John 13

David Lipscomb Commentary On John 13 HE WASHED THE ’ FEETJoh_13:1-11 1 Now before the feast of the passover,—[How long before is not specified. I take it to mean just before. This feast re¬fers to the eating of the paschal lamb.] Jesus knowing that his hour was come—[The exact hour was close at hand— the time was come. The preliminaries had already begun.] that he should depart out of this world unto the Father,— [Calvary was no accident. Jesus knew that he would die on the morrow.] having loved his own that were in the world, he loved them unto the end.—[I take “ his own” here to mean his disciples. They were “ in the world,” and were to remain in the world, exposed to its temptations and trials. He is filled with a ten¬der sympathy for them, knowing that they are soon to be de¬prived of his presence and counsel. Having given them abun¬dant proofs of his love in word and deed heretofore, now at the close of his intercourse he will give them a crowning proof in the acts and words of this memorial night.] The Passover was approaching when he knew that he must suffer and die. The knowledge of his approaching sufferings did not destroy his interest in his disciples, but rather increased unto the end. Indeed all the sufferings that he endured were for the sake of these disciples— not the world.

He suffered all for them and his desire for their happiness increased as the end approached. This was said in view of what follows. 2 And during supper, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon’ s son, to betray him,—This is Thursday evening as is generally believed. On the day pre¬vious, Judas had bargained with the chief priests and elders to betray him. It was to be done in the absence of the crowds without strife or confusion. The Common Version reads: “ After supper” ; the Revised, “ During supper.” A better ren¬dering than either is the Bible Union Version, which renders it, “ Supper being served, ready to be eaten.” It was after it was served, ready to be eaten, knowing all things about to occur, after they had seated themselves at the table. Jesus arose and washed the feet of his disciples. [The fact that the devil put into Judas’ heart to betray Jesus does not exculpate or excuse Judas. It is true that Satan may cast darts of temp¬tation into the heart, but we need not allow them to rankle. We are not responsible for the evil thought suggested by the devil, but we are responsible for harboring it and acting upon it] 3 Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he came forth from God, and goeth unto God,—To understand this, we must look at the circumstances attending. It was the Passover to which no unclean person could approach. When the Jews came up to Jerusalem to observe the Passover, they purified themselves: “ Now the passover of the Jews was at hand: and many went up to Jerusalem out of the country before the passover, to purify themselves.” (10: 55.) These disciples of the Lord had thus prepared themselves when they came to the city of Jerusalem; but in passing to and from the city were liable to have their feet contaminated by the touch of something unclean, and to avoid this, after they approached the supper, their feet were washed. This was the occasion of the washing at this time, hence the language of Jesus to Peter: “ He that is bathed need eth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit.” (Verse 10.) They had been purified when they came to the city and now only needed the washing of the feet to be clean entirely so they could partake of the Passover supper. Another fact that should not be overlooked is that “ there arose also a contention among them, which of them was accounted to be greatest.” (Luke 22:24.) This was after they came to the table. The washing of one another’ s feet, it seems proba¬ble, gave rise to this contention.

