What is Reddit's opinion of Jesus and the Last Supper?
From 3.5 billion Reddit comments

By popularity on Reddit, this product is:

#3949 in Religion & Spirituality books

#44 in Jesus, the Gospels & Acts books

3 reviews of this product found across Reddit:

I don't think you should dwell too much on getting the precise quotes from Jesus. Check out this excerpt from an excellent book.^(1) It is very helpful on this topic (I've also included the footnotes from the original book as best I can, though they don't correspond to the numbering of footnotes in the original text; and when I say "emphasis mine" I mean my own... not the original author):

> First, with reference in particular to the sayings of Jesus, it is important to be precise about what I mean when I speak about the "historicity" or "historical plausibility."
> On the one hand, there are some readers of the Gospels who come to them looking for the ipsissima verb Jesu (the "exact words of Jesus"). As contemporary scholarship rightly insists, rarely, if ever, is it possible for us to reconstruct the exact words of Jesus.^2 Indeed, as even a cursory comparison of the sayings of Jesus in a Gospel synopsis shows, on many occasions, the evangelists themselves do not seem bent on giving us anything like the exact words of Jesus.^3 ... On the other hand, it is much more popular in the scholarly realm to come to the Gospels seeking the ipsissima vox Jesu, an expression sometimes used to refer to "the basic message of Jesus" or "the 'kind of thing' he usually or typically said."^4 Although at first glance this may seem like a more helpful formulation, upon further reflection, there are several problems with it. For one thing, "the exact voice of Jesus" (ipsissima vox Jesu) reflects the peculiarly modern preoccupation with exactitude (ipse), and hence smacks both of historical positivism and philosophical foundationalism. Moreover, the emphasis on the exact "voice" (vox) of Jesus is precisely the wrong emphasis. The image of a "voice" lends itself to a focus on how someone sounds (form), rather than what someone says (content), for a "voice" can be completely without substance or meaning... However, for historical research, a case can be made that it is not so much the form of Jesus' teaching that is most important, but the content or substance... Once again, even a quick glance at any Synopsis of the Gospels should show us that a representation of the exact forms of Jesus' sayings does not seem to have been a primary goal of the evangelists.^5 ...
> In this study, I will be pursuing what I would like to refer to as the substantia verb Jesu—i.e., the substance of the words of Jesus. In other words, I am interested in what he said and did and what it might have meant in a first-century Jewish context. Hence, whenever I conclude that a particular saying or action is historical or historically plausible, I am not saying that Jesus said exactly these words (ipsissima verba), nor am I just saying the text "sounds exactly like Jesus" (ipsissima vox). Instead, I am claiming that the basic substance or content of the teaching or action can be reasonably concluded as having originated with him.^6 That is what I mean by historical — no more, and no less.^7

Brant Pitre, Jesus and the Last Supper (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2015), 46-47.
E.g., Geza Vermes, Jesus in His Jewish Context (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003), 74.
Emphasis mine
Meier, A Marginal Jew, 1:174
Emphasis mine
Emphasis mine
See Theissen and Winter, The Quest for the Plausible Jesus (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002), 197-99.

> Purely from the perspective of someone who believes that the Great Apostasy occurred sometime in those first centuries

That's your Achilles heel for anyone outside of Mormonism. There's no 'Great Apostasy', and in fact there's a huge amount of continuity in thought.

>rather than scrambling-to-get-tenure engineering writings

Yep, very hard to find time for these. There does come a point where we admit that we accept things on faith, but I don't think it starts with an impossibly skeptical attitude towards the early church.

>before about 100 AD (Letter to the Smyrnaeans)

I don't recall the exact year of publication for that Epistle, but it does refer to a literal Eucharist. At the very latest it was authored in ~110 AD, which is splitting hairs.

Also, the Didache, ~70 AD, uses Catholic language, referring to the Eucharist as a 'pure sacrifice'. I think it's pretty clear that something can't be merely bread and also a pure sacrifice to God. I would say that completely contradicts the messianic purpose of Christ as the pure offering.

Hmm, also, RE: Ignatius, he mentions the Real Presence in other Epistles.

Letter to the Ephesians, paragraph 20 >"Come together in common, one and all without exception in charity, in one faith and in one Jesus Christ, who is of the race of David according to the flesh, the son of man, and the Son of God, so that with undivided mind you may obey the bishop and the priests, and break one Bread which is the medicine of immortality and the antidote against death, enabling us to live forever in Jesus Christ."

Letter to the Romans, paragraph 7 >"I have no taste for the food that perishes nor for the pleasures of this life. I want the Bread of God which is the Flesh of Christ, who was the seed of David; and for drink I desire His Blood which is love that cannot be destroyed."

Epistle to the Philadelphians, 3:2-4:1 >"Take care, then who belong to God and to Jesus Christ - they are with the bishop. And those who repent and come to the unity of the Church - they too shall be of God, and will be living according to Jesus Christ. Do not err, my brethren: if anyone follow a schismatic, he will not inherit the Kingdom of God. If any man walk about with strange doctrine, he cannot lie down with the passion. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: for there is one Flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of His Blood; one altar, as there is one bishop with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons."

>I find these pre-300AD Christian writings the most fascinating.

And you can probably understand how a Catholic sees these and says, "Why is this Apostasy?"...it's very early doctrine, and I can trivially reconcile it with scripture and Jewish thought in the first century.

Also, Ignatius was personally appointed by Peter to oversee Antioch when Peter left for Rome. He wasn't some random guy who didn't know about Jesus. Scripture is pretty clear that these guys were tested.

