Jesus Christ In The Writings Of John
JESUS THE SERVANT OF ALL
Lesson Text:
John 13:1-17 (KJV) [also read Luke 22:24-30; Matthew 20:20-28]
Subject:
How Christ Serves Us, and How We Should Serve Him (The Importance of Lowly Service) (Jesus Teaches Humility) (Jesus Washes His Disciples’ Feet)
Golden Texts:
“Whosoever would be first among you, shall be servant of all.” (Mark 10:44)
“The Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.” (Matt. 20:28)
“I have given you an example.” (John 13:15)
“By love serve one another.” (Gal. 5:13)
“A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another as I have loved you.” (John 13:34)
“Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus.” (Phil. 2:5)
“If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them.” (John 13:17)
Lesson Plan:
1. INTRODUCTION
2. THE STRIFE TO BE COUNTED GREATEST (LUKE 22:24-30; MATT. 20:20-28)
3. OUR LORD’S GREATNESS AND HUMILITY, LOVING TO THE END (VS. 1-5)
4. PETER, SLOW TO UNDERSTAND CHRIST’S HUMILITY (VS. 6-11)
5. FOLLOWING CHRIST’S EXAMPLE OF HUMILITY (VS. 12-17)
6. PRACTICAL THOUGHTS
Setting of the Lesson:
Time: Thursday evening, April 6, A.D. 30, at the beginning of the Passover feast, the day before the crucifixion. It was the evening after the 14th Nisan, and therefore was the beginning of the 15th of Nisan (Friday, April 7), which, according to Jewish reckoning, commenced immediately after the sunset of the 14th (April 6), and was the day on which the Passover was eaten. The four days after Palm Sunday included the second cleansing of the temple, the miracle of the barren fig-tree, daily teaching in the temple, and, probably daily returns to Bethany in the evening.
Place: An upper room in Jerusalem; perhaps, as Edersheim thinks, belonging to Mark, one of Christ’s disciples and given up to Christ and the Twelve for the Passover. It was pointed out by the man with a pitcher (Mark 14:12-16), probably in order that Judas should not know the place long enough in advance to betray Jesus there.
Place in the Life of Christ: the evening before His crucifixion. His last meeting with His disciples. Institution of the Lord’s Supper.
Intervening History:
Soon after the visit of the Greeks, and the Lord’s discourse, Jesus left the Temple. The disciples pointed out to Him the buildings of the Temple, and the massive stones of the structures; and Jesus foretold its utter destruction. Then, going out of the city toward Bethany, they came to the Mount of Olives, where the whole city lay before them in its glory; and Jesus foretold the destruction of the city, and the end of the world (Matt. 24), and uttered those three marvelous parables recorded in Matthew 25. The next day, Wednesday, was spent in retirement with His disciples, probably at Bethany, while certain Jews at Jerusalem plotted His death.1 On Thursday, the disciples went into the city to prepare for the celebration of the Passover, and toward evening Jesus went with His disciples to the upper room in the city, where the Passover was to be celebrated by them. It is here the events of our lesson took place.
Order of Events at the Supper:
The strife for seats of honor (Luke 22:24-30)
The Passover meal begun (Luke 22:14-18)
The rebuke by Jesus washing their feet (John 13:2-20)
While eating He declares who should betray Him (John 13:21-26)
Judas leaves the table (John 13:27-30)
After the departure of Judas, Jesus institutes the Lord’s Supper (Luke 22:14-20; Matt.
26:26-29)
Discourses and prayer (John, chapters 14-17)
Inductive Study of the Lesson:
a. An interesting and helpful study can be made of this lesson by first bringing together
the few notices of ambition, or self-seeking, on the part of the disciples, as, for instance,
they gathered at the supper (Luke 22:24-30); the ambitious request of James and John
(Matt. 20:20-23); on the way home from the transfiguration (Mark 9:33, 34; Luke 9:46).
b. Contrast with the Pharisees (Matt. 23:1-8; 6:1, 2, 5, 16).
c. Note the special temptations to the disciples, from honor given to Peter, James, and
John at the transfiguration; at the raising of Jairus’ daughter; of Judas as treasurer.
d. What are the results of your inquiry?
e. The warnings of Jesus against this danger (Matt. 20:25-28; 23:1-12; 18:1-6; Mark
9:35-37; 10:13-16; Luke 9:46-48; 14:8, 9; Matt. 5:3).
f. What warnings given to the early church (Rom. 11:20; 12:3, 16; 1 Cor. 4:6, 7; Phil. 2:3;
1 Pet. 5:5, 6; Jas. 3:1; 1 John 2:16; 3 John 9; Rev. 3:17).
g. The example of Christ (Is. 53:7; Zech. 9:9; Matt. 11:19; Luke 22:27; John 8:50; 13:5-
14; Phil. 2:7).
h. From the above, make a summary of the principles which should govern our daily life,
as well as the arguments therefor.
The origin of the Passover.
The upper room.
Washing the disciples’ feet.
The teaching of this act.
How Judas became a traitor.
Jesus loving to the end.
Christ’s greatness and humility.
The symbol of feet-washing.
Peter’s attitude.
The weakness and strength of Peter.
How to follow Christ’s example of service?
1. INTRODUCTION
Beginning with chapter 13, John’s narrative develops Jesus’ special revelation to the disciples who received Him, despite the betrayal by Judas and Peter’s denial. The 13th chapter details the washing of the apostles’ feet (vs. 1-11), statement of Jesus’ purpose in the painful disclosures about to be made (vs. 12-20), identification of the traitor (vs. 21-30), the new commandment (vs. 31-35), and the prophecy of Peter’s denial (vs. 36-38). Beginning with the 13th chapter and going through chapter 20, John records the events of our Lord’s final week, climaxed by the resurrection. Our lesson considers only the first seventeen verses of chapter 13.
Christ’s washing of His disciples’ feet has rightly been called the most remarkable of His deeds. This is a lesson with the strongest possible contrasts. We are to see Christ’s majesty at its highest point of earthly glory, and His humility at its lowliest. If we serve Christ we have at our disposal infinite resources of power and authority, but we must use these resources meekly, by serving others – triumphing only through loving, tender ministries to mankind.
SCRIPTURE READING: LUKE 22:24-30; MATTHEW 20:20-28
Jesus, having spent Wednesday in retirement at Bethany in preparation for the awful day of crucifixion, the next morning sent two of His disciples to the city to prepare for the celebration of the Passover. It was to be the scene of His farewell words to His disciples. In the early evening of Thursday He and His disciples went to Jerusalem, and entered the upper room where the meeting was to be held.
2. THE STRIFE TO BE COUNTED GREATEST
Luke 22:24-30
We cannot understand the full meaning of our lesson unless we turn to Luke and read
about the contention among the disciples; and to Matthew (and Mark) for the request of
James and John, and the consequent indignation of the other disciples.
Strife
One occasion of the act that follows seems to have been a contention among the disciples about who should be greatest. It may have kindled at the time by the question as to who should have the place of honor nearest to Jesus, but it was no new feeling. Before this, the mother of James and John had asked that her sons might sit nearest to Jesus in His kingdom; and as the time was manifestly drawing near when Jesus should come in His kingdom, the natural selfishness of the heart prompted them to desire the first and best places in that kingdom. Therefore, as this feeling would be a great injury and hindrance, and was contrary to the whole spirit of His kingdom, it was of the utmost importance to root it out, and Jesus with most impressive words, and by a symbolical act that would long be remembered, taught His disciples the truths of humility and service.
The strife probably occurred while the disciples were gathering in the upper room, perhaps before sitting down to the table. It arose from the desire of some to be esteemed greatest, and the unwillingness of others that they should be. In other words, it was apparently twofold: who should be greatest, and who should not be least – a very strange scene on the eve of the most solemn time in all their lives.
The time was close at hand2 – Jesus was soon to be glorified, and His kingdom founded, and the natural selfishness o the human heart prompted them to desire the highest and best places in the new kingdom. The desire may have been kindled into a flame by the question regarding who should have the place of honor at the table, nearest to Jesus – on His left. It is possible that those who had received unusual honors may have claimed the best places as their right. Three had more than once been selected by Jesus for His companions on special occasions, such as the transfiguration; John was the disciple whom Jesus loved; The keys had been given to Peter (Matt. 16:18, 19); Judas, as the treasurer, may have had special ambitions – chief of the treasury; and We know that some time before this the mother of James and John came to Jesus, asking that her sons be placed nearest the king (Matt. 20:20, 21).
Another occasion for this strife was doubtless the fact that there was no servant to perform the necessary but menial service of washing the travel-soiled feet of the disciples, and none of them were willing to perform it for the others. Who should serve, and who should be served was the questions.
The self-seeking spirit leads to Satan’s kingdom, not to Christ’s. It is the spirit of hell, not of heaven. Self-seeking ambition produces evils innumerable and sorrows unspeakable. It was Milton’s Satan who said, “Better to reign in hell than to serve in heaven.” Like a growing devil in the heart, ambition rules the unreigned. But distinguish between the strong desire to improve, to have large usefulness, to grow in holiness and love, and the desire to have more honor and power – to be better than others. To do the very best we can in everything good is, after all, our duty.
