it, they are guilty and will be held responsible.” (NIV)
        It still comes down to personal responsibility, IF we are to believe Scripture, or so it seems to me. (end quote)
        I then responded to you the following:
        Thanks again Bob for responding.
        So wouldn’t the scripture you quoted below also apply to you and I? In other words, you and I may understand that Jesus was not a God, or the God, but doesn’t that verse from the Law of Moses also apply to any sin? I certainly cannot claim to have kept the law perfectly (never a bad thought, bad speech etc). I’m just wondering your opinion on this, doesn’t it then mean there is no hope for us, or do you say you have perfectly kept the law without one sin? I don’t mean this in a cynical sense, just honestly wondering your thoughts.
        Thank you much,
        Alex
        “If anyone sins and does what is forbidden in any of YHVH’s commands, even though they do not know it, they are guilty and will be held responsible.” (NIV)
        (end quote)
        Then the following comment below in the next posting was your response—-

  2. Shalom Aleichem, Alex:
    Thanks for your thoughtful response.  Concerning your question above, yes, Lev. 5:17 surely does apply to us as well, IF we are in covenant with YHVH Elohim through His son, our Lord Yeshua. Other provisions of Leviticus (Chapter 4) allow for sins of ignorance to be forgiven, IF the one in Covenant makes the prescribed offering through the priest. Lev. 4:35 “In this way the priest will make atonement for them for the sin they have committed, and they will be forgiven.” THIS is the key.

    There IS a prescribed offering for the sins of the people, as well as prescribed offerings for individual sins, all of which have to be made by the priest, in the Temple. Naturally, the Jews no longer have a Temple nor a Levitical priesthood, so they have only their prayers, their expectation of the Messiah, and the individual’s faithful keeping of the written Torah of Moses in which to hope.  Since most who call themselves “Jews” today are rabbinic Talmudists with ZERO genetic relationship to Abraham, Isaac & Jacob (being descended from the Khazars), in truth, they have no hope at all (Rev 2:9 & 3:9).  So, since the destruction of the Temple in 68AD, Yom Kippur may serve as an emotional BandAid for their psyches, but little else in terms of Biblical justification.
    We, on the other hand, still have a High Priest, and the Apostle John lays it all out in a very few words, in 1 John:

    4  We write this to make our joy complete.
    5  This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all.
    6  If we claim to have fellowship with him and yet walk in the darkness (disobedience to Torah), we lie and do not live out the truth.
    7  But if we walk in the light (obedience to Torah), as he is in the light, (then) we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Yeshua, his Son, purifies us from all sin.
    8  If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.
    9  If we confess our sins, (then) he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.
    10  If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us.

    This is a CONDITIONAL promise (IF __ , THEN ___). For sins of ignorance to be covered, we still have to ask forgiveness for any which we may have committed, and for the holy Spirit of Father YHVH to bring them to our attention. And this too is provided in the Renewed Covenant Scriptures, John 14:

    23  Yeshua replied, “Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them.
    24  Anyone who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me.
    25  “All this I have spoken while still with you.
    26  But the Advocate, the holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.
    27  Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid.

    For us, the key is (a) knowing ALL of the commandments of God (“every word which comes from the mouth of God” – Matthew 4:4); (b) resting in the provisions of Father and Son for our SINCERE efforts to do so.  But, in the end, each of us is still personally responsible before holy God and before His Son for our behavior, and for our obedience. Thanks for reading.

    • Shalom Bob and thanks again. Although we may have different opinions on certain subjects I appreciate the dialogue being in a good spirit. I think believers can learn from each other when its brought in the right spirit instead of the attack that is often seen in cyber space. Over the next weeks I am hoping to get the time to put up a few posts addressing some of our differences and would appreciate your thoughts in return if you have time. I also appreciate the PDF article you sent and would like to add some thoughts along those lines. All the best Bob! Alex

  3. Thomas Robinson says:

    Just a couple of issues. You state that arton is the word for daily leavened bread. But Scripture indicates that this word can apply to both leavened and unleavened bread. When Jesus broke the bread (arton) with the disciples in Emmaus after His resurrection (the Greek word is specifically used in Luke 22:30), this would have been during the seven-day Feast of Unleavened Bread immediately following the Passover. So the bread would necessarily have been unleavened. Thus arton at the last supper could just as well have been unleavened–allowing for that occasion to have been the Passover. Moreover, Jesus had told His disciples to prepare for the Passover with a definitive statement to the homeowner: “And He said, ‘Go into the city to a certain man, and say to him, “The Teacher says, “My time is at hand; I WILL KEEP THE PASSOVER AT YOUR HOUSE with My disciples”‘” (Matthew 26:18). If this was not the Passover, then Jesus told His disciples to lie.

    • Thank you for your comment Thomas. I agree with you that the time frame of Luke 24:30 is during the Feast. Course 4 of my book goes very deep into this section of scripture and its hard to cover in a short comment but let me try. If you notice the next verse you will see that it was right after Jesus breaks this bread (same word for regular daily leavened bread) out to them that their eyes are opened and they recognize him, on this road to Emmaus. I believe part of why this was is their shock in seeing regular bread in the middle of the Festival. This was after the resurrection so it was not a sin for Jesus to use leavened bread, and was a major sign to them that they were no longer under the Old Covenant, but they were now in the New Covenant. No observant Jew would walk into a Rabbi’s house in Jerusalem today and say “Rabbi, I have brought bread for Passover.” They were much more strict in Jesus day, and they would not portray to the Jewish world that the Messiah and the twelve all sinned before God by eating “bread” at Passover (had the Last Supper been the Passover, which it was not). One chapter in my book is titled “50 reasons the Last Supper was not the Passover,” where I cover 50 such points. I cover Matthew 26:18 in the chapter titled “Three Greek Keys that Unlock the Gospels” (now uploaded under Chapter Samples tab). In that chapter I cover all the English verses that have been translated to support the Roman Catholic tradition (that was handed down) that Jesus was not crucified on the Passover, but he ate it the night before at the Last Supper. In the other scriptures where Jesus speaks of eating the Passover he uses the Greek subjunctive, which is often used when conveying possibility or doubt. Even some of the English translations say “might eat” to show this (John 18:28, Luke 22:8). The verse you mentioned (Matt 26:18) is interesting because it is the only verse where the Greek uses the indicative mood in Greek (the mood of certainty), but Jesus there does not say he will “eat” it, but thet he will “keep” it (the Greek word translated “keep” can also mean “accomplish, perform, bring about…” Jesus knew he would not “eat” the Passover and said it at the Last Supper (Luke 22:15,16, in an accurate Greek translation). Jesus knew he would be crucified at the Passover, on the 14th day of Nisan as God’s true lamb, and he told his disciples this two days before the 14th day Passover lamb sacrifice (Matthew 26:2). The early Jewish believers all knew that the Messiah was crucified on the 14th day of Nisan, and my book brings out this clear history in the first chapter titled “The Jewish Disconnect and the Fourteenthers” (see Chapter Samples tab) and in that chapter we see how Rome took over and handed down the other tradition. This caused certain Greek scriptures to later be translated incorrectly (not changed, but mis-translated) because everyone had believed the Roman tradition as fact. Thank you again Thomas for the issues you raised, and the good spirit in which you brought them.

