ANSWER: A careful investigation will disclose that Judas was not present when the Lord Jesus took bread and broke it, and gave it to the apostles in remembrance of Himself in death, and then gave them the cup in remembrance of His blood shed for them.
Judas was present at the keeping of the Passover feast just prior to it, and engaged in the conversation at the table about who was to betray the Lord. John, who records the Passover but not the Lord's supper, tells us that the Lord Jesus took a morsel, or piece of bread, and dipped it in broth or juice and gave it to Judas. This was an act of favor by a host to a special guest (which Judas accepted), and was connected with the Passover and not the Lord's supper. John then records that when Judas had received the sop he went out "immediately" (John 13:3030He then having received the sop went immediately out: and it was night. (John 13:30)).
A comparison with Mark 14 will confirm that Judas was present at the Passover supper where the Lord told them of His coming betrayal (vv. 12-21). Then in verses 22 to 25 we have the account of the Lord's supper as separate and distinct from, and later than, the Passover. Mark does not tell us when Judas left the company, but it is evident that he did sometime, for in the 43rd verse he comes to betray Jesus. John supplies the information as to when he went out.
A check with Matt. 26 will show the same order (vv. 17-25 giving the Passover and the conversation) with the Lord's supper following the Passover (vv. 26-28). Matthew likewise does not name the time of Judas's departure, but tells of his coming back.
Now, lest anyone suggest that Luke affirms that Judas was present at the Lord's supper, let us look at Luke 22. This inspired writer gives an account of the Passover in verses 7 to 18; then in verses 19 and 20 he gives the institution of the Lord's supper: he then goes back in verses 21 to 23 to tell about the conversation which had previously taken place at the Passover about who would betray the Lord. This last is coupled with the strife among the rest regarding who was to be the
greatest, followed by Simon Peter's display of self-confidence. This is in keeping with the Spirit's design in Luke's gospel where actual chronological order gives way to a moral order.
In Luke 22 the Lord's desire to keep the Passover with them is expressed, and then His desire that they should remember Him in death is put next; after that we find the state of Judas brought forward, then of the eleven, and then of Peter. The expressions of the Lord's heart are put together, and then, in sad contrast, the states of all those who had accompanied Him in His ministry are placed side by side. What a contrast! Such is our blessed Lord, and such is man.
This same departure from sequence is seen in other places in Luke's gospel; for instance, in the temptations of the Lord by Satan. Luke places them in order of severity and gives the hardest (the religious one) last, although it was actually earlier. This method of dealing with subjects is not uncommon even in the writings of men, and in the inspired gospel it marks perfection in details.
We have gone into this matter rather lengthily because an understanding of it enhances the beauty of the inspired accounts and, further, to offset the mistaken teaching that affirms Judas was present at the Lord's supper as a reason why other Judases should be permitted to partake of that blessed memorial of our Lord in death. We quote the words of a poet:
"None but believers should break bread,
For none but them do know
That for their sins Christ died and bled,
And why His death they show."
Even in the low state that existed in Corinth it is not supposed that unbelievers were present and partook of the Lord's supper. The Corinthians had forgotten the true character of it, and were eating of that blessed memorial as though it were a common meal. The Apostle by the Spirit writes in the 11th chapter of the first epistle to correct their errors. and then admonishes them to examine themselves—to judge themselves—before partaking of it. There is not the slightest thought of examining themselves to see if they were Christians or not, but to examine their ways and to judge all that was inconsistent with Him whom they remembered, so that they did not come together "for the worse."