Word Studies in the Bible

By E. M. Zerr

DINNER-SUPPER

[Page 11]

     The uses and meanings of the terms of this heading, both in religious and secular activities, are various. I shall therefore offer what definitions and other information I can find on them, before entering upon any reasoning about them. In the Old Testament the first one is from ARUCHAH, and Strong defines it, "a ration of food." The same Hebrew word has been translated by allowance, diet, dinner and victuals. In the New Testament it is from ARISTON. Strong defines it as follows: "The best meal (or breakfast; perhaps from ERI, "early"), i.e., luncheon." I shall give Thayer's complete article including his historical information in black type: "The first food, taken early in the morning before work, breakfast; dinner was called DEIPNON. But the later Greeks called breakfast TO AKRATISMA, and dinner ARISTON . . . and so in the New Testament. Hence, dinner to which others are invited." Webster defines it thus: "The principal meal of the day, eaten about midday or in the evening; also, a formal feast in honor of some person or event." As a verb the Old Testament uses AKAL, which Strong defines briefly as follows: "To eat (literally or figuratively)." The New Testament uses ARISTAO, which Thayer says means to take the principal meal." Webster says it means "to take dinner; to entertain at dinner."

     The second word of our heading is not used in the Old Testament at all. In the New Testament if in verb form it is from DEIPNEO. Strong defines it "to dine, i.e., take the principal (or evening) meal." Thayer defines it merely "to sup." Webster says it means "to eat the evening meal." As a noun it is from DEIPNON, and defined by Strong thus: "Dinner, i.e., the chief meal (usually in the evening)." The definition of Thayer in italic type is as follows: "Supper, especially a formal meal usually held at evening, universally, food taken at evening." In his comments Thayer says it is "used of the Messiah's feast, symbolizing salvation in the kingdom of heaven." Webster gives the following definition: "The evening meal when dinner is taken at midday."

     The patience of the reader is craved for consideration of the foregoing information. Much of it may seem unnecessary, and perhaps it could justly be so considered, were it not for the fancied importance which some good brethren attach to the "proper hour" for observing the Lord's Supper. In trying to set forth a fixed rule for this question, much effort is made to connect the name of a meal with the time of the day at which it is eaten. We may hear it said that in ancient times the supper was an important meal. Next the comment that the "communion" is certainly an important meal. Next we will be told that a supper is an evening meal, and hence the Lord's Supper should be observed in the evening.

[Page 12]

This partial consideration of the testimony available, seems to make it certain with these brethren that the sacred feast should be observed only "in the evening." I have known some who refused to assemble with a congregation which attended to it at noon. This is the reason I have gone into such detail in copying the information from the works of reference that bear on the subject. An institution as important as the Lord's Supper, demands a clearly established basis for any definite claim that is made concerning it. Even if a "supper" is admitted being the most important meal in some cases, it is not certain that "the principal meal" was always eaten in the evening. Let the reader carefully go over the definitions and other information given in the forepart of this article. He cannot fail to observe the swinging back and forth from morning to evening, in the explanations of dinner and supper. Especially he will notice how uncertain is the time or hour of the day, to be determined by whether it is a dinner or a supper.

     But though it is settled that the Lord's Supper must be observed in the evening, it still needs to be learned at what hour that is. But that can never be done, for the various definitions show that anywhere from noon to dark may be called evening. In Exodus 12:6 the passover lamb was to be killed "in the evening." The marginal translation says "between the two evenings." That would be at 3 o'clock, and hence the first evening would start at noon. The Lord certainly would not let so important an item be thus clouded, were it neccesary to keep the sacred feast at any particular hour. But He did tell us that the disciples observed it on the "first day of the week." Therefore, if the institution is kept at any hour on that date, the will of the Lord will have been done. (B. M. Zerr, P.O. Box 149, New Castle, Ind.)