Resolving the debate about whether the

Last Supper was on Nisan 14 or Nisan 15

between John and Mathew-Mark-Luke

     It is supposed to be that John contradicts Matthew, Mark, and Luke on the timing of the Last Supper, or that somehow John is supposed to be re-interpreted so that he agrees with Matthew, Mark, and Luke.  However, this paper will show that John is right and the other three gospels may be easily translated to agree with him.  I will be covering material that is unavailable in the average source, and unfamiliar to most scholars.  The reason the apparent conflict has not been resolved is that it cannot be resolved the way most Church advocates wish, so as to support the Friday-Sunday chronology of the Passion.  So it is left unresolved, and the current level of mistranslation is as far as they dare push it, or misinterpretation in the case of trying to force John into agreement with their version of Matthew-Mark-Luke.

     Our first text is Matthew 26:17, "*Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover?" *mistranslation.

      This seems to say that it was Nisan 15, the first day of the feast of unleavened bread when the disciples first approached Yeshua about Passover preparation.  First, let us test the translation with logic.  When does it make sense to ask how to prepare for Passover after the time for it is already come?  The time of the supposed question is after the leaven is supposed to be removed, after the lamb is supposed to be slain and prepared, and after the bitter herbs and matza are supposed to be ready.  And above all means, if you wanted to prepare by finding a room or accommodations, it was certainly too late to be trying to arrange that.  All these things were supposed to be done on or before Nisan 14.  And all that was supposed to be left to do on the 15th of Nisan was to eat the Passover supper, not prepare for it.  That is why you should see at once that the above translation is a bunch of nonsense.

      Why would Church scholars leave a translation that was nonsense?  The the answer is sin.  But this is not without precedent.  Here is the Roman Church's translation of Genesis 3:15: "I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel" (Douay-Rheims American Edition, 1899).  Notice that is says "she".  This is because Jerome mistranslated the Hebrew, which says "he", as "she" in the Latin Vulgate.  He admitted his mistake later, but the Church refused to fix the problem, teaching instead that Mary is the one who crushes the head of the serpent, and now the Church portrays their Astarte-like goddess-like Mary with a snake under her feet.

       This clearly goes to show that the Church can make and perpetuate translation errors in favor of major false doctrines.   What then do so called Messianic believers, or Messianic Jews perpetuate such errors?   Does being Messianic mean that one suddenly is free of all the corruptions of the Church, or does it mean that one is just starting to escape from the corruptions of the Church?  Sadly, it can only mean one is just starting to escape, because most so-called Messianic scholars repeat the same nonsense that the Church repeats.  What we must realize is just because a Messianic says something is so does not mean it is so.  And that includes statements that are founded on mistranslations that have gone uncorrected.   If one does not know Hebrew or Greek, YHWH does not hold one to the same responsibility to know if something is a mistranslation.   However, if someone points out a mistranslation and shows you logically what is the correct translation, then you become responsible not to follow the false one.   The sad thing is that many have been shown, but few have used the intellect that God created in His own image and gave to them to know that it makes sense.  Rather they have dismissed their intellectual witness the Father gave them in order to follow the crowd and please their emotional desire to be non-controversial, and their fleshly desire not to suffer persecution and contention for the truth.  For this reason most Christians, and Messianics have become anti-intellectuals falling prey to cleverly designed traps that are invisible to them.   No human can deliver themselves from these traps.  The being that induced men to believe them is greater and more powerful than they.  If one wants to deliverance from the snake of Eden, then one has to trust YHWH and his Son Yeshua, and show their desire for deliverance by striving to depart from the flesh's desire to give in to the error of the majority.

     Let us now return to Matthew 26:17.  The traditional Christian translation is foolishness, at least from the standpoint of anyone who really does prepare for Passover.  Many translations even say "on the first day of unleavened bread" furthering the nonsense by adding the word "on" that is not in the Greek text.  To correct the translations, we must render the dative case correctly in the context.  The dative case is an inflection ending of the word "the" in Greek.   Daniel B. Wallace tells us that the dative case is commonly taken as a "Dative of Reference/Respect [with reference to] ... supply the phrase with reference to before the dative. (Other glosses are concerning, about, in regard to, etc.)"  (pg. 144-145, Greek Grammar: Beyond the Basics):  Here is the full quote from Bibleworks 8.0 edition:

Let us now apply this revelation:

"And with respect to the first day of unleavened bread..."

"And concerning the first day of unleavened bread..."

     If you go to your master concerning a certain day, then you want to ask about that day, or what to do about that day.  It does not mean that it is yet that day.   The above solution and rendition of this text is confirmed in the Anchor Bible Commentary, "Matthew" by C.S. Mann and W.F. Albright.  I only cite it to show the non-scholar some authority for the matter.  Otherwise, any Greek or Hebrew scholar in the world who is worthy of the name knows that the above is a common and legitimate understanding of the text.  In Hebrew, which Yeshua spoke, this dative case would be marked by a lamed, ל.

