Program 105: The Last Supper: Passover? Or regular meal?

Yahushua, as the antitype of the Passover lamb, was dead at the time of the Passover. The Last Supper was a regular meal.

Welcome to WLC Radio, a subsidiary of World’s Last Chance Ministries, an online ministry dedicated to learning how to live in constant readiness for the Savior's return.

For two thousand years, believers of every generation have longed to be the last generation. Contrary to popular belief, though, Christ did not give believers “signs of the times” to watch for. Instead, he repeatedly warned that his coming would take even the faithful by surprise. Yahushua urgently warned believers to be ready because, he said, “The Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.” [Matthew 24:44]

WLC Radio: Teaching minds and preparing hearts for Christ's sudden return.

* * *Part 1: (Miles & Dave)

Miles Robey: Hello! Welcome to WLC Radio. I’m your host, Miles Robey.

Dave Wright: And I’m Dave Wright! Thanks for joining us today.

Miles: If you’ve tuned in before, you know that at WLC, we prefer to use the personal name of the Creator which is Yahuwah, or Yah. That’s actually the name that’s used throughout the Old Testament. It’s simply that in our modern translations, the name has been hidden under the generic titles of “lord” or “god.”

Hebrew had generic titles, too. Lord, or god, in Hebrew was “el” or “elohim.”

Dave: Elohim is how Yahuwah is referred to throughout the Creation account.

Miles: Right! The Saviour’s name contains Yah’s name. They did this a lot in Bible times. There’s Abijah, or, more properly, Abiyah which means “my father is Yah.” There’s Azriel, which means “my help is El”, and Azaziah, or “Yahuwah is strong.”

Dave: Daniel—Daniyyel: “El is my judge.”

Miles: Then there’s Elijah, or Eli-Yah which combines both the name and the title. It means “my El is Yah.” It’s really beautiful how they did this. The Saviour’s name is Yahushua and means, literally, “Yahuwah’s salvation.” That’s what he is! To us, he is, literally, “Yahuwah’s salvation.”

Sooo, moving on. What have you got for us today, Dave?

Dave: Well, do you like puzzles? Riddles? Ciphers?

Miles: Not really. What about you? Do you like riddles?

Dave: Actually, I do.

Miles: Well, then, here’s one for you. My daughter asked me this the other day. What belongs to you, but other people use more than you do?

Dave: Aw, let me think. It belongs to me, but other people use it more than I do?

Miles: Yep. Give up?

Dave: Nope! Uh … that would have to be my name.

Miles: You’re right! You’re good at this. Okay. One more: The man who invented it doesn't want it. The man who bought it doesn't need it. The man who needs it doesn't know it. What is it?

Dave: Hmm. You got me on that one. What is it?

Miles laughs: A coffin!

Dave chuckles: I can see that: someone who buys a coffin doesn’t need it, and if you need it, you don’t know it.

Well, the puzzler I want to explain today has to do with the Last Supper. Was the Last Supper the Passover meal? Or was it simply a regular meal at which the Saviour instituted communion as the memorial of his death?

Miles: Well … I’ve always assumed it was the Passover supper.

Dave: A lot of people have, so let’s take a look at the facts.

In the New Testament, we have the three synoptic gospels. Those are Matthew, Mark, and Luke.

We also have the gospel of John. Now, because the gospel accounts bring out different details, some people think the synoptic gospels contradict the account in John.

Miles: Yeah, I’ve heard that before. I haven’t really paid a lot of attention to what it’s about, though. I just thought it was doubters looking for something to quibble about.

Dave: Well, I think we should pay attention to this. Any time someone starts claiming that one part of Scripture contradicts another part, it’s an opening for Satan to come in and implant doubt. And you know, he’s not going to hesitate to do that.

Miles: So, what’s the problem? Why do they say there’s a contradiction?

Dave: It has to do with the timing of the Last Supper. John 13 appears to place the Last Supper before the Passover, while passages in Matthew, Mark and Luke appear to place the Last Supper on the Passover.

I’ve printed off a number of verses here to save time, so you don’t have to be flipping through your Bible so much. Go ahead and read the first passage at the top. This is the one from John 13. What does it say?

Miles: “Now before the Feast of the Passover, when Yahushua knew that his hour had come that he should depart from this world to the Father, having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them to the end. And supper being ended Yahushua began to wash the disciples’ feet…” [See John 13:1, 2, 5.]

Unquote.

Okay. I’m not seeing the problem.

Dave: Well, notice the first phrase: “Now before the Feast of Passover …” and then it immediately goes into Yahushua’s washing the feet of the disciples which, as we all know, occurred at the Last Supper.

Now, let’s read it from the synoptic gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke. What do they say?

