What Is The Name Of The Last Supper
By Pastor G. Reckart & Brother Herb Cunningham
Copyright 1993 All Rights Reserved
Passover is the name the Gospel writers give to the annual feast which was commanded under the law. This Feast was also a supper John 13:2; Greek deipnon: dinner, feast, supper (Strong's 1173). But we know the Supper was the Passover Feast. Rightly this should have been translated Feast. It is called a supper in the Gospels. But supper is not its name. It was the Last Supper Jesus ate before his crucifixion but it was not called the Last Supper, it was called Passover. The Passover meal is what is called the Lord's Supper. It is the Passover he instituted in his own commemoration, which is also a Supper because of the time of the day in which it is eaten. But, the name of the Feast is not named Supper or the Last Supper. It is named Passover.
Paul, speaking to the Corinthians, speaks of the Lord's Supper (1Cor 11:20). Supper in the Greek is deipnon: dinner, feast, supper (Strong's 1173). It can be translated dinner or FEAST! The Lord's Supper is also at the same time the Lord's Feast. When did the Lord eat this FEAST with his disciples? It was on Passover. The words "Lord's Supper or Lord's Feast" are not the name of the dinner. The name of the Lord's Supper Feast is called Passover. These two words "Lord's Supper" describe only the Passover Feast he ate with his disciples and instituted for his remembrance. The words "Lord's Supper" can only refer to the Passover Supper Jesus ate with his Apostles when he called the Cup, the Cup of the New Covenant in his blood, and the Unleavened bread his body. We eat the Lord's Supper when we celebrate the New Covenant Passover. Passover is the name of the celebration and because it is the New Covenant Passover, that is its real name: New Covenant Passover.
Paul also calls the eating of the Passover Supper "Communion" (1Cor 10:6). But Communion is not the name of the Supper. The word in Greek here for Communion is "koinonia" (Strong's #2842); correctly meaning "fellowship." The word "Koinonia" is not the name of the Feast. The word "Fellowship" is not the name of the Feast. The name of the Feast is Passover. Each and every time the Unleavened Bread and Wine are served on Passover it is the Lord's Supper, and each person has fellowship or communion with one another. By our eating the Unleavened Bread and drinking the Wine, we are also having fellowship or Communion with Jesus. We are to do this until he comes. The name of the Lord's Last Supper is Passover.
It is interesting that the forefathers of the Catholic church, namely Ignatius of Antioch and Justin Martyr refer to the New Covenant Passover as "eucharistia." They do not call it the Lord's Supper, the Communion, or even the Passover. This word "eucharistia" comes form the Greek word for "thanksgiving." (Strong's #2169). However the word "thanksgiving" is never used in connection with the New Covenant Passover, the Lord's Supper, or the Communion. In 1Cor. 10:16 Paul says of the Cup, it is the Cup of blessing "eulogia" (Strong's #2129). But the Feast is not called "Eulogia." We bless or consecrate, pray over the Unleavened Bread and the Wine, but this is for sanctification purposes and also to set them aside especially for this one celebration. Now, in Mark 14:23 Jesus gives thanks over the New Covenant Passover emblems. The word "thanks" here is "eucharisteo" (Strong's #2168). But, in giving thanks, he is not renaming the Passover to Eucharisteo or to Eucharist as it is now called among Catholics and other trinitarians.
Jesus kept the Feast of Passover as commanded by the law (Exodus 12:14, 24). He was the Passover Lamb that was to replace and fulfill the old Passover lamb (1Cor 5:7). If the Unleavened Bread and the Wine are the emblems of Jesus as the Passover Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world (John 1:29), then the name of the Feast when this is done remains Passover. It does not have to be called Passover it is Passover by the sacrifice it commemorates.
If it is called Passover and Jesus ate it with his disciples in Jerusalem, must all subsequent Passovers to be observed by the nations until he comes be held in Jerusalem? Obviously not. But, each nation can observe the New Covenant Passover on the correct evening. Passover is the most important event of world history. There is no day that equals it. It is the greatest and most holiest day of all creation. It deserves our respect and honor and we are told to keep this FEAST (1COr 5:8). It demands we eat it worthily (1Cor 11:29). We are not to play games with this celebration.