    So, Matthew 26:17 need not say that it was the 15th of Nisan when they asked Yeshua where to prepare.  Matthew is narrating the statement.  The questions were asked w.r.t (with respect to) the first day of unleavened bread, and they were asked before it at the beginning of the 14th of Nisan, which would be at sunset 24 hours before the start of the 15th of Nisan.

     The text in Mark is like the one in Matthew. I will use the abbreviation w.r.t. (with respect to) to translate the dative.  First the mistranslated text:

     Mark 14:12 "*On the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, when they sacrificed the Passover lamb, his disciples said to him, "Where do you want us to go and prepare for you to eat the Passover?" *mistranslation.

Now the correction:

     "And w.r.t. the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, when they sacrificed the Passover, his disciples said to him, "Where do you want us to go and prepare for you to eat the Passover?"

     This time there seems to be a complication.  It says "when they sacrificed the Passover", and most people will think of the Passover lamb sacrificed on the 14th of Nisan, however, the text does not contain the word "lamb", and there is another sacrifice that is on the 15th day that is also called "the Passover".  In John 18:28, we are told the authorities would not enter Pilate's hall so they would not be defiled "that they might eat the passover".   It that case, John is referring to the Passover lamb slain on the 14th, but in an amazing case of moving the goal posts, the Catholics tell us that this was the offering made on the 15th also called "the Passover".  We only need to reverse this logic and apply it to Mark instead of John.  In Deuteronomy 16:1-8 we are told about "the Passover" offering for the 15th of Nisan, and one can tell it is for the 15th because vs. 4 refers to "the flesh which thou sacrificedst the first day at even."  And then vs. 8 says there are six more days of the feast left after that.  This proves that "the Passover" in this passage is the offering of the 15th, and not the 14th. 

       There were two Passover offerings.  The one on the 14th in the afternoon is what corresponds to the lamb in Egypt and the blood on the door posts, and this signifies the passing over of the death of the firstborn.   The second passover offering was on the 15th day in the afternoon, and this was instituted later as a festive offering in remembrance of the Exodus from Egypt.

     So Mark 14:12 is a question w.r.t. the 15th of Nisan, on which they sacrificed the additional passover offering.   Why would Mark add in the narrative a reference to the festive offering on the 15th?   We may ask the same question of Deut. 16:1-8.  Why would the passage there in the Torah talk about the festive offering of the 15th and not mention the passover lamb for the passover in Egypt?  Since the Torah deigns to mention one without the other, it may not be argued that Mark  cannot mention one without the other.  Also, let us use a bit more logic here.  If one really wanted to think that Mark was saying the preparation was done on the 15th of Nisan rather than correctly that the questions were asked w.r.t. preparations for the 15th, then it would still follow that the passover sacrifice mentioned in the text is the one that pertained to the second passover offering, the one for the 15th, mentioned in Deut. 16.  For it is simply not possible to place the 14th offering on the 15th.

     So, now let us turn to the Luke 22:7 passage: "Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed."   This time, in Luke, the word "first" has been omitted, and properly so, because Luke is using the reckoning of Josephus in which 8 days are celebrated for unleavened bread, but only 7 are still counted: 

 317 Hence it is that, in memory of the want we were then in, we keep a feast for eight days, which is called the feast of unleavened bread. (Ant 2:317 JOE)

 99 and on the feast of unleavened bread, which was now come, it being the fourteenth day of the month of Xanthikos [Nisan], (Jwr 5:99 JOE)

250 But on the second day of unleavened bread, which is the sixteenth day of the month, they first partake of the fruits of the earth, for before that day they do not touch them. And while they suppose it proper to honour God, from whom they obtain this plentiful provision, in the first place, they offer the firstfruits of their barley, and that in the manner following: (Ant 3:250 JOE)

     If we logically parse Josephus' information, we see that he includes the 14th in the overall measure of 8 days, and that he reckons the 14th part of the feast of unleavened bread, but when it comes to numbering the days, it is evident that he numbers the 15th as the 1st day from the fact that he calls the 16th of Nisan the 2nd day.  Josephus also separates the two feasts:

249 The feast of unleavened bread succeeds that of the passover, and falls on the fifteenth day of the month, and continues seven days, wherein they feed on unleavened bread; (Ant 3:249 JOE)

    The Galileans abstained from leaven from sunset at the start of the 14th, while the Judeans abstained only from noon on the 14th day.  According to the Torah, one only need abstain for seven days, starting with the 15th of Nisan. So when Luke is referring to the "day of unleavened bread" that "came" he is saying the 14th, and in this case he is referring to the passover lamb on the 14th the way Josephus or some other Galilean would refer to the 14th day.  The removal of leaven from the houses was done on the 14th of Nisan, and so for this reason, it came to be called the "day of unleavened bread".  For not only was leaven removed, but unleavened bread was baked in preparation of the 15th, which unleavened bread must be eaten.