The humbler should wash the feet of the greater was the rule among the Jews. While they were disputing over this and to reprove them for their untimely contention, Jesus prepared himself to wash their feet. This gives significance to Peter’ s language: “ Thou shalt never wash my feet.” While contending with his fellow disciples that some of them should do it, the emphasis was that Jesus should not. The presence of the basin and towels at the place indicate the correctness of this statement. [Here Jesus asserts anew his divinity and anticipates his ascension. He did not allow the treachery working in the heart of Judas to prevent him from doing what follows. He did not wash Judas’ feet in ignorance that he would betray him, but with full knowledge of it.] 4 riseth from supper, and layeth aside his garments; and he took a towel, and girded himself.—While they were contend¬ing who should wash the feet of the others, Jesus laid aside his outside robe and girdle as a servant does and tied the towel around his waist. 5 Then he poureth water into the basin, and began to wash the disciples’ feet, and to wipe them with the towel where¬with he was girded.—He then proceeded to perform the office of a servant. 6 So he cometh to Simon Peter. He saith unto him, Lord, dost thou wash my feet?—With whom he began it is not certain. It may mean, in beginning to do the work, he came to Peter first. If he did not begin with Peter, the one with whom he began seems to have made no remonstrance. This question of Peter, with the reply of Jesus, seems to show that he came first to Peter with water before he had washed any others. 7 Jesus answered and said unto him, What I do thou know- est not how; but thou shalt understand hereafter.—What Jesus did Peter did not now understand, but when he came to know the true spirit and mission of Jesus he would understand the significance of the service he rendered them. Connect with this the teaching recorded by Luke (Luke 22:24-27) in reproof of the strife as to who is greatest: “ And there arose also a contention among them, which of them was accounted to be greatest. And he said unto them, The kings of the Gen-tiles have lordship over them; and they that have authority over them are called Benefactors. But ye shall not be so: but he that is the greater among you, let him become as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve. For which is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at meat? but I am in the midst of you as he that serveth.” [This is not a mere foot washing, for then another and not I ought to have performed it. It is a symbol. Peter ought to have realized the meaning of these words, but, with his usual rashness, answers hastily.] 8 Peter saith unto him, Thou shalt never wash my feet.— Peter with his impulsiveness and promptness, in deciding and acting, told Jesus he could never submit to so dishonoring Jesus as to permit him to wash his feet. [He is stupid. He does not realize that Jesus must have a lofty reason. He only sees the humiliation of the Master he loves and he cannot bear it.] Jesus answered him, If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me.—This response of Jesus may have a deeper and more farreaching meaning than we are in the habit of seeing in it. If I wash thee not, if I cleanse thee not, thou hast no part with me. [Your part is submission to my will. It is not for you to question— only to obey. Make your choice, submission or exclusion.] The reply of Jesus had a double meaning. The question of purification was brought out again: If I purify you not, you have no part with me. While this literal washing was primarily referred to, the deeper significance of a spiritual purification was implied. (Revelation 1:5-6.) 9 Simon Peter saith unto him, Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head.—Peter with the same quick and decisive spirit asks him to wash his face and his hands also. [Here is the same Peter who rushes upon the water and a moment afterwards cries, “ I perish!” Who strikes with the sword and who takes to flight, who enters into the presence of the high priest and yet denies his Master. The loyalty of heart which was under all this insubordination speaks out here. If it is a question of union with thee, wash me completely. Consecrate my whole body. He still does not enter fully into the thought. He is imagining something efficacious in the physical act. [Peter, with his earnestness and impulsiveness, seeing his favor with Jesus depended on his being washed by him runs to the other extreme and asks him not only to wash his feet, but his hands and head also. “ Wash me all over,” in other words. 10 Jesus saith to him, He that is bathed—[He who has washed his whole body once for the day.] needeth not save to wash his feet,—[Which may have become soiled from the defilements of the road.] But since they had been purified and only the feet had been exposed to contamination, only the feet needed to be washed and the whole person was cleansed. but is clean every whit:—[In all other particulars. So he who, by earnestly attaching himself to Christ, has broken with sin once for all has no need at each particular defilement to begin anew this general consecration; he has only to cleanse himself from the stain by confession and recourse to Christ.] and ye are clean, but not all.—Here he gives a spiritual sig-nificance to his language and says that not only the body was clean, but they were all spiritually clean, save one, whom he knew would betray him. [There was one of the little crowd who had not spiritually bathed himself, to whom mere foot washing would do no good.] 11 For he knew him that should betray him.