Miles: Uh … okay. This is Matthew 26, verse 17. It says:

“Now on the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Yahushua, saying to him, ‘Where do You want us to prepare for You to eat the Passover?’”

Dave: All right. John says before the feast of Passover; Matthew says on the first day of Passover.

What does Mark say?

Miles: Mark 14:1 says: “After two days it was the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread.”

Dave: This one isn’t as clear. You have to read it in context, but once you look at it in context, the problem becomes clear. Just before this, in Mark 11, you’ve got the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, followed by a couple of chapters quoting Christ’s teachings, then this, saying “after two days it was the Passover.” The next event listed is Christ’s anointing in Bethany at the home of Simon the leper. So you’ve got a few days really full of activity here.

And Luke? What does Luke say?

Miles: Luke 22, verses 7 to 9, say:

Then came the Day of Unleavened Bread, when the Passover must be killed. And he [Yahushua] sent Peter and John, saying, “Go and prepare the Passover for us, that we may eat.”

So they said to Him, “Where do You want us to prepare?”

Dave: So, this is why we have what appear to be contradictions in the gospel accounts and why so many people are puzzled by this.

Miles: Yeah, it does sound contradictory. You’re saying it’s not.

Dave: Well, no. Truth never contradicts itself. Don’t let Satan instill doubt. If you come across something that appears contradictory, it simply means your understanding is incomplete or you’ve made a mistake or assumption somewhere along the way. Because when you dig deeper, you’ll find that truth is always harmonious.

And that’s the case with this, too.

People have believed the Last Supper was the Passover meal, because of the long-held assumption that the Hebrew day began at sunset, rather than dawn.

Miles: Awww! Yeah, I can see that. Because if the Saviour was crucified on the sixth day of the week—and Scripture says he was—then if the day began at sunset, the evening before would technically be considered Passover.

Dave: Right. Now, we already know from elsewhere in Scripture that the Biblical day actually began at dawn, not sunset and when you see the evidence that the Last Supper was not the Passover meal, we have additional circumstantial evidence that the day begins at dawn, not sunset.

Miles: We’ve talked about that before. If you missed that program, you can still listen to it. Just go to our website, click on the WLC Radio icon. Look for the program entitled “When does the day begin in Scripture?” You can also look for WLC videos on YouTube.

Dave: When you know that the day in Scripture began at dawn, it becomes immediately clear that if the Saviour was killed on Passover (and he was) then the last supper could not have occurred on Passover.

Miles: Right. Okay. But for those who haven’t had a chance to research yet when a day begins—

Dave: There are still problems with the assumption that the Last Supper was the Passover.

First, all four gospels refer to the day of the crucifixion as the “Preparation.”

Miles: Really?

Dave: Yes. So, this indicates that the evening-time Passover meal (for which preparation must be made) had not yet been eaten. Many Sabbatarians today refer to the sixth day of the Biblical week as the “Preparation Day.” In other words, the day on which you prepare for the Sabbath.

Miles: Sure! That’s how we use it in our home.

Dave: We do, too, actually. But that’s not how they used it in the Bible. In Scripture, referring to a day as the “Preparation” is recorded only for the 14^th of Abib or the Passover.

Now, we know from Exodus 12, that the Passover meal was eaten in the evening, so that day when they were getting ready for the Passover was referred to as the “Preparation.”

Miles: Could we take a look at those verses in the gospels that refer to the day of crucifixion as the Preparation?

Dave: Yes. Actually, I printed them out here somewhere …

Here we go. Go ahead and read through those.

Miles: All right, uh … Matthew 27:62 says: “On the next day, which followed the Day of Preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees gathered together to Pilate.”

Dave: This is when they asked Pilate to guard the tomb “until the third day.”

The Jews, like the Romans, counted inclusively, so the first day was the day of Preparation when he died and was buried; second day was the seventh-day Sabbath, and the third day was actually the first day of the week when Yahushua was resurrected.

What’s next?

Miles: Mark 15:42-43.

“Now when evening had come, because it was the Preparation Day, that is, the day before the Sabbath, Joseph of Arimathea … coming and taking courage, went in to Pilate and asked for the body of Yahushua.”

Dave: You can’t get clearer than that: “the Preparation Day, that is, the day before the Sabbath.”

Miles: Right!

Okay, Luke 23, verses 53-54. This is talking about the burial of Christ. It says, quote:

“Then he took [the body] down, wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a tomb that was hewn out of the rock, where no one had ever lain before. That day was the Preparation, and the Sabbath drew near.”

Unquote. That’s interesting. Hm.

John 19:31 is really clear, too. It says, quote: “Therefore, because it was the Preparation Day, that the bodies should not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.”

Dave: So, in every single instance we’ve got the day after the Last Supper being the “Preparation.” The preparation for what? For the Passover.