     Therefore, the disciples questions were asked just after sunset at the start of the 14th of Nisan.   It was after sunset when they went into the city and were shown the upper room, and Yeshua and his disciples arrived there when it was dark.

      The gospel of John, of course confirms all of this.   The last supper was before the Passover (John 13:1).

      Now let us turn to another set of passages.  Matthew 26:18 "And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples."  Did Yeshua really say "I will keep"?  Not in the English sense implied.  The Greek word used by Matthew is "make" (ποιεω = עשה make) Yeshua uses it in the sense of to "make" a contract to rent the room for the week of Passover.   A lesser possibility is that the Greek were means "prepare" which is in the lexicon.   And of course one that declares He will "prepare" for something does not mean He will actually get to eat it.   And in fact, Luke 22:16 confirms this.  It says in the more ancient Greek MSS,  "For by no means may I eat from it until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God."   While all the modern translations actually use this better Greek text, they try to dodge it with a mistranslation.  For example the New American Standard Bible, "for, I tell you, I shall not eat it (again) until there is fulfillment in the kingdom of God."  Notice the word "again"?  It has no place in the Greek text used by the NASB.   So Yeshua made no promise to "keep" the Passover, only to "make the passover" which in this case means to make a contract for Passover to rent the upper room.  Also Yeshua did not "eat" the Passover because he emphatically says he would not eat it.

        The final set of passages in the synoptics needing their translations fixed, I will summarize quickly:

Mat 26:17 that we fix for thee to eat the Passover?

Mat 26:19 and they fixed a place for the Passover.

Mar 14:12 go and establish a place that thou mayest eat

Mar 14:15 furnished and set up: there establish a place.

Mar 14:16 them: and they fixed a place for the Passover

Luk 9:52 into a village of the Samaritans to set up for him

Luk 12:47 knew his lord's will, and set up not, neither

Luk 22:9 Where wilt thou that we set up accommodations?

Luk 22:8 Go and set up a place  for us the Passover

Luk 22:12 upper room furnished, there establish a place.

Luk 22:13 them: and they fixed a place for the Passover

     The Greek word used in these passages is:  ετοιμαζω = כּוּן   make firm, set up, fix, establish; cf. LXX, "of hospitable preparation" (Abbott-Smith).  cf. HALOT fix. The word "fix", of course, is a word with a wide range of sense.   A modern pilot can "fix a bearing" or a captain can "fix a course".   In order to bring these passages into harmony with John, the sense of "fix the Passover" should refer to fixing a time and place, and not refer to the preparation of an actual lamb.  There is no way that scholars cannot tell us that Yeshua and his disciples colloquial Galilean could not mean this.  Therefore, it behooves us to recognize the possibility for the sake of John and the unity of the Scripture.

      Summary:

1. Mathew and Mark mean w.r.t. the first day of unleavened bread

2. Mark is referring to the festive offering on the 15th

3. Luke's "day of unleavened bread" means the 14th as in Galilean usage (cf. Josephus)

4. Not "keep" but "make" is what the Greek says Yeshua would do, and it means to make a contract or agreement.   "make the passover" when dealing with business arrangements is colloquial for striking an agreement for passover week.

5. Not "prepare the passover" but "fix the passover" meaning to fix time and place in the colloquial speech of Yeshua, or equally, "establish the passover" means arranging accomodations.

Why John is right:

1. He says it was "before" the Passover.  John 13:1. 

2. He says the authorities still wanted to eat it.  John 18:28. 

3. He says it was the "preparation of the passover" (John 19:14). 

4. At the last supper his disciples assumed Judas would go and buy provisions, which would be forbidden, and not even possible on Nisan 15.

5. It would not make sense to release Bar-Abbas on the 15th.  The custom would only make sense if the prisoner would get to eat the Passover.

6. The authorities wanted to get the matter over with before the Passover, and they were urgent to do it.  The Talmud confirms this saying Yeshua was crucified on the "eve of Pesach".

7. The typology of the Passover lamb being Yeshua the lamb of God fits best if Yeshua dies at the same time the Passover lambs die.

8. Three days and three nights (Mat. 12:40) only literally work with a Wednesday crucifixion and Sabbath resurrection if John is right.

9. John's statements take priority as to clarifying the issue because John was written much later and with the knowledge of any misunderstandings that might have arisen with the first three gospels.

10.  John tells us in no uncertain terms that the Sabbath following the crucifixion was a "high Sabbath" (John 19:31).  The only way this can happens is if Nisan 15 is the high Sabbath.