—Jesus already knew that Judas had bargained to betray him. therefore said he, Ye are not all clean.—After the service had been performed, he asked if they knew the significance of it. [By expressing in this way the grief which they thought his crime caused him to feel, Jesus makes a last effort to bring Judas to repentance. And if he does not succeed, he will at least have shown to his disciples that he was not the dupe of his hypocrisy. (Verse 19.)] HE ON THE WASHING John 13:12-2012 So when he had washed their feet,—[Peter therefore submitted, and his feet were washed with the rest.] and taken his garments, and sat down again, he said unto them,—[The object lesson is over. Now comes the explanation of its teaching.] Know ye what I have done to you?—[You know the literal act, but do you understand its significance, the spiritual application?] 13 Ye call me, Teacher, and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am.—They all recognized him as their Teacher and Ruler. [Jesus exalts his relationship to them in order that the lesson to be drawn from his act of humility may be the stronger.] The word “ Lord” has a distinct meaning, and in reading the word of God that meaning should be kept in mind. You call me your Ruler and Teacher. “ And ye say well [or rightly]; for so I am.” He had come from God to teach them. They had left all to follow him, as his servants and pupils. He im¬presses the relationship and his superiority upon them, for, without feeling this, they could not understand the lesson he was teaching them. 14 If I then, the Lord and the Teacher, have washed your feet, ye also ought to wash one another’ s feet.—I have per¬formed the office of a servant for you and you ought to do such acts for one another. 15 For I have given you an example,— He is enforcing on this occasion the great lesson of his mission—that the true end of the servant of God is to serve and not to be served, that men and angels will find their highest and best good in helping others. Man can bless himself only by blessing others. that ye also should do as I have done to you.—This washing of the feet was the cleansing that they might eat the passover supper. The special service could not again occur save on a similar occasion. As the Passover passed away or was swallowed up in Christ, our Passover, the same service might occur. But the principle taught in this by example was: let him that would be greatest be servant of all. There is nothing in this that could indicate a special ordinance or formal observance to be perpetuated in the church. The foot washing of both the Old Testament and the New were acts of helpful kindness when needed. [To take these words as a command to establish the church ordinance of foot washing, as some have done, is to utterly miss the spirit of the whole scene, and the great lesson it was intended to convey.] 16 Verily, verily, I say unto you, A servant is not greater than his lord; neither one that is sent greater than he that sent him.—If the Master could perform such acts for the servants, the servants should not object to doing it for one another. I send you— do not think you are better than I. If you are my servants, as you are sent by me, you should not feel yourselves above doing what I do; you should follow my footsteps and be led by the Spirit that moves me. 17 If ye know these things, blessed are ye if ye do them.—If they understood the lessons taught it would add much to their happiness if they would do them. The spirit that is willing to serve is one that will always bring happiness, and without which true happiness cannot be attained. A person that is always expecting and exacting deference will be unhappy. Seek to show deference, let such esteem others better than themselves, is the spirit that Christ inculcates and is one that will bring happiness in time and eternity. What will bring true happiness in time will also bring it in eternity and vice versa. Then if you have understood these things, you shall be blessed if you do them. The principle of helping the helpless, of weeping with those that weep, and of encouraging the lowly and encouraging the sinful to sin no more is the essential and fundamental spirit of Jesus Christ and his holy reli¬gion, and to cultivate the spirit and practice of doing good to others is the work that fits mortals for the home with him for¬ever. 18 I speak not of you all:—In these commendatory remarks he embraces all save Judas. I know whom I have chosen: but that the scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth my bread lifted up his heel against me.—He fulfilled the prophecy of Psa 41:9. The action of Judas fulfilled this scripture rather than he did it to fulfill it. The scripture foretold it because it would be done. 19 From henceforth I tell you before it come to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye may believe that I am he.—Jesus foretold the treason of Judas as of other things that would occur at once to prepare them for what would be done, and that after they came to pass as he foretold they would, they might see his divine foreknowledge and believe in him as the Son of God. 20 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth me; and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.—In connection with the assertion of his authority he tells them that those he might send out would go clothed with his authority as he was clothed with the authority of him who sent him, and the treatment given them and their message would be received as done to himself. [Those who received the apostles not only received the messengers of Christ, but Christ himself. To receive Christ would be to receive the Father who sent him.]