See, the whole reason for getting the bodies off of the crosses so quickly was because that day was the “Preparation” for the evening Passover meal as well as the next day, which was the first day of Feast of Unleavened Bread, a High Sabbath. The Last Supper was eaten the day before Yahushua was crucified.

Miles: So, what you’re saying is: if the Last Supper had actually been the Passover meal, the next day would not have been repeatedly referred to as the “Preparation.”

Dave: Exactly. But there’s more. Do you remember what John the Baptist said when he first saw Christ? How did he describe him?

Miles: He said: “Behold! The lamb of Yah who takes away the sin of the world.” [See John 1:29.]

Dave: Right! Now, if the Last Supper had been eaten at the time of the actual, official Passover meal, that beautiful symbolism of Yahushua as the “lamb of Yah who takes away the sin of the world” would have been lost. The beautiful symbolism of the blood of Yahushua being the blood of the Passover Lamb by whose blood we are passed-over is destroyed if he did not die at the time of the evening sacrifice on the day of Passover.

Miles: I never really thought about it that way, but that really makes sense. Huh. That’s beautiful.

We’re going to take a quick break and when we return, we’ll talk about this some more.

Be right back.

* * *

Advertisement

The doctrine of the trinity is one of the foundational dogmas of Christianity. With only a handful of exceptions, the vast majority of Christendom worships a triune godhead.

This doctrine is so ubiquitous, that the few denominations that reject it are not viewed as truly Christian by everyone else!

The truly astonishing fact, though, is that a triune godhead really cannot be supported from Scripture. It comes from ancient heathenism. The one passage of Scripture that refers to a triune divinity is a clear addition to the original text made nearly 1,000 years after Christ!

To learn the truth about this teaching, go to WorldsLastChance.com and click on the WLC Radio icon. Listen to the episode entitled, “One Yah versus Triune Godhead.” Learn the truth because this error hides the love of the Father.

* * *Part 2: (Miles & Dave)

Dave: When you carefully, meticulously study Scripture, a surprising truth begins to come to light and that is: The Last Supper was not, in fact, the Passover supper. Now, we don’t have time to go into more detail about the supposedly contradictory accounts of the timing of the Last Supper as given in the Gospels, but I’ll just repeat: truth does not contradict itself.

Miles: Let’s plan on, in a future program, going over those passages. Could you plan on that? I’d like to hear how you resolve that, too.

Dave: Sure! Let’s do that. Just know, for now, that there is a very logical, reasonable explanation that does not contradict Scripture.

Okay. There’s additional evidence that the Last Supper was not the traditional Passover meal and I’d like to take a look at that now.

Miles: All right.

Dave: Turn to John, chapter 13.

John 13 clearly indicates that at the time the Last Supper was eaten, the Passover meal had not yet been eaten! This is a vital point, because it proves conclusively the Last Supper was not the Passover meal.

Miles: Where do you get that? I’m not seeing that here.

Dave: I’ll show you. And once you see it, you’ll wonder how you could ever have assumed the Last Supper was the actual Passover meal.

But first, let’s define a term. The Passover meal was commonly referred to as “the feast” because it kicked off the Feast of Unleavened Bread.

Now, at the Last Supper, you’ll recall, Yahushua announced that one of the twelve disciples would betray him. This upset and confused the disciples.

Let’s read about it. Start at John 13, verse 23 and following.

Miles: All right. It says, quote:

Now there was leaning on Yahushua’s bosom one of his disciples, whom Yahushua loved. Simon Peter therefore motioned to him to ask who it was of whom he spoke. Then, leaning back on Yahushua’s breast, he said to him, “Lord, who is it?”

Yahushua answered, “It is he to whom I shall give a piece of bread when I have dipped it.” And having dipped the bread, He gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon. [See John 13:23-26.]

Dave: By this time, Judas had fully determined to betray the Saviour. Scripture tells us that Satan completely controlled Judas at this point. So then Yahushua says something to Judas the other disciples don’t understand.

It’s this misunderstanding on the part of the disciples that reveals the Last Supper was not, in actual point of fact, the Passover meal.

I’ve printed off the next two verses, John 13:27 to 29, in four different versions. I’d like you to read them all.

Miles: All right. Let’s see here, uh …

The New King James Version says, quote:

Now after the piece of bread, Satan entered him. Then Yahushua said to him, “What you do, do quickly.” But no one at the table knew for what reason he said this to him. For some thought, because Judas had the money box, that Yahushua had said to him, “Buy those things we need for the feast,” or that he should give something to the poor.

Oh, now that’s interesting!

Dave: Isn’t it though? Okay, what’s next?

Just read verse 29. That’s enough.