      • Thomas Robinson says:

        In Luke 24:30, the bread would have been supplied by the people at the house they stopped to eat at. It, again, would necessarily have been unleavened, as the Jews of Judea would not have made leavened bread during the Days of Unleavened Bread. How would even Christ’s disciples then have understood that it was supposedly OK to do so? Or are you are saying that Jesus miraculously produced leavened bread–of which there is no indication? In Matthew 26:18, Jesus did not only say, “I will keep the Passover”–allowing for His crucifixion to be included, as you’re maintaining. Rather, He said, “I will keep the Passover AT YOUR HOUSE.” So what He did at the person’s HOUSE was keeping the Passover. (Not to get into the whole argument of when Passover was, but I agree that Jesus died on Nisan 14 in the afternoon and that the Jews killed their lambs at that time, eating the Passover meal at the beginning of the 15th after sunset. However, I believe the Passover lamb was originally mandated in Exodus to be killed just after sunset at the beginning of the 14th with the meal eaten that evening–the same time that Christ and His disciples had the last supper. I utterly reject the Good Friday tradition, believing that Jesus was in the grave three days and three nights, as He foretold.) Again, I stress that what Jesus observed at the person’s HOUSE was the Passover, according to His own words–which are not easily dismissed. (Of course, the remainder of that night and through the daylight period, the same calendar date, was a continuation of the observance, being the fulfillment of the Passover.)

        • The text in Luke 24 does not say whose “bread” it was. The Jews often carried bread along in little pouches, and since the text does not say, it could have either been in the house, or it could have been supplied by Jesus. Regular bread would not have been left in this Jewish home during the Festival, so Jesus miraculously supplying it makes much more sense. It was not hard for him to produce bread when needed for a major teaching or miracle, and he did this several other times in scripture (John 21:9, Mark 8:19-21, John 6, etc) . But the bigger question is if the Passover was eaten by Jesus at the Last Supper, then Jesus was crucified the following day as “our day late Passover.” You cannot have it both ways. And if the Last Supper had been the Passover, why would all the apostles go out writing the scriptures saying that they and Jesus all sinned a grevious sin before God by eating regular “bread” at Passover? Why not just use the Greek word for unleavened (azumos) instead of the Greek word for regular daily leavened bread (arton)? And was God wrong when he anointed David in the scripture saying that the Messiah would be betrayed by one eating his “bread”? God, by His foreknowlege, used the Hebrew word for regular leavened bread (lechem). If God had known that His son would be crucified the next day, as the true Passover then this would make sense. But if He thought Jesus would instead be eating a Passover the previous night, then He certainly would not have used “lechem” for what he would be eating, but the Hebrew word “matzah.” As to your point on the “HOUSE,” again you will find that this is another English bad translation that was made to look like Jesus ate the Passover at this mans “house.” But the word for “HOUSE” is not in the Greek, it was added by the translators. You cannot just add words that are not in the Greek to help bolster a position. The Greek reads “near you I keep/accomplish/perform the Passover.” Jesus does NOT say “I will keep/accomplish/bring about the Passover at your HOUSE.” In the prophecy of Jesus being betrayed with “bread,” (Psalm 41:9) why did the God breathed scripture use the word for regular bread (lechem) if God thought Jesus would be betrayed while eating the Passover? Instead God should have used the Hebrew word for unleavenmed (matzah) in Psalm 41:9, assuming He would know by His foreknowlege that it would be at the Passover, when matzah would be required? At the Last Supper Jesus said that Psalm was written of him, and he used the regular Greek word for “bread” when he quotes that verse concerning what Judas was about to do (John 13:18, and the verses that follow there). If that was the Passover, God, the Psalmist, and Jesus all used the wrong word?

          • Thomas Robinson says:

            Thanks for the point on the Matthew 26:18 translation. But I think the location at the house of the homeowner is still the natural meaning–as Jesus’ particular directive was specific to this individual, not everyone in Jerusalem or the world–as it would be if he meant the fulfillment through His crucifixion. The next verse states that the disciples carried out Jesus’ command in preparing the Passover (this was not them preparing for the crucifixion). Also, I disagree that arton is limited to leavened bread. It refers to a loaf, which could be leavened or unleavened. Our English word “bread” can refer to both leavened bread and unleavened bread. I maintain that it’s the same with Hebrew lechem and Greek arton. So it was not a sin to have arton at the Passover–as this could well be, and necessarily was in this case, unleavened bread. Despite this, I do agree that bread and wine can signify meals generally–and spiritual fellowship in a figurative sense. I do not think the actual observance of the Passover on the eve of Christ’s death is mutually exclusive of the fellowship metaphor.

          • The following verse (as you mention Thomas) where they “prepare” the Passover (Matt 26:19) did not mean cook the lamb, for an observant Jew would never think of killing and cooking a Passover lamb the night before the Passovers were sacrificed (i.e. the day before the lamb of God, the true Passover was sacrificed). God’s law through Moses was very clear, on the 14th day, between the time when the sun starts going down (i.e. noon) and sunset, is the allowable time for the Passovers to be sacrificed. This was the exact time Jesus died on the cross, and God commanded it to Moses by His foreknowlege. So Jesus could never have eaten a Passover the night before, nor would he sin before God by sacrificing an illegal Passover the night before they would be legaly sacrificed. The “prepare” for Passover (that the disciples did) had to do with ritually preparing the location, preparing in body and soul to make the sacrifice the following day. The Jews were very serious about these things and we see many coming down to Jerusalem days ahead of time to prepare (John 11:55). The chapter in my book that covers the legal time for the Passover is titled “Between the Evenings: The Legal Time to Slay the Passover” (now uploaded under Chapter Samples tab). You raise a good point that there are some rare occasions where the Greek word for arton is used loosely for something that was unleavened (Course 7 fully covers each one of those rare occasions) but the important point is that each time this happens the scripture makes it very clear that it is used in a figurative sense. Each time the scripture fully qualifies it in the context. For instance in Deuteronomy 16:3 the scripture refers to the matzah (i.e. in the original in the Hebrew scripture) at Passover, and God loosely calls it the “bread” of affliction (using the Hebrew word lechem, for daily common leavened bread). But this is obviously used figuratively by God. The Rabbi’s never went out and said “Oh, I guess it’s ok to eat regular leavened bread at Passover now.” As I say, those rare verses where someting unleavened (Greek = Azumon, Hebrew = matzah) is called “bread” (i.e. arton in Greek, and lechem in Hebrew) the scripture context always makes it clear, and those verses are covered in Course 7 of The Messianic Feast. The Jews had one word for unleavened (matzah) and another word for daily leavened bread (lechem). When those scriptures were translated into Greek they had the same thing, one word for unleavened (Azumon) and another word for daily regular leavened bread (arton). Everytime God told the Jews what to eat at Passover, or what was eaten, they used the one Hebrew word for unleavened (matzah, 15 time in all). God would never say “eat bread” at Passover, or leave it vague and confusing when He wanted only unleavened (matzah). When God said the man that eats leaven during Passover would be cut off from the nation, the Jews did not then go around saying “Hey, we all ate bread at Passover.” They were very careful and specific to use the proper and correct word when speaking to each other, and they would never imply they were eating leavened bread at Passover by using the wrong word.