John 13:21-30 21 When Jesus had thus said, he was troubled in the spirit, and testified, and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.—After saying these things, his mind recurred to the treason of Judas, and the sufferings before him and this troubled him. Jesus had all the repugnance of a strong sensitive nature to suffering and he shrank from it, as his prayer “ remove this cup from me” indicates, and he repeats in sorrowful tones “ that one of you shall betray me.” 22 The disciples looked one on another, doubting of whom he spake.—The disciples, save Judas, did not know to whom he referred. So wondering and inquiring glances were exchanged in doubt as to whom he referred. There seems to have been nothing in the conduct of Judas heretofore that directs suspicion or attention to him as the person to whom reference was made, notwithstanding it had been said that he was a thief in carrying the bag. 23 There was at the table reclining in Jesus’ bosom one of his disciples,—It is said that the persons at the table reclined on couches placed around the table, each resting on the left elbow, leaving the right hand free for use. One in front of the other could easily turn the head and rest on the bosom of the person behind. whom Jesus loved.—John who is known as the beloved of Jesus occupied this position nearest Jesus. 24 Simon Peter therefore beckoneth to him, and saith unto him, Tell us who it is of whom he speaketh.—Peter, always prompt and forward in every case that arose, beckoned to John to ask which it was that should betray him. 25 He leaning back, as he was, on Jesus’ breast saith unto him, Lord, who is it?—[John complied with the request of Peter and asked, “ Who is it?” All innocent parties were interested in knowing who he was.] 26 Jesus therefore answereth, He it is, for whom I shall dip the sop, and give it him. So when he had dipped the sop, he taketh and giveth it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot.—He dipped the sop and gave it to Judas Iscariot and in this way pointed him out as the person. This exposed Judas to the disciples as the traitor. It let him know that Jesus knew that he had already bargained to betray him. 27 And after the sop, then entered Satan into him.—[Up to this time he had doubts and impulses to do better, but now he gives himself up wholly to Satan’s work. He was already under his influence, but now he plunges headlong into the bottomless pit.] Satan had entered into Judas and led him to go to the priests to bargain for his betrayal, now he enters to prompt him to put his purpose into execution. Jesus therefore saith unto him, What thou doest, do quickly.—The time had come and Jesus desired that what he did should be done and completed. [Judas was not fully exposed. Christ knew he had covenanted to betray him, and bids him do it at once. He desired the wicked deed to be done that night and for the traitor to leave the little band at once so that he might be alone to give a last charge to the faithful disciples.] 28 Now no man at the table knew for what intent he spake this unto him.—Those at the table did not understand the significance of the language. 29 For some thought, because Judas had the bag, that Jesus said unto him, Buy what things we have need of for the feast; or, that he should give something to the poor.—Judas kept the treasury that the apostles had, and out of it things were bought for the feast and the poor were helped. They expected something would be done promptly. There is difficulty in harmonizing all the facts connected with the Passover by Jesus. He had partaken of the Passover at this time, but he speaks of the feast yet future. Again on the next day the priests that accused Jesus did not go into Pilate’ s judgment hall “ that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover.” (18: 28.) This would imply that the passover was not yet eaten. Two explanations are offered for this.

One is that Jesus ate the passover at the appointed hour, but that throughout the week of the feast there were other meals to be eaten, and as no unleaven bread could be used during the week so all had to keep themselves clean for this eating during the week, and this language refers to some feasting at a later day of the week. The other theory is that Jesus ate the passover as is attested (Matthew 26:17-19; Mark 14:12-18; Luke 22:7-15), but that he ate it the evening before the regular time, and he himself was slain at the hour of slaying the paschal lamb, intended to typify the slaying of Jesus. This latter seems to me probable. He could not be slain at the time for slaying the passover lamb and eat the passover at the accustomed time too. He chose to die at the appointed hour and so was compelled to anticipate the time of eating it. 30 He then having received the sop went out straightway: and it was night.