Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 26:23
And he answered and said, He that dippeth [his] hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me.
23. He that dippeth his hand with me in the dish ] “He it is to whom I shall give a sop when I have dipped it,” Joh 13:26; here we have the words of the disciple who heard the reply of Jesus, which was probably whispered and not heard by the rest.
dippeth his hand in the dish ] i. e. in the charoseth, see above, Mat 26:20 ( b).
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 23. He that dippeth his hand] As the Jews ate the passover a whole family together, it was not convenient for them all to dip their bread in the same dish; they therefore had several little dishes or plates, in which was the juice of the bitter herbs, mentioned Ex 12:8, on different parts of the table; and those who were nigh one of these, dipped their bread in it. As Judas is represented as dipping in the same dish with Christ, it shows that he was either near or opposite to him. If this man’s heart had not been hardened, and his conscience seared beyond all precedent, by the deceitfulness of his sin, would he have showed his face in this sacred assembly, or have thus put the seal to his own perdition, by eating of this sacrificial lamb? Is it possible that he could feel no compunction? Alas! having delivered himself up into the hands of the devil, he was capable of delivering up his Master into the hands of the chief priests; and thus, when men are completely hardened by the deceitfulness of sin, they can outwardly perform the most solemn acts of devotion, without feeling any sort of inward concern about the matter.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
And he answered and said,…. In order to make them easy, and point out the betrayer to them,
he that dippeth his hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me. This seems to refer to the dipping of the unleavened bread, or bitter herbs, both, into the sauce called “Charoseth”, which the Jews z say,
“was made of figs, nuts, almonds, and other fruits; to which they added apples; all which they bruised in a mortar, and mixed with vinegar; and put spices into it, calamus and cinnamon, in the form of small long threads, in remembrance of the straw; and it was necessary it should be: thick, in memory of the clay.”
The account Maimonides a gives of it is,
“the “Charoseth” is a precept from the words of the Scribes, in remembrance of the clay in which they served in Egypt; and how did they make it? They took dates, or berries, or raisins, and the like, and stamped them, and put vinegar into them, and seasoned them with spices, as clay in straw, and brought it upon the table, in the night of the passover.”
And in this he says, the master of the family dipped both the herbs, and the unleavened bread b, and that both separately and conjunctly; for he says c, that
“he rolled up the unleavened bread and bitter herbs together, and dipped them in the Charoseth.”
And this was twice done in eating the passover; for so it is observed d among the many things, which distinguished this night from others: “in all other nights we dip but once, but in this night twice”. By this action, Christ gave his disciples a signal, whereby they might know the betrayer: for this is not the general description of one, that sat at the table, and ate of his bread with him, and so fulfilled the prediction, in Ps 41:9, though this is too true; but then, this was saying no more than he had before done, when he said, “one of you shall betray me”; though the phrase is so e used; for instance,
“if a man goes and sits at table with them, , and “dips with them”, though he does not eat the quantity of an olive, they bless for him.”
But this refers to a particular action then performed by Judas, just at the time Christ spoke these words; and who might sit near him, and dip into the same dish he did; for since there were thirteen of them, there might be more dishes than one; and two or three might have a dish to themselves, and Judas dip in the same dish with Christ.
z Bartenora in Misn. Pesach. c. 10. sect. 3. Vid. Maimon. & Yom Tob, in ib. & Piske Tos. Pesach. art. 322. a Hilch. Chametz Umetzah, c. 7. sect. 11. b Ib. c. 8. sect. 2. 8. c Ib. sect. 6. & T. Bab. Pesach. fol. 115. 1. d Misn. Pesach. c. 10. sect. 4, Maimon. Chametz Umetzah, c 8. sect. 2. Haggadah Shel Pesach, p. 5. e Bereshit Rabba, sect. 91. fol. 78. 4.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
He that dipped ( ). They all dipped their hands, having no knives, forks, or spoons. The aorist participle with the article simply means that the betrayer is the one who dips his hand in the dish ( ) or platter with the broth of nuts and raisins and figs into which the bread was dipped before eating. It is plain that Judas was not recognized by the rest as indicated by what Jesus has said. This language means that one of those who had eaten bread with him had violated the rights of hospitality by betraying him. The Arabs today are punctilious on this point. Eating one’s bread ties your hands and compels friendship. But Judas knew full well as is shown in verse 25 though the rest apparently did not grasp it.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
The dish [] . Wyc., platter. A dish containing a broth made with nuts, raisins, dates, figs, etc., into which pieces of bread were dipped.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
23. But he answering said. Christ, by his reply, neither removes their doubt, nor points out the person of Judas, but only confirms what he said a little before, that one of his friends sitting at the table is the traitor. And though they thought it hard to be left in suspense and perplexity for a time, that they might employ themselves in contemplating the atrocity of the crime, it was afterwards followed by another advantage, when they perceived that the prediction of the psalm was fulfilled,
He that ate pleasant food with me (184) hath lifted up his heel against me, (Psa 41:10.)