Did you see the thread the other day about how believers have theologically shifted? Did you notice how so many believe in the Real Presence now? That's because they actually bothered to study the topic. "To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant" - John Henry Cardinal Newman.

>I'm not looking to start a battle with your belief system

Then why do you keep posting?

>Shaul did not teach that the old way of doing Passover was replaced by taking communion if that is the issue.

Yes, he did say that, because Christ said it first.

Luke 22 >15 And He said to them, “I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer; 16 for I say to you, I shall never again eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” 17 And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He said, “Take this and share it among yourselves; 18 for I say to you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine from now on until the kingdom of God comes.” 19 And when He had taken some bread and given thanks, He broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 20 And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood.

This is a Passover feast, which is a type of celebration known as a remembrance, and remembrances are ordinances from God to celebrate his saving covenant. Remembrances are by definition reenactments. E.g.

Exodus 12:14 >"This shall be a day of remembrance, and you shall keep it as a feast to the Lord; through out your generations you shall observe it as an ordinance forever."

Mishnah Pesahim 10:5 >"In every generation a man must so regard himself as if he came forth himself out of Egypt...therefore we are bound to give thanks."

If Christ isn't celebrating a Passover, then he is not the pascha, and if he is not the pascha, there is no redemption, because the Passover is incomplete and unfulfilled if there is no offering.

Hebrews 10:12 >but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD,

It's a sacrifice because he is our Passover Lamb. And Christ - at the last supper - ordered us to keep it as a feast.

1 Cor. 5:8 >Therefore let us celebrate the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

Further readings:

Didache 8, 9, 14

>Chapter 8. Concerning Fasting and Prayer (the Lord's Prayer)

>But let not your fasts be with the hypocrites; Matthew 6:16 for they fast on the second and fifth day of the week; but fast on the fourth day and the Preparation (Friday). Neither pray as the hypocrites; but as the Lord commanded in His Gospel, thus pray: Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be Your name. Your kingdom come. Your will be done, as in heaven, so on earth. Give us today our daily (needful) bread, and forgive us our debt as we also forgive our debtors. And bring us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one (or, evil); for Yours is the power and the glory for ever. Thrice in the day thus pray.

>Chapter 9. The Thanksgiving (Eucharist)

>Now concerning the Thanksgiving (Eucharist), thus give thanks. First, concerning the cup: We thank you, our Father, for the holy vine of David Your servant, which You made known to us through Jesus Your Servant; to You be the glory for ever. And concerning the broken bread: We thank You, our Father, for the life and knowledge which You made known to us through Jesus Your Servant; to You be the glory for ever. Even as this broken bread was scattered over the hills, and was gathered together and became one, so let Your Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into Your kingdom; for Yours is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ for ever. But let no one eat or drink of your Thanksgiving (Eucharist), but they who have been baptized into the name of the Lord; for concerning this also the Lord has said, Give not that which is holy to the dogs. Matthew 7:6

>Chapter 14. Christian Assembly on the Lord's Day

>But every Lord's day gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure. But let no one that is at variance with his fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be profaned. For this is that which was spoken by the Lord: In every place and time offer to me a pure sacrifice; for I am a great King, says the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the nations.

Messianic Prophecy

>Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Berakoth 17a

>"In the World to Come there is no eating or drinking...but the righteous sit with crowns on their heads, feasting on the brightness of the divine presence, as it says, “And they beheld God, and did eat and drink”

>Ecclesiastes Rabbah 1:28

>"Rabbi Berekiah said in the name of Rabbi Isaac: 'As the first Redeemer Moses was, so shall the latter Redeemer be'...As the former caused manna to descend, as it is stated, 'Behold, I will cause to rain bread from heaven for you', so will the later redeemer cause manna to descend, as it is stated, 'May he be as a rich grainfield in the lands.'"

>2 Baruch 29:3, 6-8

"And it will happen at that time that the treasury of manna will come down again from on high, and they will eat of it in those years because these are they who will have arrived at the consummation of time".

Typological

Matthew 6:11, Luke 11:3 >"Give us this day our epiousios [super-substantial, not daily] bread"

John 6 >"Our fathers ate manna in the wilderness...Lord give us this bread always."

>Jesus: "I am the bread of life...the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh. Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you...this is a hard saying."

The flesh is of no avail, but Christ's flesh is true food. Why is this a "hard saying"? Because he just told people his flesh is manna and we must consume this to "have life in us". Why is Christ's word spirit and life? Because if we listen to what it says - eat his flesh - he is abides in us and us in him. This is the very origin of communion - we are one because when we receive communion we are joined by the commonality of Christ's presence with in us. "

>Babylonian Talmud, Menahoth 29A:

>"The priests used to lift the Golden Table up and exhibit the Bread of the Presence on it to those who came up for the festivals saying to them, Behold God's love for you!'"

Liturgy of the Eucharist (lifts up the consecrated bread:

>"Behold the Lamb of God. Behold he who takes away the sins of the world. Blessed are those called to the Supper of the Lamb".

Patristics

St. Justin Martyr, First Apology, 155 CE

>"And this food is called among us Εὐχαριστία [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined.

>For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; ...the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh"

St. Ignatius's Epistle to the Smyraeans, 90 AD

>"They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness"

St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book V, Chapter 2, 180 AD

>"By His own blood he redeemed us, as also His apostle declares, In whom we have redemption through His blood, even the remission of sins...He has acknowledged the cup as His own blood, from which He bedews our blood; and the bread He has established as His own body, from which He gives increase to our bodies."

Media & Other