Matthew, Mark, Luke, And 1 Corinthians

5. IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
There are a number of accounts that describe the Lord’s Supper but there are four accounts that are significant, in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and 1 Corinthians. These four accounts take into consideration the ‘supper’ that Jesus took on the night before he was betrayed.
5.1 Pauline account
Paul refers to the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corin chapter 10 and 11.In this passage from 1 Corin 11:17-34, Paul reminded the Corinthians of what Jesus did on the night before he was arrested. Paul’s account gave instruction to the disciples of what they ought to do as a “pattern for the disciples to follow in remembrance of him” (Marshall, Last Supper and Lord’s Supper 33). He pointed out that they were not behaving in the right manner and therefore confronting them to do as Jesus did for he believed that “ Eucharistic fidelity meant doing what Jesus did in memory of him, celebrating the Lord’s Supper in truth, and living the Eucharist as a Eucharistic people” (LaVerdiere 48) I. Howard Marshall in Last Supper and Lord’s Supper pointed out that “the account given by Paul is confined to the central elements in the Last Supper, the distribution of the
bread and the cup and the sayings of Jesus which explains their significance” (Last Supper and Lord’s Supper 33). Through “Pauls’ main point, which provided the theological undergirding for the practical advice was made by citing the tradition which he had received” (Marshall, “Lord’s Supper” 572), and by using words like ‘receive’ and ‘deliver’, it implies that this is a tradition which has been passed on orally. “By this he means that ultimately the tradition of the Last supper comes from Jesus” (Stein 444). The tradition mentioned what Jesus did and the direction that he gave for his disciples to do.
5.2 Synoptic account
Among the Synoptics accounts, Matthew and Mark bear resemblances to each other while that of Luke bear close affinity to the Pauline account. According to R.S.Wallace, “the main differences between the two groups are that Mark omits the words ‘Do this in remembrance of me’ and includes ‘ poured out for many’ after the reference to the blood of the covenant” (703). Besides, in Mark, though there is a mentioned of a Passover meal in Chapter 14:12 yet in 14:22-25 there is no signs of a passover as Hans-Josef Klauck pointed out that “everything that is typical of a Passover is missing: the paschal lamb, the stewed fruit, the bitter herb and the Passover haggadah” (365). Matthew too bears this affinity with Mark and therefore they were considered to give only a “historical report of the Lord’s supper in its context in the story of Jesus” (Marshall, Last Supper and Lord’s Supper 33). Hence they were reporting the event as it happened and therefore it is more of a historical narrative.
While Luke bears the resemblance to Pauline account as he mentioned the account of the last Supper in Luke 22:14-20. Some arguments were made that there are two accounts mentioned here of the same meal where the liturgical account have been inserted…. Refer to marshal Luke mentions the cup before the bread and C.P.M.Jones writes that “the cup comes before the bread, because a further point is to be made about the bread, the common sharing of the particles of the one, broken, loaf symbolizes and effects the union of the participants not only with Christ but also with one another” (191).
5.3 The Acts Account
In Acts 2:42-47, we see the mentioning of the ‘breaking of the bread’ with respect to the fellowship among the early Christians and it also indicated to us that it was done at their individual homes.
It is not uncommon for Jews to come together for thanksgiving feast and other rituals. According to I.H. Marshall, the “phrase ‘breaking of bread’ in Acts may cover both celebrations of the Lord’s Supper and other church meals without wine” (“Lord’s Supper” 574). The ‘breaking of the bread’ came into prominence as it has significance in the command of Jesus during the Lord’s supper. R.A.Falconer explains that “the memory of their Lord’s constant table-fellowship to which His thanksgiving with intense reality, had given religious significance, but much more because of the Last Supper carrying his command” (Falconer
68)
5.4 Gospel of John
“John 13 reports in detail a farewell banquet which Jesus celebrated with his disciples” (Klauck 367). The setting of this feast is what informs us of the relation to the Lord’s Supper however, beyond this, there was not much mentioned of the narrative of the Lord’s Supper as was evident in Pauline writings as well as in the Synoptics. Furthermore, “the so-called Eucharistic discourse which calls for the eating of the flesh and the drinking of the blood of Jesus in crassly vivid terms” (Klauck 367) was mentioned in John 6:52-58. However John did not give any instruction that the Lord’s Supper is to be conducted