Three things that developed the feeling into outward expression:
a. They seem to have wanted the seats of honor at the table nearest the Master.
b. They wanted to have the highest and best places in the new kingdom to be soon inaugurated. James and John had asked for these places. Peter was prominent. These three had more than once been favored, as at the transfiguration. Judas was treasurer. These could naturally assume a certain superiority, and the assumption would “gall the rest, and rankle in their minds.”
c. There was a lowly duty to perform for one another. A lowly duty commonly performed by the lowest slaves, or someone fit for little else. However, in a household like theirs– without slaves – this common duty would have to be performed mutually for one another. But no one was willing to be beneath the others and make himself their servant, so the common duty remained undone.
As usual among good men (Judas not included), their higher motives mingled with lower ones. In other words, we may be sure (with the exception of Judas) that the best of motives were mingled with the unworthy ones. They simply wanted to be nearest their Teacher and friend, whom they loved. They wanted to be useful in the new kingdom with power to lead many to the Savior. This fact is recognized by the Lord, because of His gentle, but obvious reproof of them – assuring the good far overbalanced evil.
Illustration
In a dream the angels took his zeal and weighed it, and told him that it was excellent; it
weighted exactly 100 – as much as could be asked, they said. He was greatly gratified by
the result, but then they began to analyze it in various ways. Using a crucible the angels
tested it in various ways, with these results: 14 parts selfishness; 15 parts sectarianism; 22
parts ambition; 23 parts love of man; and 26 parts love of God. He awoke humbled,
determined to be more consecrated. But a dream does not make it true. We are to be very
careful how we judge other people’s motives. It is often very hard for to distinguish
wrong from right ambition, either in ourselves or in others – whether our ambition is
better or greater, or as good and as useful as it can be.
The disciples on this occasion exhibited one of the greatest dangers confronting the
church of our Lord in this or any age. And we need to pay very close attention to this
lesson – study it closely – and absorb the way Jesus taught us to overcome it.
SCRIPTURE READING: JOHN 13:1-5
3. OUR LORD’S GREATNESS AND HUMILITY, LOVING TO THE END
No teaching is as powerful as living a great truth – showing by example how a person should act. As we look at these verses, note the greatness of Christ, and the lowliness of the act. Also, note the reasons for the statements in verses 1-3 as bearing on this act of Jesus.
Illustration
During the terrible cholera that raged through Europe years ago, there were two examples
of two kings who went through their cholera-stricken people to help and comfort them at
the expense of their own lives. The cholera raged at Naples. It was confined to the lowest
and poorest parts of the town, and, because of this fact, a mad rage took possession of the
plague-stricken populace. Any wealthy people who went down among them from the
better part of the town did so almost at the peril of life. The desperate people resented the
very prosperity that sought to help them. For instance, there was a rich Greek who paid
someone to drive among them every day, with broths, wines and medicines for the sick
that he had purchased. Finally, they grew so mad and desperate in their misery, that the
very thought that he was able to come and bring them help enraged them, and one day
they mobbed him, killing his horses, and breaking his carriage to pieces; he barely
escaped with his life. A riot was imminent, and Naples would have fallen into unutterable
horrors, except for Humbert, king of Italy, who went to Naples and entered the plague-stricken quarters of the city, and the hospitals. Why did not the people mob him, as they
had the Greek? After all, the king was wealthy, too. It was reported later that the people
accepted the king because he came among them as one of them, sharing their dangers. He
spent his days in their poor hovels; he spoke to them in their own Neapolitan patois. He
nursed their sick. He held them in his arms when they were dying. He wept over them
when they died. He was their brother in their sorrow, and the bitterness melted out of
their hearts, and, like little children, they were ready to do his bidding. In 1885, Alfonso,
king of Spain, went into one of the provinces of Spain where they were dying at the rate
of 4,000 a week, and visited hospitals. On his return to Madrid, he received a tremendous
welcome from the crowd gathered at the station. King Alfonso was never very popular
with his people, but history reveals that this little demonstration of kingly sympathy and
courage in a time of sore need, won their love.
“Of all the words and actions of our Lord that have been recorded in the Gospels, there is none, perhaps, more remarkable, more unlike every other system of morals with which we are acquainted, than the action described in this passage of Scripture. It is a lesson which we all need, at every time of life, at every age of the world, in every condition of society.” (Arnold of Rugby)
This is a lesson of the strongest possible contrasts. We are to see Christ’s majesty at its highest point of earthly glory, and His humility at its lowliest. The first picture gives the church a proud sense of its coming triumph in the world; the second reminds the church that it triumphs only through its loving, tender ministries to men. The first picture teaches us personally that if we serve Christ we have at our disposal infinite resources of power and authority; the second, that we must use those resources meekly, in serving others.
It is perfectly natural to pass from our Lord’s crowning evidences of power and popularity to the scene of the upper room – the most conspicuous illustration of Christ’s humility. Jesus was King of the Jews, and Lord of the earth; but He was the Son of God. As the first, He had entered Jerusalem in triumph; as the second, He had received the first fruits of the Greeks; as the third, He advanced along the path of sacrifice, appointed by His Father. The feet-washing, in its humility and self-abnegation, was the beginning of Calvary.
What preparations were made for Christ’s last supper with His disciples? The disciples probably expected Christ to observe the feast in Bethany, which was considered within the limits of Jerusalem. But “he, the true Paschal Lamb, was to be sacrificed once and forever in the Holy City, where it is probably that in that very Passover some 260,000 of those lambs of which he was antitype were destined to be slain” (Farrar). Therefore, He sent Peter and John to Jerusalem, where by a mysterious sign (Mark 14:13), there willing host was indicated and the roof room was made ready for their reception.
What was the relation of this feast to the Passover?
It occurredthe evening before the feast of the Passover, Nisan 13. The first three Gospels “are correct in stating that the Last Supper had in some sense the character of a Paschal meal; but it is quite evident from John that the Last Supper was not the Passover in the ordinary Jewish sense.” (Cambridge Bible)
How do you picture the room of the Last Supper?
It was unlike the famous “Last Supper” of Leonardo da Vinci, perhaps the world’s greatest painting, located in the refectory of Sta. Maria delle Grazie, at Milan, was the most consummate outcome of his genius. Every other picture of the Lord’s Supper is dwarfed into insignificance by the side of this. Christ himself remains majestic in isolation, his wonderful majesty only slightly dimmed by sadness. The apostles are divided into four groups.
“At the right of the Saviour, Peter is leaning across the traitor Judas to whisper in the ear of the youthful and beautiful St. John that he should ask Christ whom he meant to indicate. Peter is ardent and excited; John is sunk in sorrow. Judas is grasping the bag in his right hand; while his left, half lifted from the table, shows that he, too, is alarmed; his face is powerful and bad, but not revolting. His arm has, at least in Raphael Mengs’ engraving, with evil omen, upset the salt cellar.” (Farrar)
egarding the upper room itself, Farrar wrote: “The room probably had white walls, and was bare of all except the most necessary furniture and adornment. The couches or cushions, each large enough to hold three persons, were place around three sides of one or more low tables of gaily painted wood, each scarcely higher than stools. The seat of honor was the central one of the central triclinium, or mat. This was, of course, occupied by the Lord. Each guest reclined at full length, leaning on his left elbow, that his right hand might be free. At the right hand of Jesus reclined the beloved disciple, whose head therefore could, at any moment, be placed upon the breast of his friend and Lord.”
What quarrel had arisen among the disciples?
A contention as to precedence (Luke 22:24). Perhaps it started in the seating of the disciples, each seeking the “chief seats,” those nearest Christ.
Why was this quarrel grievous to Christ?
a. Because He had tried so hard, by precept and example, to cultivate in them the spirit of
lowliness and self-forgetfulness (Mark 10:35-45; Luke 9:46-48, etc.).
b. Because it showed how little of His spirit His disciples had, and yet He must soon
leave His work for them to carry on.
c. Because the quarrel marred this last hour of communion, when He was about to institute the most blessed of commemorative rites.
d. Because He was even then in the shadow of that cross He had so often foretold, and His disciples’ hearts should have been especially tender instead of boastful and self-seeking.
13:1 ... “Now before the feast of the Passover.” That is, immediately before: just as He was about to sit down with His disciples to the Paschal feast (Abbott). This is to be construed with he loved, etc., at the close the verse.
Notes regarding time and place
It was in the upper room before the supper began, while they were waiting for the supper to be served (v. 2). This is the natural meaning, and agrees with the other Gospels (Matt. 26:17). Some interpret the statement as meaning that this supper was not the Passover supper, but on the evening before, and, therefore, in direct contradiction to the statements of the other evangelists. But this is forced and unnatural.
