John Chapter 13:1-17 by Mark Dunagan

The Gospel Of John Chapter 13:1-17

I. Outline: I. Jesus Washes The Disciples Feet: 13:1-17 II. The Plot To Betray Him Is Exposed: 13:18-30 III. The New Commandment: 13:31-38

II. Introductory Comments: The chapter begins what we could call the private ministry between Jesus and the twelve. Prior to this chapter Jesus has fielded the greatest questions that the opposition could muster (Matthew 21-22); He has severely denounced the Jewish rulers (Matthew 23); predicted the destruction of Jerusalem (Matthew 24) and the final judgment (Matthew 25). A day or two previous to the evening in this chapter, Judas had struck a bargain with the Jewish leadership to deliver Jesus into their hands (Matthew 26:2-16). Various events recorded in the other Gospels had happened immediately before the events in this chapter: 1. Preparations had been made for a place at which to eat the Passover feast (Matthew 26:17-19; Mark 14:12-16; Luke 22:7-13). 2. Jesus had opened the Supper (Luke 22:15-18). 3. The disciples had disputed concerning which of them was the greatest (Luke 22:24-30). 4. At this point Jesus will proceed to wash the disciples feet (John 13:1-30). 5. The Betrayer will be revealed and he will leave. 6. The Lord’s Supper will be instituted. 6. The New Commandment given. 7. Peter’s denial and the denial of all the disciples is foretold. The reader should be impressed that John doesn’t record the institution of the Lord’s Supper in this chapter or the chapters which follow. This is simply one more indication that John knew that his readers already had such information in the other Gospels which had already been written.

III. Commentary:

John 13:1 ‘Now before the Feast of the Passover, Jesus knowing that His hour had come that He should depart out of this world to the Father, having loved His own who were in the world, He loved them to the end.’ ‘before the Feast of the Passover’-Even before the Passover, Jesus had been keenly aware of what the future held for Him. He was 100% in tune with the Father’s timetable of events. He knew that His death was near. The fact that He was going to die didn’t finally dawn on Him. Rather, He knew that this was His fate, before He even came to this world (Hebrews 10:5-7).

‘Feast of the Passover’-‘this expression usually refers to the whole seven day period (Ezekiel 45:21). The Feast began on the fourteenth day of the first month when the paschal lamb was killed (Lev. 23:5; Luke 22:7, 13-14). On the evening of that day the Passover supper was eaten (Luke 22:15). Traditionally other ceremonial meals were also eaten in the remaining days of this week of unleavened bread (Lev. 23:6-8; John 18:28).’ (Harkrider p. 92)

‘He should depart out of this world’-Thus death is not annihilation or a cessation of existence, but rather, a departure (2 Peter 1:15; James 2:26).

‘having loved His own..He loved them to the end’-‘how utterly he loved them’ (Rieu). ‘extends beyond the single act of love now to be recorded and includes all that Jesus did for the disciples until the end finally arrived.’ (Lenski p. 902) In despite of the tremendous suffering which He knew lurked only hours away (Matthew 16:21), His thoughts were not upon Himself merely, but also upon His disciples. ‘Jesus loved His disciples to the end, though they did not all so love Him. One of them at this very moment entertained the diabolic purpose of betraying his Lord.’ (Butler p. 212)

John 13:2 ‘And during the supper, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot; the son of Simon to betray Him.’ ‘during the supper’-The King James here reads, ‘and supper being ended’. It seems clear these events took place while the supper was in progress, see 13:26. Point To Note: McGarvey notes, ‘Since the second century a great dispute has been carried on as to an apparent discrepancy between John and the synoptists in their statements concerning the Passover.’ (p. 647) Actually, there is no discrepancy: 1. The ‘supper’ in this chapter is the Passover meal and not some ordinary supper which had been eaten on the previous day (as some claim). Lenski notes, ‘The very phrase in v. 1 “before the feast of the Passover”…makes this supper a part of the festival. For if this phrase does not intend to bring us to the Passover supper, it is out of place.’ (p. 906) 2. The identical events took place at this supper, as are recorded as happening at the Supper in Matthew, Mark and Luke (compare John 13:16-17 with Luke 22:14-15; 24-27/ John 13:18, 21-30 with Mark 2

14:17-21; Matthew 26:20-25/ and John 13:38 with Matthew 26:34; Mark 14:30; Luke 22:34). 3. Hendriksen notes that to argue that these are two different meals, one is faced with also arguing that Peter denied the Lord on two successive nights! 4. The ‘feast’ mentioned in 13:29 is in reference to the entire Passover festival. Therefore, the feast of John 13 took place on Thursday evening. Jesus would be crucified on the next day, the day before the Sabbath (John 19:31). Jesus would be in the tomb part of Friday, all of Saturday, and part of Sunday, the day on which He arose (John 20:1; Mark 16:1-2).

