In order to comprehend doctrines of various faiths, one has to adopt broad-based approaches to particular subjects. Whether one is skeptical or not about particular subjects or concepts in a faith or religion, a broad-based and open-minded approach renders one the best means of attaining thorough comprehension.
An example of such comprehension can be observed when one wishes to learn what the ‘doctrine of the Trinity’ is all about. Clearly, the ‘Doctrine of the Trinity’ is a concept that cannot be criticized too far, and it also cannot be completely understood. The manner in which it is presented in text (the bible) cannot completely justify the manner in which things took place. This is true to say because of the fact that it is a man-made presentation of the mystery of God in his essence. For this reason, there are limitations in analyzing completely various passages from the bible. However, there is an acceptance of the ‘Deity’, which emerges from the willingness to learn and understand the concept and Doctrine. This in turn is fuelled by an open-minded approach that is necessary for understanding what Christian doctrine is about (Keener, 1993, 35-37).

One more point that needs to be emphasized on is that there is a difference in language use in the bible. This not only refers to the difference in languages that have been used to describe the historical events, but it also refers to the selection of particular words and phrases that have been implemented to expose variable meaning. Hence, when one reads different versions of the bible, there is almost always some differences observed in the text. However, it also must be asserted that from a Christian perspective, the overall meaning does not change, and hence, the concept of the Christian doctrine prevails.

In preparation of the Lords’ Supper, Jesus had already told the apostles that he was to return to where he came from; He was to return to His father. However, He was Himself the father, as they were supposed to be one. Jesus in His own words assigned divinity to Himself in John 10.

Jesus said, “I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand” (28) … “My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand” (29) … “I and my Father are one” (30).

The manner in which these words have been used, as an example, may be different to other bibles. This is to say that other versions of the same text are ones that may have minor differences such as pagination and word selection differences. It does not mean to assert that they are different in meaning, but it must be said that the presentation of matter has different impacts on the readers. In this regard, one may assert that different readers may in fact take to different text presentations, depending on which text presentation they find impressive (Keener, 1993, 24-29).
Observing the ‘Last Supper’ in King James Version of the bible, it appears that the text has been very simply laid out. The presentation cab described as simple because of the fact that each line or verse is numbered. This is not a unique characteristic of this version as other bibles do have the same sort of presentation. Examples of these are the RSV and NIV versions, which are considered in this paper.

The King James Version of the bible presents particular events of the bible as part of a series. Though this may be the case in most bibles, it is important to assert that this version aims at providing a transition for the coming of the last supper and thereafter when Jesus is to be deceived.

It is in fact part of a larger scene where Jesus is actually preparing to let himself be handed into the hands of the Jewish law enforcers. This has all been very well presented in the sense that the description is not marked by any subheadings or anything to that effect. This has helped provide a proper transition, and helps see things in a broader perspective. However, in contrast to this type of presentation, one can see that other bibles such as the RSV and NIV versions both contain subheadings; these help the reader to recognize where exactly there is a change of events. Aside from the transitions in these versions of the bible, there are other important things that need to be observed, and this refers to the selection of words in the presentation of the last supper.

It might be asserted that there is a distinct difference in the presentation of the last supper in each of the three bibles. In order for one to observe these easily, below are verses 22 and 23 from Mark Chapter 14.
(KJV Version)
22: And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, eat: this is my body.
23: And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it.

(NIV Version)
22While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, "Take it; this is my body."
23Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, and they all drank from it.
(NASB Version)
22 (17) While they were eating, He took some bread, and after a (18) blessing He broke it, and gave it to them, and said, "Take it; this is My body."
23 And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, and they all drank from it.

After observing the differences in the words and the sentence structure as well, one is compelled to assert that there is not much difference in the meaning that each verse transmits. This inevitably means that the messages of the gospel, as far as these verses are concerned, remain uniform. Hence, a difference in the word selection does necessarily means that the meaning of the text has to change.
In addition to the meaning of the text not necessarily changing, it is also worth adding that the expressions are somewhat the same. However, the arrangement of these words is a different. As in the case of the King James Version of the bible, it says: “And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, eat: this is my body”.

Quite apparently, there are too many breaks in the sentence. In contemporary times, one might not consider these grammatically correct. It is for this reason that the meaning of sentences could change through a period of time. However, one can also see that the meaning of these words can also be deciphered if one takes an unbiased approach to understanding their meaning. In addition to this, along with the texts that have been translated such as the RSV version, one can easily see the similarity between them. However, one might add that the RSV version of the gospel is one that has been adapted to suit the standards of contemporary English, and has not in fact got much to do with old English into which original Greek sentences may have been translated. Hence, one may observe that the King James Version of the bible is one that is quite similar to the Greek presentation as far as sentence structure is concerned.