The notes of time in John’s Gospel clearly show that “St. John places the crucifixion on the preparation or eve of the Passover, i.e., on Nisan 14, on the afternoon of which the paschal lamb was slain; and that he makes the Passover begin at sunset that same day. Consequently our Lord was in the grave before the Passover began, and the Last Supper cannot have been the paschal meal.” (Cambridge Bible)
Coffman writes: “We take these words in their simplest and most obvious sense as declaring that the supper about to be narrated occurred in advance of the Jewish Passover; and, although it resembled the Passover in so many details, it was nevertheless not technically the Passover. Jesus was crucified on the Preparation (19:31), and the Passover was eaten after sundown the day Jesus died. There is no way the Passover itself could have been called the Preparation. The synoptics are in perfect harmony with this, Matthew making it clear that Jesus ate this mean reclining (26:20), which he would not have done had it been the Passover.”
So in a number of entirely consistent notes of time, John represents the Last Supper as taking place the day before the Passover, or on Thursday the thirteenth of the month Nisan, so that our Lord was crucified on the afternoon of Friday, the fourteenth of Nisan, at the very time when the paschal lambs were being slain. The synoptic Gospels represent the Last Supper as eaten twenty-four hours before the regular Passover feast.
13:1 … “When Jesus knew.” R.V., “Jesus knowing,” being fully conscious. The verb being in the participial form, as in the following phrase, “having loved.”
13:1 … “His hour was come.” Throughout His ministry, Christ was fully aware of the Father’s ordering of all His steps and Jesus was fully conscious that the moment of His offering on the cross was at hand. “Here and elsewhere in this Gospel it is implied that the course of Christ’s life and its various crises were foreordained by the Divine counsel (John 2:4; 7:6; 12:23, 27; 17:1). Till the appointed time, His enemies could have no power over Him (John 7:30; 8:20; 11:9).” (Century Bible)
13:1 … “That he should depart out of this world unto the Father.” The Greek expressing the act of going over from one place or sphere to another. His going away could not quench His love. Even the sufferings of the cross could not destroy His love, but manifested greater strength and glory.
“He has watched the dark shadow creeping always nearer, now he can feel its chill sweep his cheek. He has come to the moment when conscience searches the heart of the average man with fingers tipped with fire. And what is he doing? Bathing the feet of a few fishermen. What ineffable calmness! What unbroken serenity! Unconscious of any need in himself, he seems conscious only of the need of the friends he is to leave so soon.” (McClelland)
He was conscious not only that it was His hour of agony, but that this hour was the gate to the eternal glory with His Father. The Lord knew that the time of His death was fixed in the providence of God, and Scripture has man references to this appointed hour.3 The light from beyond shone back even on this dreadful hour. He saw beyond the veil.
13:1 … “Having loved his own” Vincent’s Word Study points out that of the two Greek words for “love,” Jesus uses the word indicating the discriminating affection; the love of choice, and selection. He showed His love by coming into the world to make them His own. “His own” were His nearest friends, the disciples, and also the world-wide circle of His disciples of which these twelve were the nucleus. They were His own, because He had chosen them; because they had been made into new men by Him, all the best in them coming from Him; because they had chosen Him as their Teacher and Savior; because they were like Him, filled with His spirit, carrying out His plans. They are His children, His brothers and sisters, His disciples, His people, His friends. “They shall be mine . . . in that day when I make up my jewels.” (Mal. 3:17)
13:1 … “Which were in the world.” John speaks of them as “in the world,” having in mind the fact that their Master was so soon to go “out of the world” and leave them sadly alone. Under such circumstances our Lord’s love would shine most brightly.
Christ held His followers as peculiarly His own possession, selected from mankind and given Him by His Father. The Savior cherished them, and no one should pluck them out of His hand.4
So, in what spirit was this act of humility performed? In the spirit of the tenderest love, not of haughty rebuke.
13:1 … “He loved them unto the end.” (R.V. margin, “to the uttermost”). “He loved them through all the sufferings and to all the issues to which His love brought them.” (Expositor’s Greek Testament). He loved them “unto the end and limit of all love.” (Morrison). “The statement is the suitable introduction to all that now looms in view.” (Dods). “Well may it be noted that, under the present consciousness that the great crisis is come, Christ is occupied, not with self, but with them.” (Bernard). Meyer’s Love to the Uttermost is a worthy reading.
It is possible to perform a kind deed in an angry way and lowly deed in a proud way; but this was true love and humility. The beautiful act was inspired as much by sorrow at the coming separation (v 1), as by a desire to rebuke the disciples. Christ shows His deep affection for those He was so soon to leave. “Parting brings deeper tenderness, as an earthquake may lay bare hidden veins of gold.” (Alexander Maclaren)
The end both in time and accomplishment; that is, He loved them till death broke in on His life of love; He loved them till love had finished its purpose in them by their redemption; loved them despite their quarrels and contentions, that by love He might brood and perfect the new life in them. Abbott points out that “He loved them even when He saw what that love would cost Him. Looking in the face of agony and death, He went on in His work of love. Properly the word signifies not merely end, but also completion. The phrase, His own which were in the world, does not imply a limitation of love, as though His love were for a limited number; but it is only in His own that His love accomplishes its designs.” “It was just because He saw that the time of parting was at hand that He redoubled His tenderness toward those whom He had so faithfully loved” (Godet). And He loved them even when He saw what that love would cost Him. Looking in the face of agony and death, He went on in His work of love, proving that He so loved by washing their feet, by the institution of the Lord’s Supper, and by His death on the cross.
He loved them to the uttermost limit of love, the greatest love known in the universe; and with a love without end. God’s love never changes, never ceases, any more than the sun ceases to shine, although men may hide from its light in caves and dungeons. This loving to the end is the test of love – love that fire cannot quench, nor water drown; love that no failure or disappointment or ingratitude or even hate, in the ones loved, can cause to diminish or cease. Yes, the very fact of their weakness and imperfections in a hostile world full of pitfalls and temptations never hindered His love toward them, as sickness and pain increases the care and devotion of the Good Physician. Jesus foresaw Peter’s denials, but He loved on; He foresaw that all the twelve would forsake Him and flee from His danger within a few hours, but He loved them still; He foresaw the treachery of Judas, but He did not cease to love him, but sought again and again in these remaining hours to save him – He washed his feel, He warned him, He gave him the sop from the table. He knew of the ambitious strife of the apostles, but He still could set them an example of love. He could foresee all the imperfections and failures of His followers down through the ages, still, His love never failed.
13:2 … “And supper being ended” The literal meaning is, “supper having come.” Ended is not in the original. The meaning is the supper being, being served, having commenced, while supper was in progress. Meyer wrote, “The original is simply, ‘and supper being’ i.e., being in progress, during supper, in the Revised Version” The disciples had arranged themselves around the table as best they could, possibly as Professor Dods suggests, “looking at the table, looking at the ceiling, arranging their dress, each resolved upon this – that he would not be the man to own himself servant of all.” Take note of the wisdom of Jesus in dealing with them. In the excitement of their strife they were not in a fit condition to receive the lesson Jesus would teach.
He waited for “the psychological moment.” By waiting till supper was fully begun, Jesus gave the disciples ample opportunity to repent and take the lower instead of the better places, and to wash one another’s feet. The delay would also give time for their excited feelings to quiet down, and their reason and conscience to begin to act, and a sense of shame to come over them for such a contention at such a time. They may have seen the sadness in Jesus’ face, a silent reproof.
“It was the custom for slaves to wash the feet of the guests before sitting down to meat; and we are tempted to suppose that the symbolical act, which our evangelist relates here, took the place of this custom.” (Sanday)
13: 2 … “The devil having now [already] put into the heart,” etc. Here we see the circumstances of the other side of the scene, three in number. First, the devil, who had “already” plotted the destruction of Jesus, fixed on Judas as the instrument; second, Judas Iscariot, the victim of the devil’s wiles; and third the feelings of the devil’s heart – treachery, hatred. The three particulars are in the sharpest contrast with those in verse 1 – the devil with Jesus, Judas with “his own,” treachery with love. “Darkness is over against light, earth over against heaven, the lie over against the truth” (Schaff). The devil was the sower, but the soil was ready to receive the seed. Thus, a past suggestion is indicated.