‘the devil having already put into the heart of Judas…to betray Him’ Points To Note: 1.

Judas wasn’t suddenly overwhelmed by the devil, rather, he had been yielding to temptation for along time (John 12:6). 2. Judas had already made arrangements with the Jewish leadership to betray Jesus (Matthew 26:14-16). Judas had made these arrangements some time after Mary had anointed Jesus. 3. ‘Having discovered at length that being a disciple of Jesus would not pay off, and being a thoroughly greedy individual, he was determined not to be put out of the synagogue..but instead cultivate the favor of the authorities’ (Hendriksen p. 229) 4. The devil didn’t mysteriously enter the heart of Judas, but rather, the devil enters the heart through the same means that God enters the heart (Acts 16:14). In either case, the individual must listen to the truth or the temptation being presented, and believe it. The medium for the indwelling of Satan or Deity, is the message being presented. Foster notes, ‘Judas must have listened with the utmost attention to the instructions which Jesus gave to Peter and John as to where He intended to observe the Passover meal. This would be the very time to keep his bargain with the chief priests and scribes; there would be no dangerous crowds; the streets would be deserted; each family-group would be in quiet, reverent seclusion keeping the feast. Once he learned exactly the location of the house, he could find a chance during the day to slip away and notify the enemies of Christ. But Judas got nothing from the instructions Jesus gave…(see Jesus’ instructions in Matthew 26:18-19)…Judas got nothing from this description. He found himself stymied….Those who attempt to move the day of the crucifixion back to Thursday, or even to Wednesday, argue that this must have been a substitute, preliminary meal that Jesus ate, for the priests were so hostile to Jesus they would not have consented to assist in the sacrifice of a lamb by the two apostles. This objection overlooks completely the enormous crowds and the vast number of priests who would be serving. Certainly some priests would be friendly. But amid so great a crowd and the pressure of three hours time for slaying of the lambs, any representative of a group would not be easily identifiable.’ (pp. 1211-1212)

Be impressed, that Jesus remains kind to Judas, in spite of the fact that Judas has made up his mind to betray Jesus. A tremendous amount of mercy and ‘second-chances’ will be given to Judas in these final hours. Like all men, Judas had a choice and freewill (Ephesians 4:27 ‘do not give the devil an opportunity’; James 4:7 ‘Resist the devil and he will flee from you.’) 3

John 13:3 ‘Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into His hands, and that He had come forth from God, and was going back to God.’ ‘knowing that the Father had given all things into His hands’-‘had left everything in his hands’ (Knox); ‘had entrusted everything to him’ (NEB). ‘Here we have an unexpected twist. Instead of something like, “knowing what Judas would do” we have “knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands”….But John does not see the cross as the casual observer might see it. It is the place where the great divine work was wrought out and the divine glory shown forth.’ (Morris p. 615) Points To Note: 1.

Barclay notes, ‘Jesus knew that He had come from God and that He was going to God. He might well have had a certain contempt for men…Jesus knew one other thing. Jesus was well aware that He was about to be betrayed. Such a knowledge might so easily have turned Him to bitterness and to resentment and to hatred of men.’ (p. 160) 2. ‘Jesus knows not merely the arrival of the hour for his transfer out of the world to the Father; we are to think of him as being fully conscious of his power in this hour when the devil, Judas, and his enemies seem to be celebrating the triumph of their power, fully conscious also that he of his own will came from God..’ (Lenski p. 911) ‘All things were in Jesus’ hands when those hands washed the disciples’ feet. Yet we see that these hands are still in deepest humiliation---they have almighty power but do not use this power in majesty’ (Lenski p. 912) 3. Jesus washed the disciples feet, allowed Himself to be betrayed and arrested, all the while, possessing total and unreserved power (Matthew 26:53). It is one thing to suffer helplessly, it is another thing to suffer, at the same time knowing that you could at any moment stop the suffering!