          • Thomas Robinson says:

            Thanks for the discussion. I think we will have to agree to disagree, especially as I am quite convinced from my own many years of study in conjunction with numerous others that “between the two evenings” refers to the twilight period between sunset and dark at the beginning of the 14th–not between noon and sunset at the end of the 14th (notwithstanding what I consider to be Jewish error in reckoning this). Thus I don’t believe Jesus was erring in observing the Passover at the beginning of the 14th. Rather, He and His disciples were observing it at the correct time while the Judeans were observing it a day late (though this had the effect of Christ being killed when the Jews were slaying Passover lambs). I don’t believe this timing of Jesus being sacrificed at the end of the 14th negates Jesus being the fulfillment of Passover, which was to be sacrificed at the beginning of the 14th, just as His being sacrificed on Nisan 14 does not negate Him fulfilling the Day of Atonement sacrifice of Tishri 10. Again, I appreciate the discussion.

          • Thank you much Thomas. I really appreciate the good spirit in which you write and bring your points, a rare quality on the internet these days! On the “between the evenings” and the legal time to slay a Passover the Jewish writings are very clear. All leaven was to be removed by noon on the 14th day because God had said not to sacrifice the Passover with leaven (Ex. 34:25, meaning while leaven was on hand in the nation). The Jewish authorities were very clear on God’s laws that a Passover brought before noon of the 14th day would not be valid (all these references are in the “between the evenings” chapter, see this chapter under Chapter Samples tab). So had Jesus brought the Passover sacrifice the day or evening before, there still would have been leaven on hand throughout Israel, and it would have been an illegal sacrifice—the Temple authorities never would have allowed them in for the sacrifice. I’m thinking that I will put the whole chapter online here titled “50 Reasons the Last Supper was not the Passover” so if you stop by in a few weeks hopefully I will have that up, and you can consider the various points. Thanks again Thomas and all the best to you.

  4. Thomas Robinson says:

    Correction to what was just posted–Luke 24:30, not 22:30.

  5. The bread Yeshua held before His disciples at His Passover Seder was indeed unleavened bread. The night before was Passover as the 14th oF Nisan began at sundown and he had to be in the ground the following day before sundown which completed the Passover Day.
    God’s Day begins with creation and there was Night and Day and this was the first day.
    Day begins at sundown. Yeshua knew that leaven bread represented sin. He would not equate himself as anything less than UNLEAVENED..When He said THIS IS MY BODY, which is BROKEN FOR YOU. He spilled His Blood to atone for the Sins of His chosen since Jacob was the first THROUGH ISAAC YOUR DECENDANTS WILL BE (a SPIRITUAL CALLING BY A HOLY GOD WHO KNEW WHO WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT HEART FOR THE CIRCUMCISION OF THE HOLY SPIRIT TO CHANGE A MORTAL INTO AN IMMORTAL SPIRITUAL BEING – Jacob wrestled all night long with a MAN, A devine Being (Elohim) and WOULD NOT let go of this Man UNTIL HE BLESSED HIM. Only GOD can BLESS man. Man cannot BLESS Himself. Yeshua changed Jacob’s name to His own
    given name from Isaiah 49 – and Yeshua was given HIS FATHER’S NAME in this chapter of Isaiah when Yeshua was called to be HIS SERVANT YISRA’EL..HIS Name Sake from His Father. THE BIBLE IS A LOVE STORY between A HOLY, RIGHTEOUS GOD, and mankind – and God has created mankind in His Image. Mankind has sinned, and fallen short of the Glory of God. Atonement is the only restoration – and God has given man the choice to chose eternal life or eternal damnation. God has known who would be HIS REMNANT – JEW AND GENTILE ALIKE AND THIS is THE RESTORED ONES WHO ARE THE TRUE DECENDANTS OF JACOB. Paul understood The Mystery in Romans 11 and used the Olive Tree as a Metaphor for the True Israel of God. Gal 6:16. THROUGHOUT the Scriptures God has sought The Remnant He chose for Himself from the beginning. He has loved YISRAEL THROUGHOUT history. Jeremiah was clear in 31:31-37 That a Renewed/New Covenant with YISRAEL would be given and this Remnant of Jews & Gentiles will be with HIM THROUGH ETERNITY. Paul said not all Israel was Israel and that not all Jews are Jews. Those with hearts that can be circumcised by God will have HIS LAW Cut into their Immortal bodies and then no one as Jeremiah said will need to teach another to Know the Lord for They all Will Know Him in that day. There is One God and He has a Triune Nature – he is Echad – Composite Unity Godhead. Father, Son, Holy Spirit. King David Knew the Holy Spirit and asked God not to take His Holy Spirit from him.
    Those Jews who sought to KNOW GOD before Yeshua was given a physical body KNEW HIM as His Spirit revealed Himself to those seeking Him with all their hearts. They will seek me with all their heart and Know Me saith the Lord. Let us draw near to God…
    Let US make MAN in OUR IMAGE, IN THE IMAGE OF GOD.
    Isaiah quoted God in the 6th chapter…..”Who shall I send, WHO WILL GO FOR US?
    God at creation certainly didn’t need anyone other than HIMSELF to create Man in His Image…but HIS IMAGE IS COMPRISED OF FATHER, SON AND HOLY SPIRIT. Isaiah 48:16 IS CLEAR. Proverbs 30 asks you…WHAT IS God’s Name or His Son’s Name if you know it. It is the SAME NAME…IT IS ISRAEL…..HIS LAND IS ISRAEL…HIS PEOPLE ARE ISRAEL. THE EPIC LOVE STORY IS GOD’S LOVE FOR YISRAEL DOWN THROUGH THE AGES AND HIS DEALING WITH HER AS HIS BRIDE AND ECHAD PEOPLE. HE IS FAITHFUL TO THOSE WHO ARE CALLED BY HIS NAME AND HIS KINGDOM COMES
    AS THE END OF THE AGE APPROACHES. COME LORD YESHUA AND REIGN AS THE KING LORD OF HOSTS AND KING OF KINGS. MAY EVERY KNEE BOW AND TONGUE CONFESS THAT YOU ARE INDEED LORD OF ALL THAT IS ETERNAL AND TRUE. WE WORSHIP AND PRAISE YOU LORD GOD ALMIGHTY WHO LOVES THOSE WHO HAVE HUMBLY SOUGHT TO KNOW HIM IN HIS FULLNESS AND MAY HIS GREAT RESTORATION BE FULFILLED THROUGH YISRAEL HIS SERVANT.
    LORD – FOR ALL THE ARABS THAT ARE IN DARKNESS PLEASE REVEAL YOURSELF TO THOSE WHO READ YOUR SCRIPTURES PRESERVED IN PART THROUGH THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS AND MAY ISAIAH HELP TO OPEN THEIR EYES TO WHO THEIR GOD TRULY IS. THE COUNTERFEIT PALES IN COMPARISON TO PROPHETS WHOSE WORDS HAVE BEEN ACCURATE DOWN THROUGHOUT HISTORY TO THIS PRESENT DAY. ISRAEL INDEED WAS BORN IN A DAY AS ISAIAH SAID AND JERUSALEM WAS GIVEN BACK FOLLOWING. DANIEL SAID THE MESSIAH WOULD BE CUT OFF BEFORE THE SECOND TEMPLE WAS DESTROYED IN DANIEL 9:24-26.
    YESHUA’S ATONEMENT WAS RECORDED IN ISAIAH 53. ISAIAH SAID THAT A CHILD WOULD BE BORN AND A VIRGIN WOULD CONCEIVE AS A SIGN. iSAIAH SAID THAT UNTO US A CHILD WOULD BE BORN AND HIS NAME WOULD BE CALLED WONDERFUL, COUNSELOR, ALMIGHTY GOD, EVERLASTING FATHER, SAR SHALOM – PRINCE OF PEACE. ALL THE HEBREW SCRIPTURES HAVE BEEN ACCURATE AND TRUE. ARAB PEOPLE GOD LONGS FOR YOU TO READ AND LISTEN TO MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. THE JEWS NEVER CHANGED ANY WORDS OF THEIR SCRIPTURES – FOR THOSE OF YESHUA WOULD HAVE CERTAINLY BE REMOVED IF THEY WERE SEEKING TO DISCREDIT HIS LIFE, DEATH, AND RESURRECTION AS THE PROPHETS DANIEL, JEREMIAH, ISAIAH, AND ZACHARIAH SO CLEARLY FORETOLD. SHALOM, SHALOM – COME INTO HIS LIGHT
    AND THE COVENANT OF DEATH WILL BE ANNULLED BY ALMIGHT GOD AS ISAIAH 28 SAID. ACCURATE TO THIS VERY DAY WE ARE SEEING THE TRUE GOD’S PLAN PLAYED OUT. PEACE WILL NOT COME BY WAR AND HATRED BUT BY LOVE AND TRUTH THROUGH A LOVING GOD.