In addition to the sentence structure, there are also other things that should be noted, and this refers to the importance of synonyms. It is true to say that some bibles may not use words in similar sentences that describe particular events. However, in the case is NIV, RSV, KJV, etc. it is true to say that the words used are similar. As an example, when each of these bibles describe the last supper, one particular sentence that describes starting the meal, asserts that Jesus ‘took’ the bread. The word ‘took’ is most common in describing the beginning of the supper in this particular event.

It is evident then, in most translations of the bible that the essential meanings of particular words are largely maintained from their Greek origins. This again reinforces the argument that the meaning of the text does not change significantly even though they are translations of another language (Hurtado, 1995, 23-28).
Besides the technical side of describing the last supper, one needs to take a look at other aspects of this event in order to decipher the significance. First of all, it must be asserted that the even t being described, in itself, is one that is of immense importance to the Christian world. This is because of the fact that it talks about a man in his final hours being and calm and courageous, knowing that he was headed towards death and completion of His mission. It is evident that there was a sharp degree of nobility in this, and so, it stands as an example to all followers so that they live up to what they have to do. In this description, it must be asserted that the author Mark, has done a good job of narrating as well as directly including the exact words of Jesus. This authenticates his presentation, and has in fact created a balance between mere quotations and pure narration.

Mark’s presentation of this is such that it explains what might ordinarily prove to be difficult to understand. However, in the case of King James Version that is under examination here, one might assert that there is a severe difference in it when compared to other texts. In other versions of the last supper, one can easily see that there is more use of contemporary English even in the quotations (Hurtado, 1995, 23-28).

As for King James’ version, it appears that the translator has in fact pieces the text together using as much original narration. This is probably why the sentence structure is as it is. There might not be any guaranteed way of confirming this, but this purely the way that it all appears on the surface. However, the manner in which this text has been presented is sufficient for one to decipher the essential meaning it has. This is to say that it presents the life of Jesus and the reason for his mission among. In particular, the last supper does have special meaning as it is an event that would mark Jesus’ parting from His company.

The last supper must be remembered as a recollection of an event in history that demonstrated immense significance. Understanding this from historical perspective is even more interesting, considering the fact that these historical events were in fact passed down orally to begin with. In this sense, it must be remembered that words used by Jesus Himself might have easily changed before they were ever recorded. However, it must also be remembered that these words were in fact remembered in some way and recorded almost with similar words by four different authors. These recordings were in fact made by different independent historians, and hence, this means that they were quite accurate. Though there might be ambiguities as to how exactly all this fell into place, it is considered reasonably authentic information, theologically speaking (Barnett, 1993, 22-35).

In verse 22, Jesus says: “And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, eat: this is my body. And in verse 23 he says: “And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it.” In these words above, Jesus refers to ‘bread’ and the ‘wine’ His ‘body’ and ‘blood’. At no other point in the gospels has this been mentioned, and in this context, these words used hold very special meaning for the followers. Right down till our contemporary period, one might assert that these words are of immense significance, and are used at every mass; without these words, a mass cannot be conducted, as the meaning that these words have been given are in fact primary cohesive ones that hold the church together. This is true to say because if these words were to be altered, one would probably find great controversy arising, and indeed a split in the theological beliefs and practices could result. Aside from these words, there is another metaphorical usage presented in verse 27 of markchapter 14.

In verse 27, Jesus says: “And Jesus saith unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered.” As He had earlier referred to Himself as the ‘shepherd’ and his followers as ‘sheep’, the last supper as well Christ does the same, and here, it appears to have tremendous impact on the reader (Barnett, 1993, 22-35).
Quite apparently, the words used as metaphor in these verses too are ones that are important in contemporary times as well. Without these words, there would be emptiness in theological thought, as Jesus truly did act like a shepherd and kept His word; He promised His followers that he would return, and so He did to establish a new kingdom that he would come back for again.

It must be finally mentioned that the last supper is an event recorded that can alone stand as an event in biblical history, and it can also fit in with the series of events in Christ’s life. However, it must be said that this event and its recordings give it a great deal of significance as far as the last supper fits in with Christ’s preparation for death. It also follows the prophecies that were made by prophets in the Old Testament.