Besides, in the person of Judas, our Lord intended to admonish his followers in all ages, not to be discouraged or faint on account of intimate friends proving to be traitors; because the same thing that was experienced by Him who is the Head of the whole Church, must happen to us who are members of it.
(184) “ Celuy qui mangeoit en ami avec moy ; ” — “ he that ate with me as a friend. ”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(23) He that dippeth his hand with me.Better, he that dipped, as of an act just passed. It seems probable from what follows that these words also were spoken to a few only of the disciples, say to the four who were nearest to their Master. We can scarcely think of Judas as asking the question of Mat. 26:25, if he had heard the words and knew that they pointed to him as the traitor.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
23. Dippeth his hand with me in the dish By this it is intimated that it was one who reclined near him, and even supplied himself from the same dish. This forms the second advance of exposure. At the same time in this expression our Lord seems to have aggravated the crime of the traitor by suggesting the language of the Psalmist: “He that did eat my bread hath lifted up his heel against me.” Psa 41:9. But our Lord did not leave the traitor without a third and still more special detection. John tells us (Joh 13:23-26) that at Peter’s request he himself, as reclining nearest his Lord’s bosom, inquired of Jesus in an under tone, “Lord, who is it?” Our Lord replied, doubtless in the same sub-tone, “He it is to whom I shall give a sop.” He then gave the sop to Judas, by which the two disciples knew, the man for certainty. Judas by some tokens sees that he is individualized, and at last himself puts the question, Is it I? (Mat 26:25,) and receives an affirmative answer, as John adds, by which the whole eleven learn the man. Judas then, full rightly, thinks it time to vacate his place.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And he answered and said, “He who dipped his hand with me in the dish, the same will betray me.” ’
In the place where normally mention would be made of Israel’s betrayal by Egypt Jesus then replied that the one who would betray Him would be one of those who was dipping his hand in the dish with Him. This dish probably referred to the dishes of bitter herbs dipped in salted water which in typical Jewish fashion were shared. All would be dipping in it together. But it was a poignant reminder to Judas of the enormity of his betrayal, while simply indicating to the remainder that it was one who was present at the meal. The particular activity He described, which indicated friendship and fellowship, would come home poignantly to the one to whom He was hinting, without being obvious to all (we have no indication at any stage that any of them recognised that He meant Judas). It was, however, an indication of the unforgivable perfidy of the person in question. In Middle Eastern eyes to eat from the same dish was an expression of loyalty and friendship. It was not considered honourable to do it with someone towards whom there was an intention to act with hostile intent (compare Psa 41:9). Thus it heightened the level of betrayal.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Mat 26:23. He that dippeth his hand with me, &c. Grotius and others think this implies, that Judas had placed himself so near his Master, as to eat out of the same dish with him; but their way of lying on couches at meat, must have made it inconvenient for two or more persons to eat in that manner. It is more probable that the disciples, being in the deepest distress, had left off eating; only Judas, to conceal his guilt, continued the meal, and was dipping his meat into the haroseth, or thick sauce before mentioned, when Jesus happened to be putting his into it; which sauce, according to custom, was served up in a separate dish. See Joh 13:26.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Mat 26:23 . , . . .] he who has dipped (not: is dipping , Luther, following the Vulgate). We have here no such definite allusion as Joh 13:26 represents Jesus to have made to Judas . For it is not probable that the dipping in question took place subsequent to the intimation by Jesus in Mat 26:21 and the commotion of Mat 26:22 , two circumstances calculated to interrupt for a little the progress of the meal, but rather before them, when there may have been others besides Judas dipping into the dish from which Jesus was eating. The allusion can be said to point specially to Judas only in so far as, happening to recline near to Jesus, he must have been eating out of the same dish with Him (for there would be several of such dishes standing on the table). Comp. Grotius. The of Mar 14:20 (see on the passage) is not a substantial variation; neither has it been misunderstood by Matthew (in opposition to Weiss in the Stud. u. Krit . 1861, p. 53 f.), and converted by him into a special means of recognition (Holtzmann). The contents of the dish were the broth charoset ( ), made out of dates, figs, etc., and of the colour of brick (to remind those who partook of it of the bricks of Egypt, Maimonides, ad Pesach. vii. 11). See Buxtorf, Lex. Talm. p. 831.