Miles: All right, uh, King James version says: “For as some of them thought, because Judas had the bag, that Yahushua had said unto him, Buy those things that we have need of against the feast …”

Dave: Next?

Miles: The New American Standard Bible says: “For some were supposing, because Judas had the money box, that Yahushua was saying to him, ‘Buy the things we have need of for the feast …’”

The last one, the Complete Jewish Bible, says: “Some thought that since Y'hudah [or Judas] was in charge of the common purse, Yahushua was telling him, ‘Buy what we need for the festival . . . .’”

Dave: If they were just finishing up the Passover meal, would the disciples have assumed Yahushua was asking Judas to purchase things for the Passover meal?

Miles: No, of course not. And you’re right: I’m wondering how I never saw this before!

Dave: There’s more! In the Hebrew culture, yeast, or leavening, was a symbol for sin. This stems back to the exodus and to this day, those who observe the feast of unleavened bread remove all leavening from their home for that week.

Miles: I like symbols. You can pack so much more meaning into a symbol! Take leavening, for example. My oldest daughter has been learning how to bake bread. I, of course, have been enjoying the fruits of her labors. Probably a little too much—

Dave: You can always bring some to work if you’re over-indulging. I like home-made bread, too!

Miles: She’s gotten good, once she quit switching salt and sugar!

Dave laughs.

Miles: Anyway, it doesn’t take much leavening to transform a large bowl of dough. It’s a great symbol for sin because even just one little sin, indulged and clung to, can lead to still greater rebellion.

Dave: It is a good illustration of sin. It’s also a symbol for erroneous teachings that can, of course, lead to sin. Yahushua himself used leavening as a symbol in this way.

Would you read Matthew 16? Start at verse six. Let’s read this in context.

Miles:

Yahushua said to them, “Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees.”

They reasoned among themselves, saying, “It is because we have taken no bread.” But . . . [Yahushua], being aware of it, said to them, . . . “How is it you do not understand that I did not speak to you concerning bread? – but to beware of the leavening of the Pharisees and Sadducees.”

Then they understood that He did not tell them to beware of the leavening of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees. [Matthew 16:6-8, 11, 12]

Dave: Yahushua was using leavening as a symbol for the incorrect “doctrines of men” the Pharisees and Sadducees preferred above the law of Yahuwah.

Miles: Wrong “doctrines of men” still influence belief systems! You’ve got creeds and dogmas in organized religion that frequently are nothing more than traditions based on assumptions that are wrong!

Dave: That’s why each one of us needs to carefully study our beliefs to make sure we haven’t ignorantly accepted error as truth. Simply because a belief has been held for hundreds of years doesn’t make it true or Scriptural.

If you want to know the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth you have to examine your beliefs from Scripture for yourself.

Okay. Getting back to the Last Supper. Again, yeast was to be removed from the home on the “Preparation” or, the 14^th of Abib.

Miles: Which, as we said earlier, was the day of Christ’s crucifixion. The day on which the Passover meal was eaten in the evening.

Dave: Right. Now, Passover was always eaten with unleavened bread. It was a beautiful symbol for Yahushua, the Bread of Life, who knew no sin.

So, what does that tell us?

Miles: Well, if the Last Supper were the official Passover meal, it would have been eaten with unleavened bread, right?

Dave: Exactly! But here’s the shocker: the Last Supper was eaten with leavened, not unleavened bread.

Miles: Seriously?

Dave: Yep! And I can prove it.

See, in Hebrew, there’s only one word for the English phrase “leavened bread.” The English phrase “unleavened bread” also comes from a single Hebrew word.

In order to convey the idea of leavened or unleavened bread, an extra word has to be added in English. In Hebrew, however, the concept is covered in a single word. The same is true in Aramaic and Greek as well.

In Hebrew, unleavened bread is matzah. Leavened bread is lekhem.

In Aramaic, unleavened bread is patireh while leavened bread is lakhma.

And, in Greek, unleavened bread is azumos while bread with leavening is artos.

Miles: Soooo … completely different words.

Dave: Here’s where it gets interesting. When speaking of the feast of unleavened bread, always and without exception, Scripture uses the word for unleavened bread – bread that has no yeast.

Miles: In the Old Testament?

Dave: In the Old Testament and the New. Every single time the feast of unleavened bread is mentioned, it always uses the word for bread without leavening.

Miles: So, what you’re saying is, if the Last Supper had been the Passover, then the Aramaic and Greek words referring to the “bread” which the Saviour broke and gave to the disciples would be the same words as used for unleavened bread.

Dave: You’ve got it. When you go back and look, though, every single time the New Testament mentions the bread eaten at the last supper, it always uses the word for leavened bread: bread with yeast!

Miles: Really?!

Dave: Let’s look at these verses. Let’s start with Matthew 26:26. What does that say?