    • Barbara, are you saying that when Jesus broke the one bread and said “this is my body” that he really wanted his Jewish disciples to eat unleavened bread that was his body in a ritual? Wouldn’t it make more sense that the Messiah was speaking in another parable, as the scripture says he so often did (Mark 4:34, etc)? Would such a Roman Catholic ritual be performed in first-century Jerusalem by the Messiah and his law observant Jewish followers? In Course 2 of my book “The Body of Christ did not mean a Ritual” (see chapter samples section) I prove that this Last Supper teaching was not a new ritual but spiritual truth brought in parables. The disciples also understood what Jesus meant, for they went out teaching that “WE are the body of Christ” (1 Cor. 12:27, Romans 12:4-5, 1 Cor. 10:17,etc..), and they understood this from his parables with the one regular leavened “bread” at the Last Supper. The early Jewish believers all understood this, but things were changed when Rome took control.

  6. C.C. McInnis says:

    The only thing that has been left out from trying to read what was said above and below, is:
    In scripture it says, He took the bread, blessed it and broke it and said….take this all of you and eat, this is my body and so forth and then taking the cup he blessed it and said take this, all of you and drink, this is my blood which will……..and so forth.
    The telling line is, “Do this in memory of me.”

    • Thank you C.C., and if there was a weak point in the whole presentation this would be it, that Jesus said “do this” in memory of me. The answer is that in the book I have a whole section titled “The Jewish Idiom of Natural to Spiritual.” There (now uploaded under Chapters Samples tab) I have several pages of examples where the first-century Jews would often speak something in the natural, but mean something spiritual, or a spiritual truth behind what was said. A few quick examples would be where Jesus said Lazarus is sleeping (but he was really dead), where he said beware of the “leaven” of the Pharisees (but he was not meaning the leaven of bread), where he said unless you eat my flesh and blood you have no life (but he was not meaning to literally eat his flesh and blood), etc. It is amazing just how many of these examples there are. So when it comes to the “do this” that you mentioned, we have to ask “Do this literally, in a ritual where we drink juice as if its your blood, and eat bread as if its your human flesh (as Rome taught), or do what this parable is spiritually meaning?” The apostles understood it was a parable, so they never went out teaching everyone to do this as a ritual. We don’t know how often, whether the priest turns the bread to human flesh (Catholic teaching) or whether the flesh is just in the bread (Luther) or whether its just a symbolic ritual (as the Protestants came to teach), or even what kind of bread to use, leavened or unleavened. A big problem that shows the ritual was not taught by the early Jews is that since it was not the Passover at the Last Supper they were eating regular leavened bread (and the Greek word for regular leavened bread was used each time, as Course 1 proves, see Chapter Samples tab). So the fact that Rome and most Protestant churches use unleavened bread (thinking it was the Passover) shows that this ritual came about in Rome, and was not from the early Jews who all knew Jesus was crucified on the 14th day as the true Passover (See “Setting the Table one, The Jewish disconnect and the Fourteenthers), and that the Last Supper could not therefore have been a Passover (bad English translations notwithstanding). It was also prophesied that the Messiah would be betrayed by one eating (present tense) his bread, in Psalms 41:9 (using the Hebrew word for regular leavened bread). The Apostles all knew this, and that is why they later would go out teaching that we are the one bread, and members of the one body of Christ—that WE are the body of Christ, they knew that the pieces of bread represented us as members of his spiritual body (1 Cor. 10:17, 1 Cor. 12:27, etc). That is what Jesus was meaning in his parables at the Last Supper, how we would function as his spiritual body on earth, being members of his spiritual body. He never wanted people to eat bread as if it was his human body, this would not have gone over in first-century Jerusalem, the ritual was a creation of Rome.The Apostles also understood (from the Last Supper parables) that Jesus blood would spiritually flow through each believer bringing cleansing (1 John 1:7).

    • The NT translations should actually say “He took bread and blessed”, inferring He blessed God the Father, not the bread itself. Some do indicate the lack of an “it” in the footnotes
      every blessing
      Tim

  7. CLV Jn 6:53 Jesus, then, said to them, “Verily, verily, I am saying to you, If you should not be eating the flesh of the Son of Mankind and drinking His blood, you have no eonian life in yourselves.
    CLV Jn 17:23 I in them and Thou in Me, that they may be perfected in one, and that the world may know that Thou dost commission Me and dost love them according as Thou dost love Me.

    You can only be made perfect or mature in Christ by receiving the Spirit of God symbolized by the wine, 1Jn 5:8, and being in the body of Christ, the bread, and have communion/fellowship with of Jesus’s suffering as a offering for sin, Php 3:10, He 13:10-13 and Ro 6:6. When you are in the body of Christ you are that body of sin/flesh that is being burned to ashes outside the camp. Now one can only go so far in using types and shadows based on the law and its’ sacrifices.