] has dipped in the dish, into which he has put his hand, holding a piece of bread. Hom. Od. ix. 392; Aesch. Prom. 863; LXX. Deu 33:24 ; Rth 2:14 .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
23 And he answered and said, He that dippeth his hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me.
Ver. 23. He that dippeth his hand, &c. ] My fellow commoner, my familiar friend, Psa 41:9 . This greatly aggravateth the indignity of the matter. He was ex societate Iesu from the company of Jesus that betrayed him. So do the pretended Jesuits, Jebusites, to this day. Julius Caesar was slain in the Senate house by more of his friends than of his enemies, quorum non expleverat spes inexplebiles, of whom he had not offended, saith Seneca. But the wound that went nearest his heart was that he received from his son Brutus. , this pierced him worse than any daggar. Queen Elizabeth’s grief and complaint was, that in trust she had found treason.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
23. ] These first words represent the answer of our Lord to John’s question ( Joh 13:26 ). The latter ( Mat 26:24 ) were not said now , but (Luk 21:1-38 ; Luk 22:1-71 ) formed part of the previous announcement in our Mat 26:21 .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Mat 26:23 . , he who dipped, dips, or shall have dipped. The aorist participle decides nothing as to time, but merely points to a single act, as distinct from a process ( cf. the present in Mk.). The expression in Mt. does not necessarily identify the man unless we render: who has just dipped, and conceive of Jesus as dipping immediately after. (So Weiss.) In favour of this view it may be said that there was no sense in referring to a single act of dipping, when there would be many in the course of the meal, unless the circumstances were such as to make it indicate the individual disciple. The mere dipping in the same dish would not identify the traitor, because there would be several, three or four, doing the same thing, the company being divided into perhaps three groups, each having a separate dish. . The ancients used their hands, not knives and forks. So still in the East. . Hesychius gives for this word = acetabulum, a vessel for vinegar. Hence Elsner thinks the reference is to a vessel full of bitter herbs steeped in vinegar, a dish partaken of at the beginning of the meal. More probably the words point to a dish containing a mixture of fruit dates, figs, etc. vinegar and spices, in which bread was dipped, the colour of bricks or mud, to remind them of the Egyptian bondage ( vide Buxtorf, Lex. Talm. , p. 831). The custom of dipping here referred to is illustrated by the following from Furrer ( Wanderungen , p. 133): “Before us stood two plates, one with strongly spiced macaroni, the other with a dish of fine cut leeks and onions. Spoons there were none. There were four of us who dipped into the same dish.”
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
dippeth = dipped.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
23.] These first words represent the answer of our Lord to Johns question (Joh 13:26). The latter (Mat 26:24) were not said now, but (Luk 21:1-38; Luk 22:1-71) formed part of the previous announcement in our Mat 26:21.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Mat 26:23.[1123] , he that dippeth) The use of the same small dish, of which there were several on the table, and the dipping of the sop in it at the same moment with our Lord, was to be the distinctive mark of the traitor; see Mat 26:25. St Mark uses (present part. middle) to denote the same idea which St Matthew expresses by (1st Aor. part. act.); The former therefore employs the present in an indefinite sense.
[1123] Mat 26:21. Verily I say unto you) Our Lord inserted His complaint as to the approaching treachery and uncleanness [Joh 13:10] of Judas in His discourses connected with the washing of the disciples feet, and with the Lords Supper, on the following day; but on both days the inquiry of the disciples as to the traitor, follows immediately after that complaint which He uttered. Both the complaint and inquiry of the second day are placed in Matthew and Mark, before the Lords Supper: in Luke they are placed after it. They are, therefore, to be regarded as simultaneous with it-that is to say, the institution of the Supper held a middle place between the beginning and continuation (progress) of the complaint and inquiry.-Harm., p. 510, 511.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
He that: Psa 41:9, Luk 22:21, Joh 13:18, Joh 13:26-28
Reciprocal: Dan 11:26 – that feed Mic 7:6 – a man’s Mar 14:20 – dippeth Luk 22:3 – being
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
6:23
The apostles had asked Jesus who was going to betray him but he did not answer them all. According to Joh 13:22-26 John was leaning on Jesus’ bosom and hence was near him. Peter beckoned to him to ask Jesus who it was, and when Jesus told him, Judas did not hear the answer. The answer was accompanied with the act of dipping a piece of bread in the dish containing the flesh and its broth. Jesus reached into the dish at the same time that Judas did, which was the sign to the other apostles that answered their question of who was to be the betrayer.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mat 26:23. He that hath dipped the hand with me in the dish. One near Him. There were probably a number of dishes, or bowls, distributed along the table, containing the broth called charoseth, prepared of dates, figs, etc., which was used at the Supper, representing, it is said, the Egyptian bricks or clay. Even this statement may not have definitely pointed out Judas to the others. There is a pathetic tenderness in the language (comp. Psa 41:9, quoted in Joh 13:18).