Miles: “And as they were eating, Yahushua took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, ‘Take, eat; this is my body.’”

Unquote. You’re saying that this was leavened bread.

Dave: Yes. You look up the word “bread” in a concordance, and the original word was artos, or leavened bread: bread with yeast.

Now what does Mark 14:22 say?

Miles: “And as they were eating, Yahushua took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to them and said, ‘Take, eat, this is my body.’”

Dave: And Luke 22:19?

Miles: “And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, ‘This is my body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of me.’”

Dave: Again, both times it’s artos, the Greek word for leavened bread.

Miles: What about John?

Dave: John doesn’t talk about the bread. Instead, he talks about the foot washing. Paul, however, has quite a bit to say about the Last Supper.

Would you read 1 Corinthians 11:23, please?

Miles: “For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord, Yahushua on the same night in which he was betrayed took bread; and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, ‘Take, eat; this is my body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of me.’”

Wow! Paul, too?

Dave: Paul, too. His account agrees with the word choice of the Gospels: the bread used was leavened bread! Keep reading 1 Corinthians, verses 26 to 28 and each time you read the word “bread” realize that Paul is using the word for leavened bread.

Miles: It says:

“For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim Yahushua’s death till he comes. Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup.”

Dave: There is simply no way the Last Supper could have been the national festival of the Passover or else the bread used would have been unleavened bread. Clearly, the Last Supper took place the day before the Passover.

Miles: Quick question: why would Yahushua have used leavened bread to represent himself when he was sinless, and leavening was a symbol for sin?

Dave: First, it was what they had on hand, although he certainly could have asked that unleavened bread be served at the meal. Secondly, though, and more importantly, is the symbolism. You’re right: Yahushua was sinless. But read 2 Corinthians 5:21 and see what it says.

Miles: All right … give me just a second.

Here we go: “For He made him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of Yah in him.”

Dave: Yahushua was sinless, but he took on our sins.

Yahushua knew he’d be dead when the Passover meal came. The Last Supper was his final meal before his crucifixion.

He died on Passover, right at the time of the evening sacrifice. This was a perfect fulfillment of type meeting anti-type. He was the great anti-type of all the lambs sacrificed since the fall.

Paul understood this symbolism and he explained it in 1 Corinthians 5, verses 6 to 9. Would you read that for us? Again, Yahushua was sinless, but he took on our sin to be the lamb of Yah that took away our sins.

Miles: 1 Corinthians 5:6-8. It says:

Your glorying is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? Therefore purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened. For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us. Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

Dave: Again, Yahushua is our substitute. And, as our substitute, he took on our sin. The result is that all who believe in him may be saved. His spotless righteousness is freely given to all who will accept by faith his sacrifice on our behalf.

This is essence of the Passover celebration. We are safely passed-over and the demands of the broken law are met by his blood shed on our behalf.

When we eat the unleavened bread in remembrance of Yahushua, we proclaim his death until he comes. We memorialize the greatest gift ever given to man: the Lamb of Yah who takes away the sins of the world.

Miles: Beautiful, it’s so beautiful. You know, every time I open the Bible, there’s always something new to learn.

Up next: our Daily Mailbag. Stay tuned!

* * *

You are listening to World's Last Chance Radio.

WLC Radio: Teaching minds and preparing hearts for Christ's sudden return.

* * *Advertisement 23

Have you heard of the promise contained in the name of Yahuwah? If you haven’t, you’re not alone. Satan has done his utmost to conceal this powerful truth from human minds.

He knows the power of the promise contained in the name of Yah! He knows that this knowledge, combined with the power inherent in the divine name, will unlock all the treasures of Heaven.

The most powerful promise in the entire universe is known to only a handful of people, but Heaven is just waiting to bless everyone who will call upon the promise in Yah’s name.

Learn how you can, too! Go to WorldsLastChance.com and click on the WLC Radio icon. Look for the episode entitled “The Most Powerful Promise in the Universe!” You can also listen to it on YouTube!

* * *Daily Mailbag (Miles & Dave)

Miles: Selma Engel of Oldenburg, Germany has a question for us. She says: “Recently my sister became convicted that, as godly Christian women, we should be covering our hair. She’s almost convinced our mother that she should be wearing a covering, too.

“I don’t know what to believe. The Bible seems clear that women are to wear coverings, but is that simply a cultural thing? My husband said he would support me in whatever I felt convicted to do, but I could tell he wasn’t in favor of such a change. I’d appreciate anything you can share to clarify the issue.”

Dave: I’ve noticed that this is a growing movement among ultra-conservative Christians and it’s based on a passage in 1 Corinthians, chapter 11.

