Each year, something that inevitably makes its way around the social media world is the phrase, “Jesus knew, but Judas ate too.” It’s a reflection of the reality that Jesus, knowing the role that Judas was about to play in his death, still washed his feet and fed him in the Last Supper. The power of Jesus’ actions demonstrates the love that we should have even for those who will seek to harm us. On the surface, this is a beautiful example of how one can and should love their neighbor. And there is most definitely merit to this application. Unfortunately, this phrase is often not applied fully or faithfully and, as such, is used to support an errant theological perspective. So, let’s take a closer look at the context surrounding this phrase:

1. First, we must remember that Judas was still an outward disciple of Jesus.
This is an important distinction that few who love this phrase acknowledge. Up til now, Judas has not followed through with anything beyond agreeing to betray Jesus. By the institution of the Lord’s Supper, what Judas had done was accept the arrangement in secret, but the actual betrayal was not until after the Last Supper. This means that Judas still identified as a member of the visible church and as a disciple of Christ. Thus, Jesus would treat Judas as he did all of his disciples that evening: He would wash their feet and serve them the Passover meal.

2. Second, this has ramifications for how many people interpret the Lord’s Supper. For example, I’ve often heard it argued that the communion table should be an open table—meaning that both Christians and non-Christians can partake—because “Judas ate too.” In other words, Jesus fed his enemy, so why should we withhold communion from non or unrepentant Christians? While that is a nice sentiment, there is a significant problem: Paul.
In 1 Corinthians 11:27-29, Paul writes,
27Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. 28Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself.
The question then becomes, “what is an unworthy manner?” Well, I would argue it is with unrepentant sin one’s heart. This means that neither an unrepentant Christian nor a non-Christian should partake of the table or, like Judas, they will end up drinking condemnation upon their own head. What Judas did before Jesus at the Supper was not mercy but wrath. So, yes, Judas ate too, but Judas also ate unto wrath and judgment.

3. Third, one may ask, what’s the difference between Judas and Peter? Didn’t Peter eat and reject Jesus, too? The difference is Jesus.
31 “Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you, that he might sift you like wheat, but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned again, strengthen your brothers.” (Luke 22:31-32)
The difference is that Jesus interceded for Peter. Jesus prayed that Peter would return and that he would be a point of strength for the other disciples upon his repentance. Judas does not receive any such recorded prayer.

Conclusion:
So, what do we do with the phrase “Judas ate too?” Well, I suggest five things:
1. We do not use it to accept or condone sin.
2. We do not use it to open the communion table to non-Christians or unrepentant Christians. Judas drank unto his own condemnation. We should not be a party to encouraging sin.
3. We remember that all who claim to be for Christ are not of Christ. Therefore, the visible church does not necessarily reflect the invisible church.
4. We love our enemies and freely offer them the Gospel.
5. We don’t let catchy phrases dictate our theology.