John 13:4 ‘rose from supper, and laid aside His garments; and taking a towel, He girded Himself about.’ ‘rose from supper’Points To Note: 1.

The reader needs to take note of the background which preceded this event. Luke notes that the disciples had been arguing about which of them was the greatest (Luke 22:24). ‘“I am in the midst of you as he that serveth” (Luke 22:27), which Luke tells us were spoken after a quarrel among the apostles as to which of them was to be the greatest. Our Lord’s action is a sharp rebuke to their attitude.’ (Morris p. 616) 2. Jesus and His disciples had come from Bethany. The common footwear in this culture were sandals, which meant that the feet became dirty or at least uncomfortable. Washing the feet of guests was a mark of hospitality

(Genesis 18:4; Luke 7:44). It was a menial task, usually discharged by a slave. ‘But here in the Upper Room there was no servant. Hence, one of the disciples should have performed the task. But none was willing. These men were too proud.’ (Hendriksen p. 228) Tenney notes, ‘According to custom in the oriental household, a slave washed the feet of guests who had come through the dust and filth of the street. Since the last supper was held in a private home, and probably as a secret meeting, it is understandable why no slave was present to fulfill this task. Furthermore, the disciple’s minds were preoccupied with dreams of elevation to office in the coming kingdom. They were jealous lest one of their fellows should claim the best place. Consequently, not one of them was likely to abase himself by volunteering to wash the feet of the others. They were ready to fight for a throne, but not for a towel!’ (pp. 198-199) 3. ‘It may seem strange that the disciples had entered the upper room without washing their feet. A host usually provided for such ordinary courtesy at the door, but once the table had been set and viands (provisions) provided, the reverent privacy offered in this home seems to have left everything to the guests.’ (Foster p. 1212) Consider the love of Jesus! A. It was a love that evil could not quench. ‘Notwithstanding treachery and cowardice on the part of men, and professed followers at that, the divine love was given spontaneously and freely.’ (Tenney p. 198) But how often does evil prevent us from loving? How often do we refuse to love because of some personal slight. In fact, at times we almost require perfect circumstances to exist before we are willing to demonstrate our love. B. A voluntary love by One who was much greater than the objects of His love. C. A love that transcends the barriers of social class. D. An active love. E. A love that doesn’t have to get all the praise.

‘laid aside His garments’-‘took off His outer clothes’ (Wms). If we take the word “garments” literally, and if the word “garments” means the same thing here as in 19:23,24, then Jesus has removed His outer garment and the tunic as well as the belt have been lain aside. ‘Jesus is pictured here as if he were an Oriental slave, wearing nothing but a loincloth.’ (Hendriksen p. 229)

‘taking a towel, He girded Himself about’-‘took a long, linen cloth…and tied it around his middle, so that with the end of this towel he would be able to dry the disciples’ feet after he has washed them with his hands.’ (Hendriksen p. 229)

John 13:5 ‘Then He poured water into the basin, and began to wash the disciples’ feet, and to wipe them with the towel with which He was girded.’ ‘began to wash the disciples’ feet’-The initial reaction of the disciples isn’t given. They are probably perplexed and ashamed that Jesus was doing something, which they should have been doing.

John 13:6 ‘And so He came to Simon Peter. He said to Him, “Lord, do You wash my feet?”’ “do you wash my feet?”-Peter can’t keep his thoughts to himself, he must speak out! ‘Peter sees the incongruity of what is happening: The Lord of glory, on the one hand, and Peter’s dirty feet, on the other; what a contrast!.’ (Hendriksen p. 230)

John 13:7 ‘Jesus answered and said to him, “What I do you do not realize now, but you shall understand hereafter.”’ “you do not realize now”-Which means that there is a deeper lesson here than merely washing feet. Jesus isn’t instituting a feet-washing ordinance for the Church, the lesson is deeper. 1. Note the kindness of Jesus. In a way Jesus excuses Peter’s ignorance, and treats him mildly. In the future, through the inspiration given him by the Holy Spirit (John 14:26; 16:13), Peter will completely understand the significance of this event. Jesus will explain the meaning of the event in 13:12-17, but it appears that the disciples wouldn’t realize the full meaning, until they were inspired. Give credit to Peter, unlike the others who were remaining silent, he had enough reverence for Jesus, that he objected.