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Here our Saviour acquaints his disciples who it was that had designed his death, even he that dipped with him in the dish, or he to whom he gave the sop.
Observe, The traitor, whom Christ less loved, he has the sop given to him; the other disciples, whom Christ loved better, had no such particular boon. Outward good things are not always given to the children of men in love, but are sometimes bestowed in displeasure; there is no measuring Christ’s affections by temporal blessings, no concluding either love or hatred by these things.
Observe farther, How Judas could sit still and hear the threats of judgment denounced against himself without concern; he hears Christ say, Woe to the man by whom the Son of man is betrayed, and is no more blanked than innocence itself: resolved sinners run on desperately in their wicked courses, and with open eyes see and meet their own destruction; and are neither dismayed at it, nor concerned about it.
Observe farther, That this shameless man had the impudence to say to Christ, Master, is it I? Our Saviour gives him a direct affirmation, Thou hast said. Did Judas, think ye, blush, and cast down his gulty eyes, and let fall his drooping head, at so galling an intimation. Nothing less.
Lord, how does obduracy in sin steel the brow, and make it incapable of all relenting impressions!
Observe lastly, How Christ prefers nonentity before damnation. It had been better for that man if he had never been born. A temporal miserable being is not worse than no being, but an eternal miserable being is worse than no being at all; eternal misery is much worse than nonentity. It had been better for Judas if he had never been born, than to commit such a sin, and lie under such wrath, and that everlasting. O, better to have no being, than not to have a being in Christ.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
26:23 And he answered and said, He that {i} dippeth [his] hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me.
(i) That is to say, he whom I invited to come to my table, alluding in this to Psa 41:9 , which is not to be understood as though just as the Lord spoke these words Judas had his hand in the dish (for that would have been an undoubted sign) but it refers to his tabling and eating with him.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Jesus’ answer did not identify the betrayer specifically. His response meant that the betrayer was someone who had dipped into the same bowl as Jesus had, namely, one of the Twelve, someone close to Jesus. This reply stressed the heinousness of the betrayal and the graciousness of Jesus.
"The whole incident must be interpreted as a gracious attempt on the part of Jesus to make Judas realize his terrible sin and turn from it before it was too late." [Note: Walvoord, Matthew: . . ., p. 213.]
If this was the main course of the meal, the bowl would have contained herbs and a fruit purée that everyone would have been scooping out with bread to eat with the lamb.
"Toward midafternoon of Thursday, 14 Nisan, the lambs (one per ’household’-a convenient group of perhaps ten or twelve people) would be brought to the temple court where the priests sacrificed them. The priests took the blood and passed it in basins along a line till it was poured out at the foot of the altar. They also burned the lambs’ fat on the altar of burnt offerings. The singing of the Hallel (Psalms 113-18) accompanied these steps.
"After sunset (i.e., now 15 Nisan), the ’household’ would gather in a home to eat the Passover lamb, which by this time would have been roasted with bitter herbs. The head of the household began the meal with the thanksgiving for that feast day (the Passover Kiddush) and for the wine, praying over the first of four cups. A preliminary course of greens and bitter herbs was, apparently, followed by the Passover haggadah-in which a boy would ask the meaning of all this, and the head of the household would explain the symbols in terms of the Exodus (cf. M[ishnah] Pesahim Mat 10:4-5)-and the singing of the first part of the Hallel (Psalms 113 or Psalms 113-14). Though the precise order is disputed, apparently a second cup of wine introduced the main course, which was followed by a third cup known as the ’cup of blessing,’ accompanied by another prayer of thanksgiving. The participants then sang the rest of the Hallel (Psalms 114-18 or 115-18) and probably drank a fourth cup of wine." [Note: Carson, "Matthew," p. 533.]