    AV Hb 10:1 . For the law having a shadow of good things to come, [and] not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

    That is why the Apostle Paul determined not to know any thing among the Corinthian church save Jesus Christ, and him crucified, 1C 2:2. It is about dying to the flesh with help from the Holy Spirit, Ro 8:13.

    • Very interesting discussion. I find the technical aspects of this subject somewhat difficult to express well and I admire the communication skills of ATennent and all the commenters too! I grew up in a church that kept a “Passover” celebration at the beginning of the 14th. This church also understood that Yashua died late on the 14th about twenty hours later. They also taught that the Jews were killing the lambs for Passover a day late despite the fact that the Messiah died exactly when they were killing their lambs. For several years I always took a bit of time out of my day at the actual time of day on Nissan 14 when Messiah was killed and reflected on the timing of our Passover service and how it made no sense having a memorial service a day before the actual time of the event. This led to much study and a conviction that the Jews timing of Passover at the time of Messiahs death was correct. One obvious but little mentioned proof is that Yashua never mentioned that the Jews were in error on their counting/timing of feast days, and neither did the Apostles. But the clincher was a specific proof of the timing of the eve. sacrifice – “between the evenings”(beyn ha’arbayim). The link below is to an article by Bryan T. Huie that explains it pretty concisely and clearly.
      http://www.scribd.com/doc/16885977/What-Does-Between-the-Evenings-Mean

  8. Hello Larry and thank you for your interesting comments and link. I totally agree with the writer of that article that the time of “between the evenings” is not a time after sunset as many attempt to show. My book happens to have a 20 page chapter titled “Between the Evenings, the Legal Time to Slay the Passover” where I give solid proof from Jewish history and both testaments of the scriptures that this time was always considered to be between noon and sunset. Here is an opening section with a couple of quotes from that chapter:

    Some of the confusion as to whether the Last Supper was the Passover or not comes from the English translations of the original Hebrew words meaning “between the evenings.” The Jewish sources are clear that this period—the time to slay the Passovers—was to be in the afternoon of the 14th day. However many English translators and commentators, believing that Jesus ate the Passover at the Last Supper (and that he also died at the proper time for the Passover sacrifice), portray the period of “between the evenings” as either evening or twilight, which can imply after sunset.
    This notion does not fit with Jewish history, which shows the legally allowed time for the Passover sacrifice to be between noon and sunset. Famous Jewish commentator Alfred Edersheim agrees with this, writing:
    The period designated as ‘between the two evenings’ when the Paschal lamb was to be slain, was past. There can be no question that, in the time of Christ, it was understood to refer to the interval between the commencement of the sun’s decline and what was reckoned as the hour of his final disappearance (about 6 p.m.). 
    The Jewish Encyclopedia verifies this same time frame:
    The time “between the two evenings” (“ben ha-’arbayim”) was construed to mean “after noon and until nightfall” 
    The chart below illustrates the sun ascending (from 6 AM to noon) and descending (from noon to 6 PM, around sunset). If you picture the sun in relation to the vertical line and the horizontal line in the chart below, this line is “even” with the horizon at noon, and is again “even” with the horizon at sunset. Thus, between the even-ings is the time between noon and sunset, as both Edersheim and The Jewish Encyclopedia noted.
    (end quote).

    I am planning to put several entire chapters up here online (now uploaded under Chapter Samples tab) so you might check back in case this chapter would be of interest to you. Although Edersheim (quoted above, and another quote in the link you provided) understood this aspect of Jewish history, he still believed the Last Supper was the Passover (due to his not understanding the accurate way to translate the Greek in the main scriptures (Matt. 26:17, Mark 14:12, and Luke 22:7). I explain how the Greek in those scriptures should have been translated in the chapter titled “The Three Major Greek Keys Which Unlock the Gospels.” He also did not understand that there was regular bread at that meal (as 10 scriptures all use the regular Greek word for daily leavened bread when describing what was eaten at this meal). The Jews in Jerusalem would never portray such a thing to the whole world, had that meal been the Passover. Larry if you send me a private email in the “contact” section I will send you a code for a free eBook (if you would be able to read the book that way)? It sounds like this might really be of interest to you and I would be glad to share it! All the best, Alex

  9. Dear brother Alex, With this bread issue I think you are getting us into an unnecessary diversion.
    Greek for bread is zumos and unleavened bread is azumos. The NT passages refer to a loaf (artos), not it’s yeast content. And to maintain the Lord produced one out of the air (unnecessarily), just beyond belief.
    – we all need to use our loaves is my usual expression 🙂
    every blessing
    Tim

    • Hello there Tim and thanks for posting your thoughts. I realize that the Roman grid that has been handed down is pretty much believed by all. Specifically that the Last Supper was the Passover and that they were all eating unleavened bread at this meal, and that for some strange reason the Jewish Messiah wants us to remember him by eating a little piece of bread and pretending its his body. This however never would have gone over in first-century Jerusalem. The scripture says that the Messiah almost always spoke in parables (Matthew 13:34; Mark 4:34) but in Rome they misunderstood these parables and created their new “Communion” ritual. You have to ask yourself, would the first-century Jews really tell the whole nation they were eating regular leavened bread (artos) at Passover with the Messiah (at his last supper)? This would be a major sin before God and the nation, and on Jesus’s last night alive? You are incorrect to say that the Greek word for bread is “zumos,” and there is not one time in the New Testament where zumos is translated as “bread.” Zumos (or zumy) means leaven, and azumos means unleavened. The Greek word that is translated “bread” throughout the New Testament is artos, it is constantly used for regular daily bread which was leavened. Artos is the Greek word that is used 10 times to explain what they were eating at the last supper. When Jesus spoke the parable warning them to beware of the leaven (zumy) of the Pharisees the first thing that came to the disciples mind was bread (artos) because leaven and bread go hand in hand (see parable Matthew 16:6, 7). They would not then portray to the whole Jewish nation that they and the Messiah all ate regular daily bread (artos) at the Passover (i.e. had that meal been the Passover, which it was not). The Messiah died as the antitype of the Passover lamb, and he died at the exact time and day the Passovers were sacrificed (by God’s foreknowledge in giving the commands to Moses). Paul called him “Christ our Passover,” not “Christ our day late Passover.” I’m not sure what you are referring to when you say its beyond belief that the Lord would produce a bread out of thin air? But as a side point, how do you think he fed the five thousand and the four thousand at the two miracles, do you find those miracles beyond belief? I will soon be placing some entire chapters from the book so people can access them. One of those will be Course 1 which proves the bread (artos) at the last supper was leavened. Truth is never a diversion, but Roman tradition has been a big diversion as so many have missed what the last supper parables really mean. Hopefully you can come back in a week or so after I get those chapters up to see the scripture proofs I use, as this might change how you view these things (update: see Chapter Samples tab, those chapters now uploaded). One of the chapters I will be putting up is called “50 reasons the Last Supper was not the Passover.” God is revealing new truths in our day because these last supper parables are very important to understand for the Church to become the spotless bride we are called to. All the best to you Tim and God’s blessings!