John 13:8 ‘Peter said to Him, “Never shall You wash my feet!” Jesus answered him, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me.”’ “Never shall You wash my feet!”-But Peter now crosses the line, he starts giving orders to what Deity can and cannot do (Matthew 16:21-23). Note, God will be patient with us—up to the point that we start telling God what He can and can’t do. The statement, ‘never shall You’, is very strong, ‘You shall by no means wash my feet so long as the world stands!’ (Woods p. 284)

“If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me”-Jesus must now rebuke Peter’s attitude. Note, Peter’s zeal is good, but his zeal is misdirected. His zeal is in conflict with the will of God, his zeal has degenerated into defiance (Romans 10:1-2). Sadly, even today there are many people who are zealous for God, but their zeal has become misdirected, and they are defying God by what they teach and practice in His name. The words of Jesus are clear: Unless Peter can completely place his trust in Jesus, even when he must simply take Jesus’ word for it, then he won’t be able to cut it as a disciple of the Lord. ‘if Peter could not in whole-hearted faith obey his Master, even when he could not understand—Peter could have no part with the Master.’ (Butler p. 215) Like Peter, many of us have started thinking too much like the world around us. ‘if our carnal minds cause us to judge honor and dignity as the world judges and we reject the way of humility and service which our God chose and bids us to follow—we shall have no part with Him!’ (p. 216)

John 13:9 ‘Simon Peter said to Him, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head.”’

“but also my hands and my head”-You just can’t help but love Peter! Here is a man so concerned about being right with God, and he immediately tries to correct himself. ‘If washing were a condition precedent to his sharing in the work of Jesus and in maintaining his favor, he could not have enough of the cleansing….Peter, with all of his early faults, is truly an admirable person. His heart overflowed with love for Jesus; he could never do enough and though his weaknesses often possessed him, his determination to do right always triumphed.’ (Woods p. 285) Peter doesn’t want to do anything ‘halfway’! And yet there is still an element of self-will in Peter’s response. Peter is still reluctant to simply comply with what Jesus initially was doing and saying. There are many people, very religious people, who insist on dictating the terms of their salvation, the purpose of the church, or how God will be worshipped and so on.

John 13:10 ‘Jesus said to him, “He who has bathed needs only to wash his feet, but is completely clean; and you are clean, but not all of you.”’ “He who has bathed needs only…”-‘The imagery is that of a man going to a feast. He will bathe at home. Then when he arrives he needs only to wash his feet to sit at table wholly clean.’ (Morris p. 618) Points To Note: Various views exist concerning the above statement: 1. Some see here a reference to baptism, ‘for one who has once been washed thoroughly by baptism needs not to be rebaptized. After that general cleansing the particular sins are removed by confession (1 John 1:7-9).’ (McGarvey p. 650) 2. But it appears to me that Jesus is making it clear to Peter that this foot-washing has nothing to do with cleansing him of any sin, rather the lesson is service and humility, the humility that they need to have in serving each other. 3. Jesus is making it clear that this isn’t come type of ritual or ceremony, rather, it is a practical demonstration of how true greatness is achieved in the kingdom of God (Matthew 20:26-28).

“but not all of you”-Which will be explained by the next verse. John 13:11 ‘For He knew the one who was betraying Him; for this reason He said, “Not all of you are clean.”’ Points To Note: 1.

The above statement was one more reminder to Judas, that Jesus knew all about his plot. It was one more chance which God was giving to Judas to confess. 2. Judas had certainly made sure that he was ceremonially clean to eat the Passover. But ceremonial cleanness never took the place of moral cleanness. 3. And yet, the fact that one of His own will betray Him, will not keep Jesus from loving His

disciples and giving His life for the world (Romans 5:8). ‘We should not overlook the fact that Jesus does not tell the disciples who the unclean person is. The reader of the Gospel knows, but right up until the arrest the disciples know no more than that there is a traitor in their midst.’ (Morris p. 619)

John 13:12 ‘And so when He had washed their feet, and taken His garments, and reclined at the table again, He said to them, “Do you know what I have done to you?”’ ‘reclined at the table again’-evidently, Jesus did this after He had washed the feet of every disciple, including Judas!