Before we go on, I just want to clarify that this is a separate issue from women who live in cultures where covering their head is the norm. There are plenty of cultures around the world where women still cover their heads. That’s cultural.

Selma’s question is different. She lives in Europe. It’s not part of western culture for women to cover their heads. Her question is simply: “Does the Bible require women to cover their heads?”

Miles: You’re right: it’s not something typically done by westerners but I’ve seen more Christian women doing it.

Dave: This whole issue arises from counsel Paul gave the Corinthians regarding a specific situation they were dealing with. But from this, many devout believers have extrapolated that women today should also cover their heads.

But there’s more to it than just keeping a woman’s hair covered at all times. People who believe this way typically also teach that a woman must be under a male’s “headship.” This, they say, is the “true” covering that is symbolized by the cloth she uses to cover her hair.

Miles: I’m assuming the male is her husband? What about for single women? Does it apply to them, too?

Dave: They believe it does. They teach that a girl is covered by the headship of her father. When she gets married, that role of “headship” moves to her husband. If she remains unmarried, she is still covered by her father. It’s a very traditional, patriarchal viewpoint.

Miles: I’m taking it you disagree?

Dave: I’m saying it’s a misinterpretation of what Paul is saying in this passage and it can lead to spiritual abuse.

Let’s start by laying some Biblical principles. Would you read Ezekiel 14, verse 20? This is the underlying principle we should always remember whenever deciding if one person can “cover” or practice “headship” over another.

Miles: Okay. It says: “Though Noah, Daniel, and Job were in it, as I live, saith Adonai Yahuwah, they shall deliver neither son nor daughter; they shall but deliver their own souls by their righteousness.”

Dave: We are never to sign authority over our own souls to some other human being, and that is too often what happens with this belief that a woman needs to be “covered” by the “headship” of some male relative. They’ll argue that it’s a “godly” man … but what if it isn’t? What if she’s married to a man who is selfish? Or has fallen away?

Miles: But even with a godly man, this text is saying you can’t rely on them, even if it were Daniel or Job—two very godly men!

Dave: We’re all answerable to Yah for our own souls.

Another example is Deborah. We have her story in Judges 4. She was married, she was a judge, and people listened to her, men and women!

She didn’t take orders from her husband. She took her orders from Yah.

Miles: So, if Paul’s not saying that women should cover their hair, or be under the “headship” of a man, what is he saying? What’s the correct interpretation of that passage?

Dave: Let’s read it: 1 Corinthians 11, verses 3 to 16?

Miles: Okay. It says:

But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is Yah. Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head.

But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved. For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered.

For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of Yah; but woman is the glory of man. For man is not from woman, but woman from man. Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man. For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. Nevertheless, neither is man independent of woman, nor woman independent of man, in Yahuwah. For as woman came from man, even so man also comes through woman; but all things are from Yah.

Judge among yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to Yah with her head uncovered? Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him? But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering. But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of Yah.

Dave: Again, 1 Corinthians was written to address issues the believers in Corinth were facing. One of these issues was whether a woman should cover her head in church. This was a question, because one of the Jewish traditions was that males—the heads of the households—always covered their heads when entering the temple.

Miles: Why? What was the significance?

Dave: Well, it was two-fold. It was to show reverence to Yah, but it was also to show the guilt and shame of their sins. Paul, as we all know, was very opposed to the legalism of Jewish tradition. Consequently, he was opposed to this legalistic demonstration of guilt since believers are justified by faith. They stand before Yah as though they had never sinned.

The question then arose: Well, what about the women? Should they cover in church of not?

Paul answered by turning the situation into a spiritual analogy. Just for clarification, in verse 16, Paul answered their question by saying: “If anyone seems to be contentious,” in other words: if anyone wants to argue about it, “we have no such custom, nor do the churches of Yah.”

So, he’s saying right here: “No. You don’t have to be covered. There is no such custom.” If the women want to do it, fine. It may be their custom. But there is certainly no requirement that they do so.

Miles: All right, but you’ve kind of lost me. I’m not seeing this analogy you’re referring to.

Dave: We know that Paul is not discussing a literal veil or cloth covering when he talks about a woman having her head covered because he acknowledges she’s already covered!

Miles: Where?

Dave: Verse 15. He says: “But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering.” Unquote.

Miles: So, what’s the analogy?

Dave: The analogy here is that he’s speaking of a spiritual covering. Isaiah 30, verse 1 states: “Woe to the rebellious children, saith Yahuwah, that take counsel, but not of me, and cover with a covering, but not by my spirit, that they may lay sin upon sin.”

This verse reveals that Yahuwah is our covering. We’re not to seek any covering other than His spirit and most certainly not from other humans, be they pastors, husbands, or fathers.

Turn to Psalm 104 and read the first two verses. This is another place that speaks of Yah’s covering.

