Luke 22:21

But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table.

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(21-23) But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me . . .—See Notes on Matthew 26:21; Matthew 26:25; Mark 14:18; Mark 14:21; John 13:21; John 13:35. St. Luke’s account is here the briefest, St. John’s by far the fullest. There is again a slight discrepancy in the order of facts, St. Luke placing the mention of the Betrayal after, St. Matthew and St. Mark before, the institution of the memorial. St. John, who makes no mention of the institution, leaves the question open. On the whole, the order of the first two Gospels seems here the most probable. and agrees better with the fourth. The date before us do not enable us to say with certainty whether Judas partook of the memorial; but, if we follow the first two Gospels, it would seem probable that he did not.

Benson Commentary

Luke 22:21-23. But behold — Πλην ιδου. This particle (πλην, verumtamen, nevertheless, or notwithstanding) “is a proof,” says Bengelius, “that Judas was present at the Lord’s supper;” for it shows that Christ’s discourse is continued without interruption; and it appears, from Luke 22:14, that when he sat down to the supper and begun the discourse, the twelve were with him: Dr. Lightfoot was of the same opinion, who says, “What can be desired more, as a demonstration that Judas was present at the eucharist?” Thus also Henry: “By the placing this after the institution of the Lord’s supper, it seems plain that Judas did receive that supper, did eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.” On which he observes, “There have been those who have eaten bread with Christ, and yet have betrayed him.” According to Matthew and Mark, however, Jesus pointed out Judas, as the traitor, to the disciples at this supper, before the institution of the sacrament, as at a prior supper (see John 13:23, &c.) he had done to John. Perhaps he did it both before and after he instituted the eucharist. So Dr. Macknight thought. “Our Lord,” says he, “was now deeply affected with his own thoughts, for he uttered some of the things twice that lay heaviest upon his spirit, as persons in great concern are wont to do; particularly after delivering the sacramental cup, and telling them that his blood was shed for them, he mentioned the treachery of Judas a second time. And this second declaration came in very properly after the institution of the sacrament, which exhibits the highest instance of his love to mankind; his dying to obtain the remission of their sins. For it showed that the person who could deliberately do so great an injury to so kind a friend, must have been a monster, the foulness of whose ingratitude cannot be reached by the force of language.” The hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table — “Manus quæ sacram cænam sumpsit, quæque hostibus perfidam fidem dedit.” The hand which took the sacred supper, and which gave a perfidious promise to enemies. So Bengelius. And truly the Son of man goeth — That is, dieth; as it was determined — See on Matthew 26:24-25.

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

22:21-38 How unbecoming is the worldly ambition of being the greatest, to the character of a follower of Jesus, who took upon him the form of a servant, and humbled himself to the death of the cross! In the way to eternal happiness, we must expect to be assaulted and sifted by Satan. If he cannot destroy, he will try to disgrace or distress us. Nothing more certainly forebodes a fall, in a professed follower of Christ, than self-confidence, with disregard to warnings, and contempt of danger. Unless we watch and pray always, we may be drawn in the course of the day into those sins which we were in the morning most resolved against. If believers were left to themselves, they would fall; but they are kept by the power of God, and the prayer of Christ. Our Lord gave notice of a very great change of circumstances now approaching. The disciples must not expect that their friends would be kind to them as they had been. Therefore, he that has a purse, let him take it, for he may need it. They must now expect that their enemies would be more fierce than they had been, and they would need weapons. At the time the apostles understood Christ to mean real weapons, but he spake only of the weapons of the spiritual warfare. The sword of the Spirit is the sword with which the disciples of Christ must furnish themselves.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

See the notes at Matthew 26:21-25.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

21, 22. (See on [1721]Joh 13:21, &c.).

Matthew Poole's Commentary

See Poole on "Luke 22:15"

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

But behold the hand of him that betrayeth me,.... By the "hand" is meant, not figuratively the counsel, contrivance, and conspiracy of Judas to betray him, as the word is used in 2 Samuel 14:19 but literally the hand of Judas, which was then dipping in the dish with Christ, Matthew 26:23 and it follows here, is

with me on the table; and is an aggravation of his sin, that one that sat with him at his table, ate bread with him, and dipped his morsel in the same dish, should be the betrayer of him, according to the prophecy in Psalm 41:9 as well as describes and points at the person that should do this action, even one of his disciples; for which disciples, he had just now said, his body is given, and his blood is shed. The phrase, "with me", is left out in the Syriac and Persic versions. From Luke's account it appears most clearly, that Judas was not only at the passover, but at the Lord's supper, since this was said when both were over.

Geneva Study Bible

{6} But, behold, the {i} hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table.

(6) Christ shows again that he goes willingly to die, although he is not ignorant of Judas' treason.

(i) That is, his practice; the Hebrews used to speak in this way, as in 2Sa 14:19: Is not the hand of Joab with thee in all this?

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Meyer's NT Commentary

Luke 22:21-23. Luke has this reference to the traitor (which, according to Luke, diverges from all the rest, without any more precise statement) in a wrong position, where it probably has been placed by way of transition to the following dispute about precedence. According to Matthew 26:21 ff., Mark 14:18 ff., it is to be placed at the beginning of the meal, and that in such a manner that the departure of Judas[252] ensued before the institution of the Lord’s Supper; comp. on Matthew 26:25, and see the remark after John 13:38.