“The devil having deviled it into the heart of Judas; the archer having shot his shaft, the sharp arrow of fatal suggestion of betrayal, into the man’s mind, one of the fiery darts of the wicked; this is the intense figure in the expression.” (Robinson)
“Satan excites thoughts, feelings, and purposes in such a way that we are conscious of nothing but our own thinking, feeling, and willing, and can judge this or that to come from him only by its moral character. The fact that Satan suggested evil to our minds does not impair our responsibility, since the thought, feeling, purpose, is consciously and freely our own.” (Broadus)
Yes, Satan was certainly the seed-sower, but Judas had for a long time been preparing the soil of his heart to receive the evil seed or it could not have sprung up. The suggestion of Satan may have come through his love of money and through anger at the reproof of Jesus for complaining of Mary’s waste of ointment.5 Satan opened the door, and Judas, looking in at the riches to which it opened, walked into the trap.6
In this connection, read vs. 18-30, for help understanding how Jesus treated Judas. He knew the heart of Judas. He knew that he was a traitor, and had joined the ranks of His enemies, and their leader and inspirer, the devil. But,
a. He did not denounce him. “Had Jesus unmasked him before such fiery spirits as John and Peter, Judas would never have left that room alive. Peter’s sword would have made surer work than with Malchus. Judas therefore is included in the feet-washing” (Expositor’s Greek Testament). But Jesus did as He had always done – He used every means that kindness and love could suggest to make Judas a good man.
b. Now He proceeds to wash his feet, giving Judas the same lesson regarding the need for purity, and the noble service of love as the other disciple’s received, and that should have melted even the heart of one like Judas. “Jesus at the feet of the traitor! What a picture! What lesson for us.” (Astié)
Illustration
“In the Orient there is a tree which puts forth a beautiful leaf, then a red hypnotic flower, and afterwards a gall-apple filled with poisonous dust. It is called the “Judas tree”: it appropriately symbolizes the self-propagating power of evil; its leaf, its blossom, and its fatal fruit.” (Burrell)
c. Jesus showed Judas His portrait in the Scriptures, the infamous portrait of a traitor violating the most sacred covenant among the Orientals (vs. 18, 26). Judas should have recoiled with horror as he looked into this mirror.
d. Jesus applied the picture by foretelling it.
e. Jesus clearly set it out by giving the sop, expressing covenant friendship.
George M. McClellan wrote these stirring words:
Christ washed the feet of Judas!
Yet all his lurking sin was bare to him;
His bargain with the priest; and, more than this,
In Olivet, beneath the moonlight dim,
Afore was known and felt his treacherous kiss.
Christ washed the feet of Judas!
And thus a girded servant, self-abased,
Taught that no wrong this side the gate of heaven
Was e’er too great to wholly be effaced,
And, though unasked, in spirit be forgiven.
13:3 … “Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands.” The tense expresses no presentiment of coming power, but an act already past.
Fully conscious that He was the Son of God, with all power and glory, to which He was soon to return. This verse sets before us the infinite condescension of Jesus, and reinforces the lesson of the act that follows. No disciple could ever claim that he was too great, too glorious; too high ranking, too supremely power, to do the humblest service for man. Greatness and power are given for this very purpose. His act of profound humility was performed in the clear consciousness that He was King of kings and Lord of lords, that God had given Him the sovereignty and possession of all the earth. This fact, and what follows, shows the greatness of Christ’s condescension in washing His disciples’ feet.
13:3 … “That he was come from God.” Words expressing that He had left the presence of God as the “sent” of God; not His divine original, which would have required another form of expression.
13:3 … “Went to God,” That He “went” (was going) as One who has executed His commission. The tree clauses thus connect themselves with His work of redeeming love (Schaff). These two verses are given, in order to set forth more clearly the condescension and love of Jesus in the act of washing the disciples’ feet. Reading the traitor’s heart, Jesus still washed the feet of Judas, no doubt moving his heart to repent of his betrayal, if it had not already been hardened; v. 3 shows the greatness of Jesus’ condescension. It was the Messiah, the Christ 7 – all powerful, all glorious – who washed the feet of the fishermen of Galilee.
“The love which went out toward this little group of men had Deity in it. It was the love of the Throne, of the glory He had with the Father before the worlds were, of that which now fills the bosom of His ascended and glorified nature.” (Meyer)
“The consciousness of impending separation leads us all to try to put all our love into a last look, a last word, a last embrace, which will be remembered forever. The earthquake of parting lays bare the seams of gold in the rock.” (Maclaren)
Christ washed His disciple’s feet knowing that He was the Son of God and conscious of His deity; fully realizing also that He was to die a horrible death on the morrow. As their God, those twelve men owed Him supreme worship, as well as tender, thoughtful and eager service as their personal Savior. This long preamble to the actual deed was the fruit of some sixty years of the loving meditation of John on it – every word having a deep and reverent meaning; every word heightening the solemn and sweet significance of the scene.
The Supper scene
We must not think of a modern table with chairs, as represented in many famous pictures, but rather a low, Eastern table, surrounded on three sides by couches or cushioned divans, “on which each guest reclines, lying on his left side and leaning on the left hand, with his head nearest the table, and his feel stretching back towards the ground. Each guest occupies a separate divan, or pillow. Thus it was easy to wash their feet one after another” (Farrar). The room was finished with table, couches, table equipment, basin and pitcher for washing hands and feet.
Such an Eastern table would have been oval or rather elongated, two parts covered with a cloth, the single divans or pillows would have ranged in the form of an elongated horseshoe, leaving free one end of the table, somewhat as in this picture:
Here “A” represents the table; “B” “B” respectively the ends of the two rows of single divans on which each guest reclines, lying on his left side, and leaning on the left hand, with his head (“H”) nearest the table, and his feet (“F”) stretching back toward the ground. Each guest occupies a separate divan or pillow. (Thus we see how Jesus could wash their feet.) As to the arrangements of the guests, the chief personage would sit near one end of the table. If there were three persons, he would sit between the two. We know from the Gospel narrative that John occupied the place on Jesus’ right, at that end of the divans, as we may call it, at the head of the table. But the chief place next to the Master would be that to His left, or above Him. In the strife of the disciples, i.e., who should be accounted the greatest, this had been claimed, and we believe it to have been actually occupied, by Judas. This explains how, when Christ whispered to John by what sign to recognize the traitor, none of the others heard it. It also explains how Christ would first hand to Judas the sop, which formed part of the Paschal ritual, beginning with him as the chief guest at the table, without thereby exciting special notice. Lastly, it accounts for the circumstance that, when Judas, desirous of ascertaining whether his treachery was known, dared to ask whether it was he, and received the affirmative answer, no one at table knew what had passed. But this could not have been at his left, or the post of chief honor. Regarding Peter, we can understand how, when the Lord with such loving words rebuked their self-seeking, and taught them of the greatness of Christian humility, he should, in his impetuosity of shame, have rushed to take the lowest place at the other end of the table. Finally, we can now understand how Peter could beckon to John, who sat at the opposite end of the table, over against him, and ask him across the table who the traitor was. The rest of the disciples would occupy such places as were most convenient, or suited their fellowship with one another (Edersheim).
13:4 … “He riseth from supper, and layeth aside his garments;” He had lain down on the couch, expecting that one of His disciples would wash the feet of the company, as was evidently the custom among them.
This was the Passover Supper, not the Lord’s Supper, which was instituted later in the evening. The Paschal supper began by the head of the company taking the first cup of wine mingled with water, and speaking over it “the thanksgiving.” This cup was then passed around. The next part of the ceremonial was for the head of the company to rise and “wash hands.” It was at this point of the supper, shortly after the strife among the disciples, that Jesus took the basin and ewer which were at hand, and taught them this lesson.
The immediate cause of our Lord’s act of humility and service was undoubtedly the unworthy strife among the disciples – not the first that had occurred, i.e., as to which of them should have precedence in the kingdom of which Christ’s triumphal entry into Jerusalem and His popularity since had given them renewed hope (Luke 22:24-27). Very likely this strife was brought to a head by some foolish struggle for the chief seats at the table, those on the right and left of Jesus. The Savior could not proceed with the solemn scene of the Last Supper while His disciples were in this ugly mod, and it was with uneasy glances as He laid aside His upper garments for ease in performing the contemplated service.
13:4 … “And he took a towel, and girded himself.” Oriental garments are much the same now as in the days of Jesus. Over the drawers and the trousers and the shirt, and perhaps over the vest and the kuftan, like a dressing gown, are worn loose, flowing robes, which must be laid aside when one has any special service to perform. Into the girdle, which may be of leather or may be a shawl, the skirt of the kuftan is tucked when one is preparing for menial service, or for running, or for fighting. “The Lord ‘girded himself’ by girding His inner tunic about the loins with a towel, used partly in lieu of a girdle and partly to wipe the feet. Thus Christ put on the ordinary habit of a servant for a servant’s work.” (Abbott)8
With the towel for a girdle, He fastened up His long robe out of the way. “And I think that when John, in his revelation on Patmos, saw the Son of Man girt with a golden girdle (Rev. 1:13), he would recall this girding at the supper” (Morrison). Our Lord had been waiting patiently and hopefully to see whether some of the Twelve would be moved to perform the customary bathing of the hot and dusty feet, bare in their sandals; but all were too angry and proud. He waited till it was clear that no one else would do it, and then He did it Himself.
13:5 … “Then he poured water into the basin.” “The large copper basin commonly found in oriental houses” (Cambridge Bible). A pitcher of water was ready as part of the arrangements of the room made in advance by Peter and John, and the usual large copper basin lay beside it. In this feet-washing the feet were not put into the basin; the water was poured over the feet, and the basin held under to keep the water from spilling on the floor. In other words, the feet are washed in the falling stream, making it difficult for someone to wash his own feet.