  10. Greetings all,

    FYI – The Scriptural understanding of the Holy Week chronology is “visually” illustrated in the Key of David. (Isaiah 22:22; Revelation 3:7) This work in the Lord (Twilight Report) began in 1992, and is available free of charge in Adobe pdf. format from Paschal Lamb Ministries website.

    The key Text in the Key of David is the Hebrew Text “beyn ha’arbayim”. It is “visually” shown from the “whole” of Scripture (Matthew 4:4; Luke 4:4) (Genesis 1:1-Revelation 22:21) (Spirit of the law, only), how “beyn ha’arbayim” must always be interpreted from God’s Perspective of the law only, always interpreted from the Spirit of the law, only. God is the Author of this eternal ordinance (Exodus 12:14,17,24), so it is reasonable that this eternal ordinance be interpreted from His Eternal Perspective alone.

    There is only one Holy Spirit “inspired” Scriptural interpretation of “beyn ha’arbayim”, and it is “visually” seen as “twilight” from God’s Perspective only, always! Jesus always obeyed all of His Father’s commands by the Spirit and the Letter of the law combined, and Jesus is our eternal Paschal Lamb of God, without spot, and without blemish, one perfect Sacrifice for sin forever. It is finished! Alleluia!!

    In Christ’s service,
    David Behrens
    Sola Gloria Dei!
    Director Paschal Lamb Ministries
    Bringing Christian harmony to all the world

    • David, thank you for your input. I think we view some things the same and other things differently, no surprise here especially on this vast and often confused subject. Allow me to ask you a few questions and make a few points.
      1. You state that the time called “beyn ha’arbayim” is twilight, can you tell me the hours of the day that you define as twilight?
      2. On page 17 of your document you say that the proper way to translate Exodus 12:14-20 is that “on the first day” when they are to remove the leaven refers to the 15th day. This however is contrary to what the Pharisaic Jews argued in the Talmud, for there they state that if the 1st day (when they are to remove the leaven) refers to the 15th day, then they have already broken the commandment to have no leaven from the 15th to the 21st days, because if you remove leaven on the 15th day then you had leaven on the 15th day contrary to God’s will. So they explain that the Hebrew word “first” can also mean “previous” (this is true for the Greek word “first” also) and therefore they say in this context it obviously refers to the 14th day, the day of the Passover sacrifice (see pages 379-381 in my book). They were to have the leaven removed by the 14th day at noon (the sixth hour), because noon on this day began the legal time for the Passover sacrifice, and God had said have no leaven with my sacrifice. It was only a tradition that came later to remove the leaven the night before.
      3. You say that the crucifixion occurred on Thursday from a real time perspective (which I agree with) but that it happened on Good Friday from a “historical” perspective? Can you explain this, for of course it did not happed two days in a row, so one has to be correct and the other false?
      4. The Jewish Encyclopedia states that beyn ha’arbayim means “The time “between the two evenings” (“ben ha-’arbayim”) was construed to mean “after noon and until nightfall” (see my book p. 451, and that whole chapter), do you agree with this understanding?
      5. I see that you believe that they were eating regular leavened bread at the last supper, therefore do you then take it a step further, as I do in my book, and prove that the unleavened bread ritual called communion came about in Rome, and was nothing that Jesus or the apostles taught?
      God bless and thank you, Alex

      • Alex,

        I am just now reading your reply (at Panera Bread), as this past week has very hectic during my move. I just sold my house in Chicago. I will try to answer you questions as soon as I am able. If you have the time, I have discussed this understanding from every possible angle in the majority of discussions that I have posted on the CARM (Christian Apologetics Resource Ministry) website, under various forums. (Apologetics, Eastern Orthodox, Lutheran, Messianic Judaism, Other – User name davbeh2010) If you register with CARM, you are then able to see my previous 25-30 discussion posts.

        The subject material (Holy Week chronology) is indeed vast. It is only confusing because of the many different theological biases, first initiated by the adversary (Satan -defeated foe, Alleluia), who is the main cause for the division within the one true faith. The understanding that I have put forth would be much easier to communicate in a community setting, rather than via discussion posts, however, this has not taken place yet.

        I am continuing to pray for the unity of the faith. (Ephesians 4:13)

        Sincerely,
        David
        Sola Gloria Dei!

        • David, I will sure look forward to your answers to my questions, thank you. I just moved a few weeks ago so I can sure empathize with you! I will also try and get time to see your discussions on the CARM site, sounds interesting. I really appreciate your heart for the unity of the faith. I think the one major discovery I have made in this area is that since the last supper was not the Passover, and they were therefore eating regular leavened bread (as the Greek shows in 10 seperate scriptures), it shows that the Messiah was not teaching the unleavened Roman Ritual called communion, but was rather speaking in parables (as the scripture says he so often did). Jesus was not wanting a ritual of communion, but rather he was teaching the true spiritual communion which God seeks with us. Perhaps up ahead when things slow down for you, you can consider my book, most of which can be read for free here on the website. All the best to you, Alex

          • Alex, here are my thoughts regarding these two questions. I am still getting organized after my move, and will get to your other questions when time permits.

            1. You state that the time called “beyn ha’arbayim” is twilight, can you tell me the hours of the day that you define as twilight?

            The period of time called, “beyn ha’arbayim” is recorded in the Holy Scriptures by the Hebrew linguists as “twilight” in nineteen English translations (Exodus 12:6; Leviticus 23:5; Numbers 9:3) , as “evening” in seventeen English translations, and as “between the evenings” in three additional English translations.

            This Scriptural definition of “beyn ha’arbayim” is “visually” depicted in the Key of David (Scriptural understanding of the Holy Week chronology), and should always be “implicitly” interpreted from the Spirit of the law only (God’s Perspective of the law), as the period of time between the evenings of Jewish man and God. (i.e. between the evenings of sunset and “end of daylight”), and as always occurring on the Biblical fourteenth calendar day from God’s Perspective only.

            The first mention of evening (ereb) in Holy Scripture is in Genesis 1:5, and only God’s Perspective of evening (ereb) existed at that time. Man’s perspective of evening (ereb) did not exist for the first five days of Creation. Therefore we know that God’s Perspective of evening (ereb) existed before man’s perspective of evening (ereb), and that evening (ereb) ended the Biblical calendar day. (Scriptural proof given below)

            4. The Jewish Encyclopedia states that beyn ha’arbayim means “The time “between the two evenings” (“ben ha-’arbayim”) was construed to mean “after noon and until nightfall” (see my book p. 451, and that whole chapter), do you agree with this understanding?