The Passover controversy has ancient roots. The Eastern Churches founded by the Apostles Paul and John, assisted by the Apostle Philip, held an annual observance of the Lord's Supper on the very evening the Jews celebrated their Passover. These were called the Quarterdicmeans. This means they prepared the Lord's Passover on the 14th of Abib and ate it on the 15th the same evening with the Jews. Obviously, for the Eastern Churches to hold this annual day all the way up to the Council of Nicaea in 325AD, speaks of the historical practice of the Apostolic Church. At the same time the Eastern Churches were observing the annual day, there was another group that began during the time of Justin Martyr who were antisemites who began celebrating the Lord's Supper differently. Instead of celebrating the actual Passover evening, they began to celebrate instead the resurrection of Jesus on Sundays. They moved the Passover to Easter Sunday and observed the death and resurrection together in what became the Mass. This led also to the observance of the Lord's Supper on Sundays, every Sunday. This developed into what is called the practice of the Western churches. These "Western churches" came under the authority and control of the Bishop of Rome. This became the history of the Roman Catholic church. Who do we follow: the western churches and Rome or the Eastern Churches who followed Paul, John, and Philip, three Apostles? We should never follow Rome or the papacy.
There are several lies associated with the Western church tradition. One is the lie that Peter instituted the every Sunday observance and also the observance on Easter Sunday morning. They claim he did this when he was in Rome. This is all false regardless of who started it. Peter never was in Rome. What the Catholic church has done is spiritualize the name Babylon in 1Peter 5:13 into being Rome. Because of this lie, later prophecy teachers would say that Babylon in the book of Revelation must then be Rome. The Catholic church has tried to shake this interpretation but has its own self to blame for spiritualizing Babylon into Rome to get Peter in the city. When Peter speaks of Babylon we have every right to believe he was really in the city of Babylon and not in Rome. Why would he go to the real city of Babylon? Because there were more Jews living in Babylon then were living in Israel. It was decided that Paul would go to the Gentiles and Peter would go unto the Circumcision (Jews). The other lie is that Peter is the one to take attention off the Lord's Supper on the Jewish Passover and place it upon the resurrection of Jesus three days after Passover. Then to make this scheme work the Catholic church invented the Friday crucifixion and celebrate Good Friday with pomp and parade but refuse to hold the Lord's Supper the evening BEFORE as an annual observance. They would not because they invented the Mass wherein the Lord's Supper would be celebrated as oft as they did the Mass. There is no proof Paul taught the Lord's Supper and resurrection should be observed on Easter. All we have are the lies of the Catholic church claiming he did this. The Catholic church has named the Eucharist Mass to replace the name of the Passover. They even call it the sacrament which is not in the Bible. Easter has come to replace the name of Passover.
What was the reason for the Catholic church to distance itself from the New Testament practice of the Passover? Bottom line, it was antisemitism. The hate for Jews was extreme. A hate that none of the Apostles started, practiced, or spread. When anyone agrees with the Western churches that were under the papacy in Rome, they have as their legacy antisemitism. Only a return to observing the annual Passover of the New Covenant can remove them from the grasp of Rome. Anyone who follows Rome is a Catholic. Even Jesus Name Oneness can be Pentecostal Catholics. Anyone who adopts or accepts the Western churches traditions of Rome, placed over the world at the Council of Nicaea and by subsequent Councils, Popes, Monks, Priests, and writers, are and always will be antisemites. Their Lord's Suppers, Communions, Eucharist, and Agape celebrations will all be false. Here are some quotes of what went down. You cannot read the following historical statements and not see the hate for and against Jews and the Passover of the New Testament.