13:5 … “Began to wash.” Implying that He had washed some of the feet before He came to Peter. No doubt washing them in order, as they reclined on their couches at the low table, their bare feet stretched outward, away from the table; and so He continued until reaching Peter.
“The disciples sat down to the meal without washing their feet, after a hot and dusty walk. There was no servant to perform the menial act for them; and no one would volunteer to do it for the rest.” (Abbott)
“Christ had already lain down; as they had no servants, the feet-washing should have been done by one of the disciples; the things necessary for it are at hand. The disciples are still disputing who shall undertake to do it. Jesus then rises Himself to perform this duty of a servant.” (Tholuck)9
13:5 … “The disciples’ feet.” “As sandals were ineffectual against the dust and heat of an Eastern climate, washing the feet on entering a house was an act both of respect to the company and of refreshment to the traveler. The sandals of one coming in were always taken from the feet at the door.” (Lange)
“This feet-washing should have been done by one of the disciples; the things necessary for it are at hand. The disciples are still disputing who shall undertake to do it. Jesus then rises himself to perform this duty of a servant.” (Tholuck)
13:5 … “And to wipe them with the towel wherewith he was girded.” How plainly do all these details mark the narrative as that of an eye-witness.
A year before this, on their way from the Mount of Transfiguration, the disciples had similarly quarreled about precedence, and Christ had then rebuked them by another acted parable, placing a little child in their midst, and bidding them become like little children if they would enter His kingdom and share its glories.10
“We have here a principle laid down; the same that the Romans referred to in the proverb, Servire est regnare. To serve is indeed to reign. Is a mother ever greater than when she ministers to her children? Is a king ever more sovereign than when he seeks the welfare of his humblest subjects? Where will you find a nobler legend than that on the escutcheon of the Prince of Wales? “I serve!” (Burrell)
“Christ had full knowledge of his glory and dignity and in spite of that – nay, because of that – he emptied himself of his glory and took upon himself the form of a servant. The nearer the end, the more Christ was conscious of his glory, and the more clearly did he show that it was the glory of perfect sacrifice. What is the meaning of this to us? It means that here in this self-humiliation we have a revelation of what God is. It means that here we have a sample of the divine life, and therefore a standard for all human life.” (Black)
“Service – that is the key-word for life, for Christ, and for all his followers. And mark, further, that it is service in order to cleanse.” (Maclaren)
“Who is not able to picture the scene – the faces of John, and James, and Peter; the intense silence, in which each movement of Jesus was painfully audible; the self-reproach as they perceived what it meant; the bitter humiliation and the burning shame! The way John recites each detail tells how that scene had scorched itself on his soul.” (Elmslie)
Regarding this verse, Coffman wrote: “The background of this moving incident includes the jealousy of the Twelve among themselves as to who was ‘greatest,’ a jealousy that had been aggravated by the request of Zebedee’s wife that James and John should have the chief seats in the new kingdom. The disciples’ concern over questions like this could have been the reason that none of them volunteered to perform the menial task of washing feet. No one made a move; and, apparently, the supper had actually begun without the customary foot-washing having taken place. This was not a ceremonial act at all, but a necessity due to the type of sandals worn and the dusty condition of all roads in those days. It would have been uncomfortable for them to have continued without washing their feet; but, since the task was usually performed by servants, and none of those disciples jockeying for position as ‘head man’ in the kingdom would touch so menial a task, the Lord did it! In this act he truly took upon him the form of a servant (Phil. 2:1-9).”
SCRIPTURE READING: JOHN 13:6-11
4. PETER, SLOW TO UNDERSTAND CHRIST’S HUMILITY
13:6 … “So he cometh to Simon Peter.” Something notable always happens when the narrative reaches this forthright apostle. “Shame and astonishment shut the mouths of the disciples, and not a sound broke the stillness of the room but the tinkle and plash of the water in the basin as Jesus went from couch to couch. But the silence was broken when he came to Peter.” (Dods)
13:6 … “Lord, dost thou wash my feet?” It was characteristic of Peter to be first to protest against Christ’s act – and doubtless to be proud that he was the first to protest. “The two pronouns, thou, my, stand together at the beginning of the sentence in emphatic contrast: ‘Dost thou of me wash the feet?’” (Vincent). Ellicott points out that “the emphasis lies first on thou, and then, a little slighter, on my. The word thou is to be strongly emphasized, but the common error of reading the word my as an emphatic word is to be avoided.” “Dost thou, my Lord and Master, act as my menial? ‘With those hands’ he sayeth, ‘with which thou hast opened eyes, and cleansed lepers, and raised the dead!” (Chrysostom)
“The other disciples seemed to have allowed Jesus to wash their feet in silent shame, but Peter burst out in an indignant exposition of protest. The collocation of the words is unusual and explosive: ‘Thou, my feet dost wash?’ To such a man as Peter there was a world of separation between those two pronouns. He recoiled with unutterable sense of shame, with his face all aglow with burning astonishment.” (Robinson)
13:7 … “Jesus answered [to prepare Peter to accept and ponder the lesson] and said unto him, What I do thou knowest not now.” In other words, you do not comprehend its meaning, you do not see how it is but a visible expression of My whole mission, in which I laid aside My glory with the Father, and took upon Myself the form of a servant.
The truths taught here, i.e., Jesus’ application of His act to the consciences of His disciples, are still needed everywhere. Young and old alike should be trained and taught by example, as well as by word, to not seek for personal honor, but rather how they can serve the humblest of God’s children. All of us should at all times look out for those among us who are neglected.
Illustration
A newspaper reporter dressed up as a respectable working man—clean and neat clothing, but threadbare and faded. He visited a number of leading churches in a large city, and reported his treatment church by church. He summed up his article in this way, “Several churches paid no attention to me at all and did not offer even a hymn-book (I later returned to these same churches in good clothes and received exemplary treatment). Some of the churches treated me coldly. There was only one church that cordially received me and treated me as any Christian gentleman should be.”
Regarding the statement, “What I do,” Alford wrote: “This washing itself, as a lesson of humility and love – v. 14; its symbolical meaning – vs. 9, 10. The great act of love, the laying aside my glory and becoming in the form of a servant, that the washing of the Holy Spirit may cleanse men.”
Here both pronouns are emphatic, and convey a rebuke to Peter. His words had almost implied that the Lord’s act was wholly out of place, like one who did not know what he was doing. The opposite was actually the case. “What I do thou knowest not now.”
Peter, the first of the disciples to recognize and assert the Messiahship of Jesus, was yet far from understanding His real nature and the vastness of His mission and the work for the world; therefore Peter could not yet enter into the full meaning of this act of lowly serviced, typifying the infinite condescension of God in entering humanity and suffering death for our sins.
13:7 … “But thou shalt know [R.V., “understand”] hereafter.” Our Lord says, “I will explain presently”; and after all the feet were washed, He does explain (vs. 12-17). “It is true of all symbols, that we can know little of them at first. The experience of life interprets them” (Maurice). This deed gives us “the full substance of the gospel concentrated into a single lesson, the whole of practical Christianity in a single symbolic act.” (Fisher)
“These words apply to all our mortal life, in which the lamp of faith can alone fling a little ring of illumination amid the encircling gloom” (Farrar). Peter was soon taught the simpler meaning of Christ’s act, but the deepest meaning, its force as a symbol of Christ’s life and death, he did not understand until after Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection and the coming of the Spirit at Pentecost.
John Newton wrote: “Blind unbelief is sure to err, And scan his work in vain; God is his own interpreter, And he will make it plain.”
Illustration
Much of the Bible must be interpreted to us by the experiences of our lives, as “Dr. Duff found the key to the vindication of what are called ‘the imprecatory psalms’ in the horrors of the Indian Mutiny.” (Taylor)
Peter’s epistles show how fully he later entered into the meaning of Christ’s lowliness and sacrifice.11
a. Jesus explained the meaning to Peter after the work was completed.
b. As he advanced in knowledge of Christ’s kingdom, its spirit, and its work; as his own character developed, Peter would be able to comprehend how this act symbolized the whole mission of Christ, expressing the character and work of His disciples.
c. Hereafter in the heavenly world he would know more of the heights and depths of its meaning.
These words spoken to Peter, “not knowing now, but hereafter,” are often spoken to us. There are things in every life that we cannot understand now – troubles, disappointments, sickness, poverty, death; but the time will come when all will be plain. The child in school cannot understand the reasons for some of his/her studies, but the experiences of later life will make them clean. None of us know at the beginning the full meaning of our life, or for what some of our experiences are training us. Robert Raikes had no vision of the millions studying the Bible, when he started the first “Sunday-school.” He only saw his present work and duty. John Bunyan, shut up in prison for the best twelve years of his life, had no conception that “Pilgrim’s Progress” would enable him to reach millions for centuries. So, in our feeble beginnings, our narrow circumstances, our trials and disappointments, we may know that if we are faithful we shall understand later on the meaning of all, and rejoice in the way God has led us.