Miles: “Bless Yahuwah, O my soul! O Yahuwah my Eloah, You are very great: You are clothed with honor and majesty, Who cover Yourself with light as with a garment.”

Dave: Yahuwah is clothed—or covered—in honor, majesty, and light.

Miles: And where there’s light, there’s no darkness or sin.

Dave: The covering Yah is talking about is His spirit of truth and light.

Now. Let’s take this understanding and read 1 Corinthians 11, verse 4 again. What does it say?

Miles: “Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is Yah.”

Dave: Paul is speaking symbolically throughout this passage. He’s not referring to the man’s physical head because he just said in verse 3: “I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ …”

What he’s saying here is simply this: Christ is our head. If we cover Christ so that his presence cannot be seen in our lives, then we dishonor him by taking the name of Christian.

Miles: Matthew 5:16: “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven.”

Dave: Exactly! If men are going to take the name of Christ, claiming to be His followers, but by their lives they dishonor Him, they are “covering” up Yah’s glory that is to shine through them.

Miles: Okay. But what about the women?

Dave: Verse 3: Paul said the head of man is Christ; the head of woman is her husband; and the head of Christ is Yah. This is not a chain of command since we know that Yahuwah shares His glory with the Saviour, even though Yah is the head of the son.

Likewise, a truly godly husband will not exert force and domination over his wife. He’ll do everything in his power to elevate her, to treat her with respect and as his equal, just as Yah elevated Christ.

Miles: True headship is earned by the self-sacrificing love given to the one who is covered. This is how Christ loved the church, and how men are to love their wives.

Dave: Yes. Now then, women cover their “head” (their husband) by their words.

Miles: Where do you get that?

Dave: Psalm 140. Would you read verses 7 to 9, please?

Miles:

O Yahuwah Adonai, the strength of my salvation,
You have covered my head in the day of battle.
Do not grant, O Yahuwah, the desires of the wicked;
… As for the head of those who surround me,
Let the evil of their lips cover them;

Dave: If a woman claims to be a Christian, and yet by her words, she “uncovers” her “head” (her husband) she is dishonoring him and, by that act, dishonoring Christ.

Most women love their hair. They’d never willingly shave it off. And yet, in Paul’s analogy, that is just what they do when they use their words to gossip about their husbands, to speak disrespectfully or degrade them in any way. This shames him and it shames Yah.

Wives are to “cover” their husband’s weaknesses. Not “uncover” them.

Miles: That’s one thing I’ve always really appreciated about my wife. We’ve had our disagreements, but she’s always been very careful not to gossip with her girlfriends about me behind my back. She’s loyal and she’s always careful to present me to our friends in the best possible light. I really appreciate that about her.

Dave: She’s honoring you, her “matrimonial” head, and in acting honorably, she honors Christ. This is the point Paul’s making in this passage. He’s not saying that women must always wear a scarf over their heads.

Betty Miller, a Christian author, writes, quote: “One way we can discern between false and true teaching is to examine the fruit of it. Does it bring freedom, or legalism and bondage?”

The problem with interpreting 1 Corinthians 11 the way many people do, is that it becomes legalism almost without them realizing it. You see, if a sister feels ever-so-slightly superior to other sisters because she has her hair covered and they don’t, that’s legalism. If she feels she must be under the “headship” of any human male, rather than Christ, that’s bondage.

Miles: Good point. It’s so easy to feel superior when any hint of legalism slips in. And this can apply to so much in the Christian walk! People who are vegetarian can feel superior to those who eat meat, while those who are vegan feel superior to those who are vegetarian.

Any act that makes us feel superior in our Christian walk is legalism. It’s trying to earn our way to heaven when, in reality, salvation, justification, sanctification … it is all a gift of grace.

Keep sending us your questions! Go to WorldsLastChance.com and click on Contact Us. We always enjoy reading your messages.

* * *Daily Promise

This is Elise O’Brien with your daily promise from Yah’s word.

Hannah loved cheerleading and was on her school’s cheerleading team her sophomore year in high school. One day, during a stunt, something went wrong. Hannah caught the full weight of the girl flying above her. Hannah heard a Pop! as the girl landed in her arms.

At first, everyone assumed Hannah would be fine in a few days, but three weeks later, it had become excruciating to move. So began round after round of visits to doctors, surgeons, and physical therapists. After a bone scan, two CT scans, and three MRIs, doctors were no closer to discovering the cause of Hannah’s on-going, intense pain.

Three years later, Hannah and her mom, Dawn, were at a Bible study. Dawn felt impressed to ask the group to pray for Hannah. They did, fervently asking Yahuwah to bless Hannah with healing and help the family to find an answer for her on-going problems.