πλήν] notwithstanding, although my blood is shed for you. Not a limitation of the ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν (Hofmann), but, without such a reflection, a contrast to that love which is on the point of offering its own life. In spite of this ̔πλήν, which carries on the Lord’s discourse, to place the departure of the traitor, even according to Luke, before the Lord’s Supper, is only possible to the greatest harmonistic arbitrariness, in respect of which, indeed, the statement that Luke does not relate according to the order of time (Ebrard, p. 522; Lichtenstein, p. 401) is the most convenient and ready resource.

ἡ χεὶρ κ.τ.λ. The hand of my betrayer, etc. It was still on the table (ἐπὶ τῆς τραπέζης), after the eating of the bread, for the sake of partaking of the cup (Luke 22:20), and Jesus mentions the hand as the correlative of the idea παραδιδόναι. There is contained therein a tragic feature.

Luke 22:22. ὅτι ὁ υἱὸς μὲν (see the critical remarks) κ.τ.λ. discloses the objective ground of this mournful experience, Luke 22:21—to wit, the divine appointment of the death of the Messiah, which none the less (πλὴν οὐαὶ κ.τ.λ.) leaves the person concerned under the imputation (of the subjectively free action).

Luke 22:23. συζητεῖν, to confer, disputare, and πρὸς ἑαυτούς, among themselves, as Mark 1:27.

τοῦτο] i.e. the παραδιδόναι. With the emphasis of horror τοῦτο is placed before the governing verb. On πράσσειν of traitorous transactions, comp. Thucyd. iv. 89. 3, 110. 2.

[252] According to Schenkel, Jesus allowed Judas to take part in the Lord’s Supper, which (he thinks) is a convincing proof against all external ecclesiastical discipline (even against confession)!

Expositor's Greek Testament

Luke 22:21-23. The traitor (Matthew 26:21-25, Mark 14:18-21), placed after the Supper, instead of before, as in parallels.—πλὴν: making a transition to an incident presenting a strong moral contrast to the preceding.—ἡ χεὶρ, the hand, graphic and tragic; the hand which is to perform such opposite acts, now touching the Master’s on the table, ere long to be the instrument of betrayal.

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

21. the hand of him that betrayeth me] For fuller details of this last awful warning to Judas, and of the intimation of the person intended to His nearest disciples, see Matthew 26:21-25; Mark 14:18-21; John 13:21-26. Whether Judas actually partook of the Holy Communion has always been uncertain. Bengel quotes the language of St Ambrose to Theodosius, “Will you hold forth those hands still dripping with the blood of unjust slaughter, and with them take the most holy body of the Lord?”

Bengel's Gnomen

Luke 22:21. Πλὴν, but nevertheless) The antithesis is between τὸ—διδόμενον, which is given (for you) in Luke 22:19, and παραδιδόντος, who betrayeth (Me) in this passage. Πλὴν is used to intimate, that the very delightful converse of Jesus with His disciples [Luke 22:15-20] is going to be presently brought to an abrupt close. [And, at the same time, He tacitly implies, that, as He is about immediately to be withdrawn from them, through the agency of a betrayer, for this reason the remembrance (ἀνάμνησιν) of Himself should be for the future celebrated by His disciples—V. g.] This particle serves as an argument that Judas was present, and took part in the Lord’s Supper. Comp. Luke 22:14 (“The twelve apostles sat with Him”). That this discourse is one continued one, is evident from this, that Luke has not even employed here that formula which he often uses, And He saith.—ἠ χεὶρ) the hand, which has taken the Holy Supper, and which has yet pledged its treacherous faith to the Lord’s enemies. [After having taken the thirty pieces of silver.—V. g.] So Ambrose (Bishop of Milan) said to Theodosius (repelling him from the Communion), “Wilt thou extend those hands of thine, which are yet reeking with the blood of unrighteously-perpetrated murder, and wilt thou with them take the most holy body of the Lord?” [μετʼ ἐμοῦ, with me) He does not say, with you. Therefore He separates the traitor as one to be distinguished from the rest of the disciples, and shows that now He Himself alone has to do with that wretched man, as with one who is an equivocal enemy.—V. g.]

Pulpit Commentary

Verses 21-23. - The Lord's sorrowful allusion to Judas the traitor. Verse 21. - But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table. This is the second mention of the traitor in St. Luke's account of the Last Supper. From St. John's recital, we gather that Jesus returned several times in the course of that solemn evening to this sad topic. That one of his own little inner circle, so closely associated with him, should so basely betray him, was evidently a very bitter drop in the Lord's cup of suffering. In his dread experience of human sorrow it was needful that the Christ should fulfill in his own experience what even the noblest of the children of men - David, for instance - had felt of the falseness of friends. What suffering can be inflicted on a generous heart comparable to it? Surely he of whom it was written, "Whose sorrows are like unto my sorrows?" must make trial of this bitterness. Chrysostom thinks that the Master, in some of these repeated allusions during the "Supper," tried to win Judas over to a better mind. Luke 22:21

Vincent's Word Studies

Betrayeth (παραδιδόντος)

The present participle: is now engaged in betraying.

With me

"He does not say with you: thus separating the traitor from the rest of the disciples, and showing that now he alone has to do with that wretch, as with an enemy" (Bengel).