“It is in the trying circumstances of the future, in the zealous discharge of the task that shall be his, and in the ripening of Christian experience, that Peter shall ‘learn,’ shall ‘perceive,’ the full meaning of what he at present feels to be so incomprehensible.” (Schaff)
“But not in its full depth of meaning until he should be in the eternal world, where we know as we are known.” (Clark)
13:8 … “Peter said unto him, Thou shalt never wash my feet.” “Literally, ‘thou shalt by no means wash my feet as long as the world stands’” Vincent). Peter, humble enough not to allow Jesus to wash his feet, is yet not humble enough to yield submissively when his Lord tells him to submit. The negative is the strongest form possible, and is translated by Weymouth, “Never while the world lasts shall you wash my feet.” This disciple did not hesitate to command his Lord. Once when Jesus had foretold His coming death on the cross, “Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall never be unto thee.” (Matt. 16:21-23)
Jesus approached him again; Peter sprang from the touch, and violently exclaimed, with an extravagance of refusal almost unparalleled: “Not to all eternity shalt thou wash my feet!” Chrysostom said, “It seems as if one might have seen in those delicate fingers around the napkin all Jesus’ miracles:” “No! not with hands that opened eyes, and cleansed lepers, and raised the dead!” (Robinson). Peter has not yet learned his lesson. To refuse was the sign of neither humility nor obedience, but of pride and unbelief, for it showed that he himself would not have condescended to do what Jesus did, and that he did not fully trust the strange words of Jesus. Abbott wrote: “He thought the act, which was a manifestation of the true glory of the Lord, dishonored him.”
13:8 … “If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me.” Cannot share My kingdom, My character, My work; must be prepared to leave the room, and the company of disciples.
This might mean that Peter should be shut out of the coming meal, but doubtless Christ meant to imply an exclusion from his fellowship, and so Peter understands it. The washing of Christ’s deeper thought was “that spiritual washing which is absolutely necessary in order to have any part in him (Rom. 8:9). That the outward washing only is not here meant is plain from the fact that Judas was washed, but yet had no part in Jesus.” (Alford)
Illustration
“The ancients sometimes, when they offered to Jupiter a victim which was not quite white, would chalk over its colored spots, and so try to pass it off as white, and, as it were, cheat their gods into an acceptance of that which was imperfect. But think you that the All-seeing God will thus be cheated into the acceptance of a soul of which the voluntary, the self-contracted stains are but smeared over and hidden under the white chalk of self-deception, of hypocrisy?” (Farrar)
Why would Peter have “no part” with Christ, unless Jesus washed his feet?
a. Because the first condition of discipleship was submission to Christ, even when he could not understand all the reasons for the command.
b. Because this washing was symbolical of spiritual cleansing, and Peter himself understood it so (v 9).
c. He must enter into the spirit of Christ’s sacrifice and humility, or he could not do the work of Christ – the work Christ would do through him in the world. In other words, unless Peter enters into the spirit of that self-sacrificing work of love that Jesus performs, makes that spirit his own spirit, sees the beauty and owns the glory of the Master becoming the servant for His people’s sake12 and becomes in like manner ready to sacrifice himself if he may thereby help the humblest member of the flock of Christ, than he is going his own way, not the way of Jesus; he is choosing his own portion, not the portion of his Lord; he must be content to separate from One whom he loved with all his heart, and to have no more a part with Him either in His sufferings or His reward. It is this thought, even though it may be as yet imperfectly apprehended by the apostle that leads to the sudden revulsion of feeling in the following verse.
Smith wrote: “I venture to think that he who puts from him ‘the basin and the towel’ is very ill prepared to take the bread, and ‘the cup of blessing.’”
“When we have become defiled we must run away to Jesus and humbly put the defiled feet in his pierced hand. But when that has been done faith says, “Now I am cleansed.” (Scofield)
13:9 … “Simon Peter saith unto him [He speaks with the impetuosity that marks all his appearances in the first three Gospels also] Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head” (or face). If the washing meant being with Jesus, having a part in the work and character of Jesus, he could not have enough of a cleansing so precious.
“This is surely implied in this answer an incipient apprehension of the meaning of our Lord’s words. The expression, ‘if I wash thee not,’ has awakened in him, as the Lord’s presence did (Luke 5:8), a feeling of his own want of cleansing, his entire pollution.” (Alford)
His error was twofold: He did not realize that enlarging the symbol does not increase that which is symbolized and He still had too much self-sufficiency, and was dictating to his Lord the method of His procedure. However, in spite of his errors, his heart glowed with love to his Teacher. He had learned his lesson. Jesus must have welcomed this outburst of passionate enthusiasm, even though He must show that Peter’s expression of it was unnecessary.
13:10 … “Jesus saith to him [Our Lord no doubt spoke with an understanding and forgiving smile for his blundering but true-hearted disciple], He that is washed” (R.V., “bathed”13). “Washed” here means to bathe all over, as in taking a bath. It typifies conversion and regeneration, the acceptance of Christ as our Savior and entrance into the new life with Him. It is a different word from “to wash” that follows, which means to wash a part, such as the hands or feet – here it means to bathe the whole person.
“A moment ago he told his master he was doing too much: now he tells him he is doing too little. Self-will gives place slowly. Yet this was the unmistakable expression of devotion.” (Expositor’s Greek Testament)
“To have no part with Christ – that was more than he could bear. It is as though he would say, ‘A great part in thee!’ First of all, he had wished to differ from the others in not being washed at all. Now that he must be washed, he would be the most washed of all. Ah, the subtle danger of wanting to be first, even in goodness! (Elmslie)
13:10 … “needeth not save to wash his feet.” Dods wrote: “The daily use of the bath rendered it needless to wash more than the feet which were soiled with walking from the bath to the supper table.”
“A man who has bather does not need to bathe again when he reaches home, but only to wash the dust off his feet, then he is wholly clean. So also in the spiritual life, a man whose moral nature has once been thoroughly purified need not think that this has been all undone if in the walk through life he contracts some stains; these must be washed away, and then he is once more wholly clean. Peter, conscious of his own imperfections, in Luke 5:8, and possibly here, rushes to the conclusion that he is utterly unclean.” (Cambridge Bible)
“This foot-washing represented to them, besides its lesson of humility and brotherly love, their daily omissions, these daily contaminations and contacts with the world, make repentance and forgiveness the daily need of the Christian.” (Vaughan)
“If I try to live merely on the strength of grace given me long ago, I shall certainly fall. A daily cleansing I must have for daily sin; and daily grace is as needful to me as daily bread.” (Knight)
“One who has just bathed, and goes straight home, will not on returning there need to be bathed again, for his body just cleansed has not yet had time to contract fresh soils. There is, however, one exception – the feet, left partially unprotected by the open sandals from dust or mire on the way home, may need a fresh cleansing. But this is all.” (Thorold)
“The heart, the inward being of the disciples – these were already washed, were cleansed, were sanctified; but the feet, soiled with the clinging dust of the daily walk, these must be ever cleansed in daily renovation.” (Farrar)
Alford points out that “This bathing represents the bath of the new birth, and this foot-washing represented to them, besides its lesson of humility and brotherly love, their daily need of cleansing from daily pollution, even after spiritual regeneration, at the hands of their Divine Master.”14
13:10 … “And ye are clean, but not all.” The feet of all the disciples had been washed, including Judas; but Judas had not been in the bath. By this Jesus meant that the other disciples could easily be cleansed of their fits of temper, their jealousy, their foolish ambitions, even of the temporary weakness that was soon to lead Peter to deny his Lord; but the sin of Judas was far deeper. He had not received the spirit of the Savior, which the rest had received; he was foul through and through. “He calls them ‘clean’ because their faith in him had not failed; but they had continued with him in all his temptations, and loved him better than any other service.” (Arnold of Rugby)
“He knew that at bottom they were good men; he knew that with one exception they loved him and loved one another; he knew that as a whole they were clean, and that this vicious temper in which they at present had entered the room was but the soil contracted for the hour. But none the less it must be washed off. And he did effectually wash it off by washing their feet . . . From a group of angry, proud, resentful men they were in five minutes changed into a company of humbled, meek, loving disciples of the Lord. They were effectually cleansed from the stain they had contracted.” (Dods)
Jesus recognized that Judas did not have the clean nature represented by bathing. Before this, Christ had indicated His knowledge of the evil heart of Judas (John 6:70). Soon after this He spoke the terrible truth plainly (vs. 18, 21, 26, and 27).
13:11 … “For he knew him that should betray him [compare John 6:70; 13:18, 21, 26]; therefore said he, Ye are not all clean.” “John evidently feels that he can speak with confidence on this point” (Century Bible). Christ Himself had confided the knowledge to John especially (see John 13:22-30).
This verse shows that Jesus was referring to moral cleansing. Jesus knows that His children who are cleansed by the new heart, who are His sincere followers, are yet often soiled by walking through the dusty ways of life, and that they need daily to pray “Forgive us our trespasses.”