            I do not agree with this understanding from the period of the Exodus of Egypt to the period shortly before the Crucifixion of Yeshua. The term “beyn ha’arbayim” is not explicitly defined anywhere in the Scriptures, it must therefore be “interpreted” implicitly from the context of the “whole of Scripture”. (Genesis 1:1 – Revelation 22:21) All previous implicit “interpretations” of the term “beyn ha’arbayim” have placed the “appointed time” of sacrifice on the fourteenth calendar day, from Jewish man’s perspective alone, (sunset to sunset), thus eliminating God’s Perspective of the eternal ordinance that He alone instituted. (Exodus 12:6; Genesis 1:5; Numbers 9:15) This understanding is contrary to the Holy Scriptures. (NKJV Exodus 12:15,16,19; Leviticus 23:6,7; Numbers 28:17,18; Luke 22:1) “On the first day” in context, by the Letter of the law, (Jewish man’s perspective) always began on the Biblical fifteenth calendar day (sunset to sunset reckoning). “On the first day” in context, by the Spirit of the law, (God’s Perspective of the law) always began on the Biblical fourteenth calendar day. (Genesis 1:5; Exodus 12:6; 18) The “appointed time” for the sacrifice of the paschal lambs’ always fell on “the first day”, by the Spirit and the Letter of the law combined, on the Biblical fifteenth calendar day (sunset to sunset reckoning). (Exodus 12:14,17,24) Yeshua always obeyed His Father’s commands perfectly by the Spirit and the Letter of the law combined.

            I do believe that the understanding found in the Jewish Encyclopedia, that beyn ha’arbayim means “The time “between the two evenings” (“ben ha-’arbayim”) was construed to mean “after noon and until nightfall” , was first born on the day that Messiah was crucified, when Messiah gave up His Spirit during this precise “appointed time” of Sacrifice, “beyn ha’arbayim”, on the Biblical fourteenth calendar day from God’s Perspective of the law only, by the Spirit of the law, only.

            [Scriptural proof: “ereb”; “beyn ha’arbayim”]

            Given the following Scriptural exegesis, we see that from God’s Perspective only, every Biblical calendar day began at morning, and each Biblical calendar day ended at evening. (“ereb” first mentioned in the Scriptures in (Genesis 1:5) – interpreted from God’s Perspective only, (end of daylight); “beyn ha’arbayim” first mentioned in the Scriptures in (Exodus 12:6) – interpreted from God’s Perspective only. (literal Hebrew “between the evenings” – interpreted as between the evenings of Jewish man and God – between sunset and end of daylight – interpreted from God’s Perspective only.)

            On Day 1 of Creation, you have God’s Perspective only.

            You have God, light, darkness, day, night, morning, and evening.

            Morning and evening are demarcation points of the period called “day” from God’s Perspective only. Morning was the beginning of the day “light”, and evening was the end of the day “light” from God’s Perspective only.

            Draw a circle. Draw a line from the nine o’clock position to the three o’clock position cutting the circle in half. The top half is God’s Day, the bottom half is God’s Night. Write in Light next to Day, write in Darkness next to Night. At the nine o’clock position write in morning, at the three o’clock position write in evening.

            Your Scriptural proof for the top half of the circle is (Genesis 1:5), with the morning and evening demarcation points attached to the Day.

            Your Scriptural proof for the bottom half of the circle is (Numbers 9:15,16), from evening to until morning, a pillar of fire by night. Night -equals- darkness from God’s Perspective only

            God alone was in control of the light switch in (Numbers 9:15,16), not man.

            God alone was in control of the light switch in (Genesis 1:5), not man.

            In (Numbers 9:15,16), God turned the “Supernatural light” on beginning at “ereb”; (pillar of fire by night), (“end of daylight” – first darkness from God’s Perspective only. God called the “darkness” – “night”) Since Moses, and the Congregation of Israel always witnessed this appearance of fire above the tabernacle, beginning at the “end of daylight” from God’s Perspective only, at “ereb”, then Moses and the Congregation of Israel would have interpreted “ereb” as “end of daylight” from their perspective as well.

            From the period of the Exodus of Egypt to the period shortly before the Cross, Moses and the Congregation of Israel, including Messiah and his family, would have understood that “ereb” ended the Biblical calendar day from both Jewish man’s perspective (sunset), and from God’s Perspective (end of daylight). (Exodus 12:6,18)

            The “appointed time” of sacrifice, “beyn ha’arbayim”, was always between these evenings, in the “twilight”, as always interpreted from God’s Perspective only, at the end of the Biblical fourteenth calendar day.

            There is only one Biblical calendar day, with two perspectives. God’s Perspective of the Biblical calendar day, and Jewish man’s perspective of the Biblical calendar day. God’s Perspective of the Biblical calendar day can be “visually” seen given the two Scriptural proofs, (Genesis 1:5; Numbers 9:15,16). All time within the Biblical calendar day from God’s Perspective is accounted for. Also, all twenty four hours of the Biblical calendar day from Jewish man’s perspective (sunset to sunset) are accounted for, given the same Scriptural proof. To illustrate otherwise, would be to add to, or take away from Holy Scripture.

            Deuteronomy 4:2 Scripture taken from the New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson.

            2 You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

            Since the term “beyn ha’arbayim” is not explicitly defined anywhere in the Scriptures, it must be “interpreted” implicitly from the context of the “whole of Scripture”. (Genesis 1:1 – Revelation 22:21)

            All previous implicit “interpretations” of the term “beyn ha’arbayim” have permanently placed the “appointed time” of sacrifice on the Biblical fourteenth calendar day, from Jewish man’s perspective alone (sunset to sunset), for all eternity, thus eliminating God’s Perspective from the eternal ordinance that God alone established to be interpreted from His eternal Perspective only. (Specifically eliminating God’s Perspective of “beyn ha’arbayim” from the period of the Exodus of Egypt to the period shortly before the Cross.)

            The Holy Spirit has shown me, that the implicit “interpretation” of the term “beyn ha’arbayim” should have always been understood as the “appointed time” of sacrifice on the Biblical fourteenth calendar day, from God’s Perspective only. (The end of God’s Biblical fourteenth calendar day at twilight, from God’s Perspective only) God is the originator of this “perpetual” ordinance, therefore, it is reasonable to interpret this eternal ordinance from His eternal Perspective only. (Exodus 12:14,17,24) God’s Perspective matters!

            Sincerely,
            David
            Sola Gloria Dei!

          • 5. I see that you believe that they were eating regular leavened bread at the last supper, therefore do you then take it a step further, as I do in my book, and prove that the unleavened bread ritual called communion came about in Rome, and was nothing that Jesus or the apostles taught?

            The timing of the institution of the Eucharist, according to the Holy Spirit “inspired” Holy Scriptures, can be “visually” seen in the Key of David. It is “visually” seen in the Key of David, how Jesus, the Eternal Paschal Lamb of God, on the night that He was betrayed, gave us His Body and Blood at the appointed time of Sacrifice (“beyn ha’arbayim”) on the first day, by the Spirit of the Law only, always. Beyn ha’arbayim is always interpreted by the Spirit of the Law only, always from God’s Perspective of the Law only. The Key of David does not change the Lord’s commands in this ordinance; it displays them “wholeheartedly. It is also “visually” seen how the use of leavened bread and unleavened bread in this ordinance are both in accordance to the Spirit of the Law only, always, according to the “whole” of Scripture (Matthew 4:4; Luke 4:4) (Genesis 1:1 – Revelation 22:21). There is no contradiction to the Lord’s commands in this ordinance (100% perfect obedience), when the Lord’s commands are framed by the “whole” of Scripture (Matthew 4:4; Luke 4:4) (Genesis 1:1 – Revelation 22:21), by the Spirit of the Law only, always. The Spirit gives life.

