<p>20:11 <i>Now when he had come up, had broken bread and eaten</i>- It&rsquo;s a hard job for those who wish to separate the open &lsquo;breakings of bread&rsquo; performed by Jesus and Paul from the &ldquo;breaking of bread&rdquo; as in our Christian ritual of remembrance of Christ&rsquo;s death. They would have to argue that &lsquo;breaking bread&rsquo; is used in different ways in the New Testament. Contrary to what their position requires, &ldquo;&rdquo; Breaking of bread&rdquo; was not a standard Jewish designation for a full meal, but only for the ritual act that initiated it&rdquo; (John Koenig, <em>The Feast of the World&rsquo;s Redemption</em> (Harrisburg: Trinity Press, 2000) p. 91. This is confirmed in Joachim Jeremias, <em>Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus</em> (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969) p. 131). The Emmaus disciples were particularly struck by the way in which Jesus blessed and broke the bread (Lk. 24:30-35), showing that &lsquo;breaking bread&rsquo; isn&rsquo;t used to simply refer to any kind of eating. Note how Luke comments on Paul&rsquo;s &ldquo;breaking bread&rdquo; at Troas: &ldquo;After he had broken bread <em>and </em>eaten&rdquo; (Acts 20:11). &lsquo;Breaking bread&rsquo; isn&rsquo;t equal to simply eating any old meal. Likewise the word <em>eucharistesas</em> is associated with the &ldquo;giving thanks&rdquo; for the bread and wine at the breaking of bread (Mt. 26:26; Mk. 14:22; Lk. 22:17-20; 1 Cor. 11:23-25; Acts 2:46); but this isn&rsquo;t the usual word which would&rsquo;ve been used to describe giving thanks for a meal. That would&rsquo;ve been <em>eulogia</em>, equivalent to the Hebrew <em>berakah</em>. The word <em>eucharistesas </em>seems to have a specific ritual, religious sense (as in Rom. 14:5; Jubilees 22:5-9); some argue that it means to give thanks <em>over </em>something, in this case the bread, rather than to simply give thanks <em>for</em> e.g. a meal. It is therefore highly significant that this is the word also used for Christ&rsquo;s breaking of bread to the 5000 strangers, Gentiles and semi-believers in the desert, and Paul&rsquo;s breaking bread with the sailors on the doomed ship (Jn. 6:11,23; Acts 27:34-36). This strongly suggests that we are to see in those incidents a spiritual, ritual &lsquo;breaking of bread&rsquo; rather than a mere sharing of food.</p><p><em>A</em><i>nd talked a long while, even till daybreak, he departed- </i>&ldquo;<em>Talked&rdquo;</em> is a more informal word than the word translated &quot;talked&quot; in :7, which implies a more formal discourse. This subtle difference is again true to observed experience and confirms we are reading a genuine eyewitness account; for after an incident like that of Eutychus, everyone would have felt the more relaxed with each other and with Paul. It is in this sense that experience unites, and doctrine left at mere ideas tends to divide.</p>