“How could He, foreknowing all that would happen, deliberately employ this man in His service, entrust him with all His teachings and confidences, and even send him out to preach, heal the sick, and cast out devils? The explanation will probably be found in the thought that Jesus from the first saw in this man certain evil tendencies that might develop into such enormity as that which they did reach at last, but that He saw better qualities that might possibly under His training overcome the baser things. The fight between the spirits of darkness and light in the man was going on continuously, not unobserved by the Master, Who was desiring and hoping and praying and doing all that was possible to secure the victory for the nobler side.” (Greenhough)
SCRIPTURE READING: JOHN 13:12-17
5. FOLLOWING CHRIST’S EXAMPLE OF HUMILITY
13:12 … “So when he had washed their feet, and taken his garments, and sat down again” meaning that the Lord reclined again on the table-couch. “The guest reclined on couches, lying on the left side and leaning on the left hand. The table was in the hollow square or oblong formed on three sides by the couches.” (Vincent)
“Can you not imagine the disciples watching his every action? Can you not imagine the sudden pang of self-reproach as they saw what it meant? Can you not imagine how ugly and hateful, and utterly loathsome, their own pride must have appeared to them, as they watched their Lord go from one to another with the basin and the towel? Why, if you will believe me, there was not a disciple among them who was not ready to bite off his tongue for very shame . . . When Jesus took his garments and sat down again at the table it was a group of abased and humbled disciples he had about him – each ready, with shame, to take the lowest place.” (Jones)
13:12 … “He said unto them, Know ye what I have done to you?” In other words, do you know the meaning of this acted parable? “Do ye perceive the meaning of this action? By washing their feet he had washed their hearts. By stooping to this menial service he had made them all ashamed of declining it. By this simple action he had turned a company of wrangling, angry, jealous men into a company of humbled and united disciples.” (Expositor’s Greek Testament)
The question is asked, not to be answered, but to direct their attention to what he had done, and to the interpretation which follows; “Do ye perceive what I have done? This is the meaning of it.” (Clark)
13:12 … “Ye call me Master [Teacher, with the definite article, the Teacher], and Lord [one who has authority over you]; and ye say well; for so I am.” This Divine authority Christ never abdicated: He never lost His Divine consciousness.
“This saying is especially striking, coming as it does after Christ’s conspicuous proof of His humility. They called him Teacher, and, Lord, and he was; and the Teacher and Lord was washing their feet. They could never forget that; service was the crown of sonship; the way to get up was to get down; one must stoop to conquer; belief in God’s Fatherhood involved belief in God’s brotherhood. Nothing that he could have said about it could have cut that truth so deep in their hearts as the feeling of the Lord’s hands on their feet.” (McClelland)
13:14 … “If I then, your Lord and Master washed your feet, ye also ought to wash one another’s feet.” The “I” is emphatic. Christ fulfilled promptly His promise to Peter of an explanation. This explanation is in two parts: First, it was a statement of His own supremacy, that He was Master and Lord. “One of you calls me the Teacher; another, the Lord” (Middleton). “Corresponding to which the followers were disciples or servants” (Vincent). “There was no title so lofty, no honor so exalted, no devotion so absolute, that Christ rejected it at the hands of men” (Smith). Second, it was an explanation that Christ’s deed was given as an example (next verse). It was saying in the language of action that the Son of man came not to be ministered unto but to minister, and that the law of his kingdom was the law of helpfulness (Mark 10:43-45).
Certainly no one of them would claim to be greater than Christ. They were servants, He was their confessed Lord. They were apostles, “men sent” (v. 16); He was the Sovereign that sent them forth. Therefore, surely if He had washed their feet, they also ought to wash one another’s feet. “By this great object lesson Christ taught the apostles, and his disciples throughout all time, that the noblest end of man’s endeavor is loving service” (Davis). “Now let man blush to be proud, for whom God is become humble.” (St. Augustine)
Did Christ intend His commandment to be taken literally?
Yes, when necessary. But, now that shoes have taken the place of sandals, it is to be observed in the spirit rather than the letter. Christ did not institute a rite, such as that celebrated in Rome on Thursday in Holy Week, when the Pope “washes the feet of a few aged paupers, after due private preparation, in the presence of the proudest rank.” “It used to be practiced by English sovereigns on Maundy Thursday, James II being the last who did so.” (Century Bible)
How is the spirit of the commandment to be observed?
a. By the performance of lowly and disagreeable physical service for others, when necessary. Those that nurse the sick, care for the aged and helpless, or work among the degraded or the very poor are often called to deeds like feet-washing.
Illustrations
The wife of President Hayes, when her husband was governor of Ohio, was driving one day when she saw a repulsive drunken woman sitting on the curbstone, a jeering crowd around her. At once she stopped, helped her into her own vehicle, and drove off with her.
A policeman in Glasgow, Scotland watched a poor woman picking up something, again and again, and putting something in her apron. Roughly and suspiciously he demanded to see what it was. Trembling, she showed him some bits of broken glass; and pointing to the barefooted children playing, she said, “I thought I would take them out of the way of the baby’s feet.”
A young city doctor was visited by his father from the country. “How are you getting on?” asked the father. “Not at all,” was the discouraged reply; “I am not doing anything.” Later the father watched his son in the free dispensary, where he had an unsalaried position. For an hour or more the young man helped some twenty-five people, who came to him with various ailments; and at the end the old man thundered: “Not doing anything! Why, if I had helped twenty-five people in a month as much as you have in one morning, I would thank God that my life counted for something. I’ll go back to the farm, and gladly earn enough to support you as long as I live.”
b. “The noblest form of help is to help men to get rid of their sin” (Maclaren). That is the cleansing we all need most. To wash one another’s feet is, in the deeper meaning of the thing, to help one another out of the evil that is in the world, to aid one another in the keeping of a pure conscience and of a wholesome and holy life (Lang).
We sometimes talk of the language of the hands; sometimes of the language of the eyes. But, there is also a language of the feet, and the whole Gospel can be translated into it. Think of it this way: first comes Jesus (when we are bowed with sin), and He says: “Son of man, stand upon thy feet.” And then comes Jesus (when we wish to serve Him), and He says: “Wash one another’s feet.” And then in the morning, when we are His forever, it is at His feet that we shall cast our sorrows.
Obviously Christ’s words are symbolic; not intended as a command for us in a time of shoes and shocks and hard pavements. When the world says, “Compete with men,” Christ says “Serve them.” He bids us enter on a course of discipline that we may find irksome and even hard, but which is our only safeguard against pride and a condition of true self-respect.
13:15 … “For I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you.” They were to follow, not necessarily the example of the deed itself, unless that was needed, but the example of the spirit back of the deed, the spirit of humility and of loving, eager service. The Imitation of Christ, by Thomas à Kempis, was at one time the most popular book in the world next to the Bible. Another very popular book was Sheldon’s, In His Steps, or What Would Jesus Do? Stead wrote, If Jesus Christ Came to Chicago, etc. Until we ask not only what did Jesus do thousands of years ago, under circumstances wholly differing from our own, but also what would Jesus do if He were here in my place today, we are not even within sight of a right interpretation or application of His life. “It is not the remembrance of what Jesus has once done to me, but the living experience of what He is now to me, that will give me the power to act like Him.” (Murray)
Illustration
We cannot copy the great work which Christ did for the world, but we may copy His spirit.
“The smallest trickle of water down a city gutter will carve out of the mud at its side little banks and cliffs, and exhibit all the phenomena of erosion on the largest scale, as the Mississippi does over have a continent, and the tiniest little wave in a basin will fall into the same curves as the billows of mid-ocean.” (Maclaren)
There are two ways of imitating the example of another person. One is to imitate the form of his example, the other to imitate his spirit. One may do exactly, in other circumstances, what another has done, and yet entirely fail in imitating his example, because all that made it of value is left out. It was a dead body without the soul. To go through a ceremonial of washing the feet of others, is not doing as Christ did at this time. He that serves others; he that does the humblest service in order to relieve their wants, or cleanse their souls from sin; he that forgets self and seeks no honor, no high place, but only to serve and to help, and seeks out the poor, the sick, the obscure, the unpopular, in order to be their friend and help – he does to them as Christ did to the disciples.
“We should never lose sight of the fact that Christ is our pattern. We are called to imitate him. Someone has said, ‘If you would become a painter, take the pencil and study Raphael; if you would become a sculptor, take the chisel and study Phidias; if you would become a poet take the pen and study Homer; but if you would become a Christian, take the New Testament and study Christ.’ Contemplate him until you can call riches dust, worldly splendors toys, and until you can feel that true glory is to be like him, meek and lowly of heart.” (Gregg)
“He makes us an example, and binds us down to that, only that by the closeness of our servitude our souls may expand.” (Clark)
It is not the act itself, but its moral essence, following His example, that He enjoins on us to exercise. However, v. 10 proves that this moral essence consists in ministering love that in all self-denial and humility is active for the moral purification and cleansing of others (Meyer).