The very next day, Dawn was searching on line for a chronic pain specialist.

Dawn recalls: “As I scrolled though dozens of names, I felt led to click on a certain physical therapist’s website. It said he had fifty years of experience. I read, ‘If you want to stop your pain at the source rather than just strengthening the surrounding muscle, we are the experts.’”

She immediately called for an appointment.

The receptionist explained that the physical therapist was actually semi-retired and currently on vacation in the San Juan Islands. She asked if Dawn would like to make an appointment with his associate.

Dawn declined. She felt impressed Hannah needed to see the man with 50 years’ experience. The receptionist said she would contact the therapist and explain the situation to him.

The physical therapist was intrigued by Hannah’s case. He immediately scheduled an appointment with her, cutting his vacation short since she would be leaving soon for university.

At the appointment, the physical therapist listened to Hannah for an hour, then he explained what happened: “A tendon popped off your bone and tore. Scar tissue is now rubbing against the bone, sliding back and forth. It’s like pulling a knot on a string of yarn through the eye of a needle.”

He said they could have it fixed before she left for university.

So, every day for the next two weeks, Hannah went to the physical therapist. Every day, the pain level decreased and Hannah was able to start doing more activities. At the end of two weeks, Dawn went with Hannah to her last appointment so she could thank him for all his help.

The therapist immediately turned the praise to Yahuwah. “God has given me a gift,” he explained. “I am so happy to use that gift to help people.”

Today, Hannah’s arm is fully functional and she can once again do the activities she wanted to do for so long but couldn’t.

In recalling the years of pain and struggle to find an answer, Dawn says: “We … rejoice and wonder in God’s ability to take a seemingly hopeless situation and, in His wisdom and mercy, bring us hope and allow Hannah back into a renewed, active, and normal life.”

Yahuwah delights to answer the prayer of faith! There’s nothing you can ask Him that is too hard for Him to answer. There is no problem too difficult for Him to solve.

Psalm 145, verses 18 and 19 says:

“Yahuwah is near to all who call upon Him,
To all who call upon Him in truth.
He will fulfill the desire of those who fear Him;
He also will hear their cry and save them.”

We have been given great and precious promises. Go, and start claiming!

* * *Part 3: (Miles & Dave)

Miles: This has been a really interesting discussion. I can’t believe I’ve never seen this before. So now I’ve got a question for you: traditionally, we’ve used unleavened bread for communion. But if the bread Yahushua used was actually leavened, should we be using that instead?

Dave: It’s not necessary to use leavened bread when participating in communion simply because Yahushua used leavened bread. Likewise, if a person cannot get unleavened bread, he shouldn’t feel condemned for using leavened bread. The point is the symbolism that teaches deep spiritual lessons: Yahushua, the sinless lamb of Yah, became sin for us, so that we might be made the righteousness of Yah in him. Full stop.

Miles: That’s a good point. I think, too often, we get focused on the nitty-gritty details: Is it leavened bread or unleavened bread? If we can’t get unleavened bread, would it be dishonoring to use leavened, or should we skip having communion until we can get bread without leavening?

Dave: These are all ways Satan distracts us from what is really important, and that is: Yahuwah has provided salvation full and free to every person who has ever been born. All we have to do is accept it by faith. Then, the merits of Christ’s blood, as well as the merits of his sinless life are credited to our account and we stand before Yah as though we had never sinned.

Miles: That’s what we have to stay focused on. Martin Luther once said, “Every week I preach justification by faith to my people, because every week they forget it.”

We’re justified—declared righteous—by Yah’s grace, people! It’s not something we can earn. All we can do is choose to accept it by faith.

Dave: And then, any works of righteousness are the fruits of already having been justified! It’s not what buys us justification.

Anything else is “another” gospel. It’s not the gospel of Christ. It’s a false gospel.

Miles: Very true. We don’t have time to play around with our salvation. You can’t “earn” it. You can only accept it. By faith. Make that choice today. It will be the best decision you have ever made!

Join us again tomorrow, and until then, remember: Yahuwah loves you . . . and He is safe to trust!

* * *

You have been listening to WLC Radio.

This program and past episodes of WLC Radio are available for downloading on our website. They're great for sharing with friends and for use in Bible studies! They're also an excellent resource for those worshipping Yahuwah alone at home. To listen to previously aired programs, visit our website at WorldsLastChance.com. Click on the WLC Radio icon displayed on our homepage.

In his teachings and parables, the Savior gave no “signs of the times” to watch for. Instead, the thrust of his message was constant … vigilance. Join us again tomorrow for another truth-filled message as we explore various topics focused on the Savior's return and how to live in constant readiness to welcome him warmly when he comes.

WLC Radio: Teaching minds and preparing hearts for Christ's sudden return.