Epiphanius of Salamis wrote in the mid-4th century, "... the emperor ... convened a council of 318 bishops ... in the city of Nicea. ... They passed certain ecclesiastical canons at the council besides, and at the same time decreed in regard to the Passover that there must be one unanimous concord on the celebration of God's holy and supremely excellent day. For it was variously observed by people ..." (Epiphanius, The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis, Books II and III (Sects 47-80), De Fide. Section VI, Verses 1,1 and 1,3. Translated by Frank Williams. EJ Brill, New York, 1994, pp.471-472).
The Nicene council assumed the task of regulating these differences, in part because some dioceses wanted the Christian calendar to be independent of the Jewish calendar. "The festival of the resurrection (Lord's Supper) was thenceforth required to be celebrated everywhere on a Sunday, and never on the day of the Jewish passover, but always after the fourteenth of Nisan, on the Sunday after the first vernal full moon. S
Some commentators have concluded that the desire for an independent Christian calendar was motivated by bitterness towards Judaism" (Schaff, Philip. "History of the Christian Church, Volume III: Nicene and Post-Nicene).
A circular letter of Emperor Constantine issued during the Council with strong anti-Jewish language lends weight to the charge of anti-Judaism, stating that that: "... it appeared an unworthy thing that in the celebration of this most holy festival we should follow the practice of the Jews, who have impiously defiled their hands with enormous sin, and are, therefore, deservedly afflicted with blindness of soul. ... Let us then have nothing in common with the detestable Jewish crowd; for we have received from our Saviour a different way" (Eusebius of Caesaria. "Life of Constantine (Book III)").
Theodoret recorded the Emperor as saying: "It was, in the first place, declared improper to follow the custom of the Jews in the celebration of this holy festival, because, their hands having been stained with crime, the minds of these wretched men are necessarily blinded. … Let us, then, have nothing in common with the Jews, who are our adversaries. ... avoiding all contact with that evil way. ... who, after having compassed the death of the Lord, being out of their minds, are guided not by sound reason, but by an unrestrained passion, wherever their innate madness carries them. ... a people so utterly depraved. ... Therefore, this irregularity must be corrected, in order that we may no more have any thing in common with those parricides and the murderers of our Lord. ... no single point in common with the perjury of the Jews" (Jackson, Blomfield. "The Ecclesiastical History, Dialogues, and Letters of Theodoret).
The historical record reveals the reason and purpose of changing the annual observance from Passover to Easter Sunday. They would celebrate the death and resurrection on Easter Sunday, on one day. This is false and whoever follows the practice of the Lord's Supper on Easter Sunday morning are false. The endtime Apostolic Church must come apart and out of Rome and go back and practice the Lord's Supper on his Passover as he instituted it. Jesus kept the old Passover and he instituted his own Passover memorial on the same evening. He is the one who started the annual New Testament Passover which we call the Lord's Supper. Anyone who claims the Lord's Supper is not the New Testament Passover Jesus instituted is false. Passover is the name of the Lord's Supper.
When all the study is complete. When all honest minds have no reason to support the Catholic church and its traditions. The name of the Lord's Supper will be seen as Passover. It can be called the New Covenant Passover. To call it the Lord's Supper and not confess this is the Lord's Passover Feast, is false. To call it Communion and not confess this is the Lord's Passover Feast, is not observing it worthily. Why remove the name Passover from the observance as if this some how removes a Jewish connection? Why claim Jesus ended the old Passover and the Feast he instituted should not be called Passover, but the Lord's Supper, the Communion, or the Eucharist?
We have before us the Apostolic order of an annual observance on the day of Passover or to accept the Roman Catholic tradition of every Sunday or every Mass. You can choose which you will observe. If you reject the Eastern Churches held the right doctrine about the right day and you are going to follow the Western churches, then you just as well confess you are following Rome and the papacy. Confess you are a Catholic. If you are a Oneness Pentecostal and you follow the papacy, then you are a Pentecostal Catholic. It is time for all true Apostolics to stop following Rome and go back to the early church practice of celebrating the annual day of Passover. When you do this, you will know the name of the Lord's Supper is Passover!