13:16 … “The servant is not greater than his lord.” If Jesus their Lord did much humble service for others, and spent his life in ministering to others, not in being ministered unto, every one of His disciples to the end of time should do the same, and not expect to avoid this duty and privilege. This is the royal road, and there is no other by which we can aid His kingdom to come. The great danger of the church, in this as in every age, is pride, self-seeking, and failing to imitate its Master in this humble service for others.
13:17 … “If ye know these things [implying that some must learn them in more ways than merely by hearing; but they must be known before they can be practiced and it is sometimes difficult for us to perceive our duty in this regard], happy [blessed] are ye if ye do them.” Blessed indeed they are the royal road to true blessedness; because the blessedness can come only to those who do was well as know. It is the blessedness of doing good, of humility, of likeness to God, of a part in the redemption of the world.
Clark points out that “duties involving humiliations, though seemingly repulsive, are found in the doing to be attended with the highest blessedness (Matt. 7:24; Luke 11:28).”
“The happiness here promised is not merely the inward complacency that accompanies every act of voluntary abasement, but a really superior position in God’s sight; we are greater in His eyes and nearer to Him in proportion as we humble ourselves to serve our brethren.” (Godet)
It was at this time that Jesus spoke the words recorded in Luke 22:24-30, in reference to this same strife as to who should be greatest.
The Greek implies less assurance as to their doing them than as to their knowing them. This is the blessing with a double “if.” “If ye know” – this is the knowledge which Christ gives to faith. “If ye do” – this is the obedience which faith gives to Christ. Knowing and Doing – these are the twin pillars, Jachin and Boaz, on which the house of happiness is built.
Lower service
This is the grandeur of Christianity, that it practices human brotherhood. By this it proves its superiority to all other religions.
Illustration
Many years ago, when Chinese Commissioners visited Chicago the newspapers pointed out that they were shown its railways, warehouses, factories, hospitals, Hull House and the Young Men’s Christian Association. “What impressed you most?” someone asked them. “The hospitals, Hull House and the Young Men’s Christian Association,” was the answer.
To know that we are brothers to all men, since God is the Father of us all, is not enough; we must act on that knowledge.
“Between the knowing and the doing there is a deep gulf. Into that abyss the happiness of many a man slips, and is lost. There is no peace, no real and lasting felicity for a human life until the gulf is closed, and the continent of conduct meets the continent of creed, edge to edge, lip to lip, firmly joined forever.” (Dyke)
“A soul occupied with great ideas best performs small duties.” (Martineau)
Illustration
Someone said to a preacher, “Is the sermon over so soon?” “No;” was the reply, “It is said, and you must now go and do it.”
6. PRACTICAL THOUGHTS
Christians as rulers and servants
This incident is scarcely excelled by any in the Bible in its richness of instruction for modern life.
The Lessons for Rulers: Christians are often placed in authority over others – as parents, teachers, employers, and officers of the church, public officials. The ruling nations of the world are Christian nations, having authority over many dependent peoples. This power should be accepted frankly, and acknowledged as a gift from God. The Christian need not, any more than his Lord, be unconscious of his superiority. But conscious power should be used humbly.
“Granted that you are superior to me in something or other. Well, what does that matter? One molehill is a little higher than another; they are all about the same distance from the sun. I remember a friend of mine who, when a child, being told that the sun was ninety-five million miles away, asked whether it was from the upstairs window or the downstairs. And that is about the difference between men, if they will bring themselves into comparison with the only true standard.” (Maclaren)
Those that are superior in one way or another should remember that everyone may be superior in some way. Each can help the other and teach the other.
The Lessons for Servants: Many Christians are rulers, but all Christians are servants. The minister of a church is the one who ministers to its needs. The President is the chief servant of the people. “Ich dien” – “I serve,” the motto of the Prince of Wales, should be the motto of every Christian, no matter his station in life. Let us take pride in our service, that it be performed in a masterly fashion. Westcott wrote: “When Christ serves, He serves perfectly.” Let us not be satisfied with our service till it springs from love, and not merely from a sense of duty.
Humility must know itself to be humble, must be unconscious. Someone reminded a certain minister of an act of goodness he had performed. The preacher said, “Any good I have ever been able to do is of the unearned mercy of God.” How true and humble. We feel that the merit is not ours, but God’s. True service goes where it is needed, and often our enemies need us far more than our friends.
Lessons in humble service:
a. The danger of the church is in self-seeking, in strife for the highest places, and in neglect of humbler service to the poor and needy.
b. Jesus corrects this danger by His example, not only on this occasion, but throughout His whole life.
c. Jesus performed this service even to the most unworthy, and to him who at the moment was traitorously plotting His death.
d. Christian humility is not abjectness of spirit, or pusillanimity, but is the child of self-sacrificing, helpful, heroic love.
e. Through present obedience we will come to a knowledge of those mysteries of Providence that perplex us.
f. Unless we are cleansed from this imperfection of self-seeking, we have no part with Jesus in His character, His work, His kingdom, His heaven.
g. The usefulness, the power, the success of the church depends on it following the Master, in welcoming the poor, in ministering to the wants of the needy.
h. To this day, even in the Christian world, one of the subtlest and the most common of the temptations with which we are assailed is the same that tried the disciples – the desire to be accounted the greater. Base jealousy of others, because of their superior riches, talents, honors, or social position, often sadly mars what are otherwise lovely Christian characters.
i. The young should be trained by precept and example to seek out the neglected and the poor, in church and in social life, even seeking to help those who need help, and not getting in sets and cliques.
j. Love transfigures the humblest service, and makes it worthy of the highest beings.
k. We should do the smallest duties with the highest motives.
l. “Vain is all strife for superiority, where the only strife should be, which should oblige each other the most; and the only power, lodged in any person, should be a power of doing good. Never strive to gain an absolute sway over anything but your own passions.” (Seed)
Footnotes:
1 See Matthew 24:1-26; Mark 13:1-14, 17; Luke 21:5-22, 30; John 12:37-50.
2 John 2:4; 7:6; 12:23, 27; 17:1.
3 See John 2:4; 7:6, 30; 8:20; 11:9.
4 See John 1:11, 12; 10:27-29; 17:6-12, etc.
5 Compare John 12:4-7 with Matthew 26:14-16.
6 Additional thoughts on Judas Iscariot: Named one of the Twelve by Jesus and, along with the others, Judas was commissioned to “heal the sick and raise the dead” (Matt. 10:7); and it must therefore be inferred that at the time of his call Judas was not evil. However, by the time of the great defection recorded in John 6, Judas had fallen. “One of you is a devil” (John 6:70), Jesus said, which is sometimes amended to read, “a devil from the beginning,” which of course is not true. A deduction from the events recorded in John 6 indicates that Judas, like so many of his countrymen, expected a temporal Messiah; and the knowledge that Jesus would never be that kind of Messiah turned his heart away from the Lord. In any case, he became unsympathetic to the ideals of the Master, used the common treasury, which he carried, for his own purposes, and drifted more and more into rebellion and defiance, even betraying the Lord, at last, for thirty pieces of silver. Judas, like all people, had freedom of the will and might have elected a more honorable course, but chose instead to betray the Lord. The thesis so often advocated that people “are not responsible for what they do,” and that society is to blame for the vicious acts of criminals is negated by the record of Judas. Wherein did Jesus fail the traitor? That Judas was truly an apostle at first is verified by the sacred record that he “by transgression fell” (Acts 1:25 KJV). It is axiomatic that one cannot fall from an eminence that he does not have. Some have sought to extenuate Judas’ sin on the grounds that he probably expected Jesus to extricate himself by some supernatural act, or upon the theory that he “atoned” for his misdeed by returning the money and committing suicide. All sins can be rationalized, and Judas might indeed have rationalized the betrayal; but all such rationalizations of criminal behavior are futile. The deed of betrayal itself was one of unique shame and ugliness.
7 For more information on Jesus Christ, see God the Son in Contents section of StudyJesus.com.
8 Jesus “girded himself,” like a servant. See Luke 12:37; 1 Peter 5:5.
9 This was a needful duty. Where sandals are worn, the dust will gather on the feet quickly; so that one coming from the public bath to his house might need to have his feet washed upon entering his home. Even where shoes or high boots are worn, there is still need of frequent feet-washing, both from the penetrating character of the dust, and from the heat of the climate. It is a requirement of hospitality to offer water for the washing of the feet to any guest entering one’s home. In other words, this duty was not performed for show or mere illustration, but actually provided a service; a duty commonly performed by a servant. However, this duty should have been done by the disciples, but they refused to do. So, since they refused to do so, Jesus therefore did as a present duty. It is only by remembering this fact that we can truly understand the lesson Jesus is teaching. No words, no description could set out the truth of humble service as clearly and forcibly as this action of Jesus.
10 See Matthew 18:1-4; 20:20-28; 23:1-12.
11 See 1 Peter 1:8, 14, 19, 22; 2:1, etc.
12 Compare Matthew 20:28; Luke 22:24-27.
13 Compare Hebrews 10:22 and 2 Peter 2:22.
14 See 2 Corinthians 7:1; James 1:21; Acts 15:8, 9.