            There is always a contradiction to the Lord’s commands in this ordinance (disobedience), when the Lord’s commands are framed by Pharisaic traditions of men that “make void” (nullify) the Word of God. (Placing less than 100% faith in the “whole” of Holy Scripture – (Matthew 4:4; Luke 4:4) (Genesis 1:1 – Revelation 22:21)) The use of leavened bread and unleavened bread in this ordinance are both, contrary to the Letter of the Law only, always. The letter kills.

            The timing of the institution of the Eucharist, according to the Pharisaic traditional “implicit” interpretation of “beyn ha’arbayim” can also be “visually” seen in the Pharisaic traditional “implicit” interpretation(s) of the Holy Week chronology. (“Commandments of men” – East vs. West – John vs. Matthew, Mark, and Luke – Wrongly dividing the Word of God – spirit of division, strife, and confusion.) Since the Eastern Orthodox* ecclesia, along with their leadership, have chosen to ignore the warning of our Lord Jesus (first Apostle) regarding this matter, that is, to take heed and beware of the “doctrine” of the Pharisees and the Sadducees (i.e. Pharisaic traditional “implicit” interpretation of “beyn ha’arbayim” (noon to sunset – six hours) – “oral traditions” of men that “make void” the Word of God), they have indeed reaped what they have sown (i.e. not 100% Holy). A very problematic and troubling reality results when the Holy Spirit “inspired” Holy Scriptures are “made void”, and the Holy Spirit is quenched in the process. The just shall live by faith in every Word of God, including “beyn ha’arbayim”. (The Holy Spirit “inspired” Holy Scriptural “implicit” interpretation of “beyn ha’arbayim”, and not the Pharisaic traditional unholy “implicit” interpretation of “beyn ha’arbayim”.)

            * All other ecclesiastical authorities within the one Body of Christ have committed the same “error” in interpretation of “beyn ha’arbayim’ that the Eastern Orthodox ecclesia have committed. This “error” was handed down through man’s sinful tradition.

            All of the ecclesiastical authorities within the one true faith (Biblical Judeo/Christian faith) need to do a “heart” check. They are all going against the doctrine of Christ. Christ did not die for our sins according to traditions. Christ did die for our sins according to the Scriptures. (1 Corinthians 15:3) All Biblical perspectives must come in unity to the Cross of Jesus to see God’s Perspective. (“beyn ha’arbayim” – always interpreted from God’s Perspective only, from the Spirit of the law, only, always.)

            Western Christianity administers the Eucharist with “unleavened” bread, with a “Letter of the law” antichrist mindset, based on their erroneous belief in an unbiblical man-made “oral tradition” of Holy Week events. (misinterpretation of the Scriptural “appointed time” of sacrifice “beyn ha’arbayim”, and misinterpretation and misapplication of our LORD’s commands in observing the Eucharist, and not abiding in the doctrine of Christ)

            Eastern Christianity administers the Eucharist with “leavened” bread, with a “Letter of the law” antichrist mindset, based on their erroneous belief in an unbiblical man-made “oral tradition” of Holy Week events. (misinterpretation of the Scriptural “appointed time” of sacrifice “beyn ha’arbayim”, and misinterpretation and misapplication of our LORD’s commands in observing the Eucharist, and not abiding in the doctrine of Christ)

            2 John 1:9 Scripture taken from the New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson.

            9 Whoever transgresses[a] and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son.

            John 4:23-24 Scripture taken from the New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson

            23 But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. 24 God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.”

            John 6:63 Scripture taken from the New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson.

            63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.

            2 Corinthians 3:4-6 Scripture taken from the New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson.

            4 And we have such trust through Christ toward God. 5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think of anything as being from ourselves, but our sufficiency is from God, 6 who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit;[a] for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

            Footnotes: 2 Corinthians 3:6 Or spirit

          • David Behrens, thank you for answering my questions as to how you see these things, and here are some additional points on your answers:
            A. The time of between the evenings (beyn ha’arbayim) cannot mean twilight, because the Jews are clear in the Talmud that leaven needed to be removed before noon on the 14th day, because the Passovers could legally be sacrificed starting at noon and continuing until sundown on that day. Therefore since God commanded no leaven with the Passover, the Jewish scholars knew that leaven could remain until shortly before noon. Yet for you and others to say the time of “between the evenings” means twilight, and that the Jews could then sacrifice the Passovers the night before, this would have many Jewish homes across Israel still having leaven while other Jews are supposedly sacrificing the Passovers. This absolutely could not have happened, for they could not sacrifice the Passover in the Temple before the legal time (i.e. noon), while many Jewish families would still have leaven in their homes. If you will click this link to my chapter titled “Between the Evenings—the Legal Time to Slay the Passover” and read that chapter you will see the proofs I bring that show both testaments of the bible (new testament and old testament) agree with the many Jewish sources that say the legal time to slay the Passover (between the evenings) was between noon and sunset on the 14th day of Nisan. If you read that chapter you will see that the proofs are complete and very solid.
            B. Also, the “first day” to remove the leaven cannot mean the 15th day, because if they remove the leaven on the 15th day they have already broken the law to have no leaven for those seven days (the 15th to the 21st). In addition, it would break God’s commandment where He said to have no leaven (on hand) with the Passover sacrifice (Exodus 34:25) which was between noon and sunset on the 14th day. The chapter in my book “Between the Evenings—the Legal Time to Slay the Passover” goes into all this clear Jewish history (as well as the clear scriptures that agree with this reckoning).
            C. Jesus said there were 12 hours in the day (6:00am to 6:00 pm, John 11:9) and the Jews counted those hours such that the ninth hour of the day, when Jesus was crucified, meant from 2:00-3:00 in the afternoon (Matt. 27:46), and the final 12th hour of the day was counted from 5:00-6:00. So their day did not end at 9:00pm, nor did their day end at the end of daylight as you say, their day legally ended (and the next one began) at sunset. I do not believe that Jesus had a separate time perspective than God’s perspective, nor did the Jews have a different perspective than God’s perspective as you say. God says what He wants and man is to align with the times that God says, and that’s what the Jews did throughout their history (concerning the time to sacrifice the Passover).
            D. And finally, the “Eucharist” was a ritual that came about in Rome, it was nothing that Jesus or the original Jewish disciples taught. Please read my chapter titled “The Ritual, Why Didn’t the Jewish Disciples Teach it?” Part of the proof for this is that almost all churches today (Protestant and Catholic) keep their ritual with unleavened bread, even though the Messiah clearly taught his parable using one regular leavened bread. For clear proof that the “bread” that the Messiah held and broke and taught his parable with was leavened, please read Course 1 in my book titled “Last Supper Ritual or Parable? The Messiah Held One Leavened Bread.” And for what Jesus meant in this last supper parable please read Course 2 titled “The Body of Christ Did Not Mean a Ritual.”
            I wish you the best David, Sincerely, Alex

Leave a Comment

*