“Do you know what I have done to you?”-Jesus challenged these men to think about the significance of what had happened. Tenney notes, ‘In contrast to the selfseeking of the disciples. Jesus took the place of humility. He set the example of service, not of strife, of self-abasement rather than of self-exaltation. His assumption of the towel was a representation in miniature of His entire career, an accurate picture of Philippians 2:6-8: “Who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant…”’ (p. 200)

John 13:13 “You call Me Teacher and Lord; and you are right, for so I am.” John 13:14 “If I then, the Lord and Teacher, washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet.” John 13:15 “For I gave you an example that you also should do as I did to you.” Points To Note: 1.

This example was a rebuke to the disciples quest for the top-stop and their continual arguing over who was the greatest (Luke 22:24-27). Jesus knew that if such attitudes prevailed among His disciples, then their work would be greatly hindered (James 3:16). ‘In this context when they had displayed petty jealousies toward each other, their Lord and Master stooped to the humble duties of a servant. The lesson is obvious. Should not the Lord’s disciples be willing to follow His example and serve one another?’ (Harkrider p. 93) 2. ‘Jesus makes it clear that His action was no casual event. It set them an example.’ (Morris p. 621) 3. Note that Jesus didn’t say that they should wash His feet, but that we should wash the feet of others. Too many people only want to do something, if it is something spectacular. They want to do some great thing for God, when God has already told them that ‘greatness’ is found in serving others.

From these passages various groups have argued that Jesus instituted ‘footwashing’ as a religious practice which must be observed when we gather together: Points to Note: 1. Unlike the Lord’s Supper (1 Corinthians 11:23-26), the apostles didn’t give us any instruction concerning a footwashing ceremony to be conducted during worship services. 2. It was a sign of hospitality (1 Timothy 5:10) in that culture, but the New Testament is completely silent concerning any official ceremony. 2. The Lord’s Supper and a footwashing ceremony are never joined together (Acts 2:42; 20:7; 1 Corinthians 11:20-26) in the worship of the New Testament Church. 3. Historically, footwashing, as a church ordinance began in the fourth century A.D.. 4. Modern practices do not conform to what the Lord did. Woods notes, ‘On occasion, the popes of Rome, with much pomp and ceremony, have washed the feet of a carefully selected group in alleged compliance with the action of the Lord…but solely as a ritualistic and ceremonial act. Jesus washed the disciple’s feet; he washed the feet of all the disciples; he washed both feet of each disciple and he washed them because they were dirty…..to go through the sham of washing other’s feet…after due private preparation, and in the presence of the proudest rank, bears no resemblance to what Jesus really did on this occasion.’ (p. 289) 5. In addition, Jesus said that He was doing something, which they didn’t understand. But they did understand that He was washing their feet!

John 13:16 “Truly, truly, I say to you, a slave is not greater than his master; neither is one who is sent greater than the one who sent him.” “a slave is not greater than his master”-It isn’t enough to “admire” Jesus or what He did and taught. One must be willing to follow His example. ‘He knows what may prevent them from doing so: the feeling that they are just as good as others or even superior to others. Such comparisons he cuts off completely by his own personal example…By his example Jesus has placed us where we must drop all other comparisons and compare ourselves only with him.’ (Lenski p. 928) (See Ephesians 5:1-2). Unfortunately, many of us want to compare ourselves with others, instead of comparing ourselves with the real and true standard (John 13:34; Matthew 5:48; 1 Corinthians 11:1).

John 13:17 “If you know these things, you are blessed if you do them.” “blessed if you do them”-present tense, “keep doing them”. ‘If the Christian’s Lord is willing to perform the duties of a servant, the Christian should be willing to serve and not make position and prestige his aim…Man was not created to be just a taker and never a giver.’ (Butler p. 221) ‘the recognition of their obligation is insufficient. It must be followed by action if they are to be blessed.’ (Tasker p. 156) Like the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5), Jesus says that the person who serves is truly the blessed person. The world usually doesn’t agree, and insists that the person who places themselves first will be the person who finds happiness.