—Judas having been pointed out as the per¬son who should betray him and admonished to do it at once, immediately left the table and went out on his mission. JESUS HIS SPEEDY Joh_13:31-35 31 When therefore he was gone out, Jesus saith, Now is the Son of man glorified, and God is glorified in him;—Judas, leaving on this mission, brought more vividly to his mind that the time was now come for the tragedy that would end in his resurrection, ascension, and glorification at the right hand of God. He looks beyond the sorrows to this end. God would be glorified in glorifying Jesus. ’ [The hour has come and Jesus is about ready to go through his bloody pathway into the presence of his Father. The disciples will be left without him to meet the trials and persecutions of the earth. The time has arrived for him to pour forth the deepest feelings of his soul in their behalf. In the discourse that follows he comforts, consoles, instructs, and points them to the glory, power, and grace of their Lord. He strives as never before to reveal himself to the disciples so fully that every doubt of his divin¬ity shall pass away when the darkness and gloom that gathered around his tomb shall have been dispelled by a deep knowledge of his glory.] 32 and God shall glorify him in himself, and straightway shall he glorify him.—The glorification is mutual. God glori¬fies himself in exalting and glorifying Jesus. So Jesus is glo¬rified in glorifying those who honor him. 33 Little children, yet a little while I am with you.—He spoke to them tenderly because they were but children in their ignorance of what was before them. He had often told them that he must die, be buried, and rise the third day, but in their weakness and blindness they failed to take it in. Ye shall seek me: and as I said unto the Jews, Whither I go, ye cannot come; so now I say unto you.—He tells his disciples, as he had told the Jews before, that soon he would leave them and they could not come to him while he was absent. He would die, they would be scattered, and for a little while be in distress and doubt over their condition. [He would be in the grave and while there they could not come to him; but he comforts them by assuring them that he would come to them again.] 34 A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another;—This was given in anticipation of what would befall them. Moses had said unto them, “ Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” (Leviticus 19:18.) even as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.—Jesus introduced a higher order of love— a love that caused him to leave heaven, come to earth, and suffer and die for them. His disciples must partake of the same degree or measure of love, and give up earthly and temporal good for their spiritual and eternal good. [The commandment to love was not new, but such love as Jesus commanded was. This love demands that we give up all as Jesus did.] 35 By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.—By this self-denying love for one another, partaking of the love he manifested all men should know that they were his disciples. [The presence of such love does more than cause those who see it working in others to marvel. It points them to Christ as its author, for all must admit, when it shines forth in its excellency, that it is of heavenly origin. When it is fully exhibited men know that those who possess it are the disciples of Christ.] PETER’ S DENIAL John 13:36-38 36 Simon Peter saith unto him, Lord, whither goest thou? Jesus answered, Whither I go, thou canst not follow me now; but thou shalt follow afterwards.—[Peter does not yet comprehend the Lord’ s death. We now come to one of the saddest points recorded by John, that is, the last moments the Lord spent with his own before his suffering, a moment in which he speaks words full of tenderness and heavenly meaning. The Lord’ s way was to the cross, the sepulchre, the ascension, and to heaven. Peter might follow in due time, but the Lord had other work for him now. The Lord does not answer his question directly. Tradition says that Peter did follow Christ to the cross in death. He was also crucified.] 37 Peter saith unto him, Lord, why cannot I follow thee even now? I will lay down my life for thee.—Peter felt mortified by Jesus saying that they could not follow him now. He felt that Jesus had implied that they had not the courage and fidelity to follow him, and Peter really felt that he was ready to die for and with Jesus, and why could he not go with Jesus wherever he went. Peter was in this claiming the same love for Jesus that Jesus had for them. Peter was sincere and thought he was ready to die with Jesus, but he did not understand himself. He was rashly bold and courageous, but when the conditions called for discreet and patient endurance without display Peter failed. Jesus knew what was in Peter. He knew the good and he knew also his weakness. 38 Jesus answereth, Wilt thou lay down thy life for me? Verily, verily, I say unto thee, The cock shall not crow, till thou hast denied me thrice.—John refers to but one cock crowing. The other writers refer to two. There are two times for cockcrowing. At midnight the cock crows, but only a little. At three o’ clock in the morning the principal cock- crowing takes place.

When only one is spoken of as the cock- crowing, the three o’ clock, when the chief crowing occurs, is meant. When two are spoken of, both the twelve o’ clock crowing and the main one at three o’ clock are referred to. When Jesus said to Peter, “ The cock shall not crow, till thou hast denied me thrice,’’ he meant before the second or time for the main crowing, or as we would say, “ Before three o’ clock you will deny me.” When John says, “ The cock shall not crow, till thou hast denied me thrice,” he means the chief crowing of the cock will not take place till thou hast denied me thrice. Both mean you will deny me before three o’ clock. (“ The Lord reveals to him his weakness. It was then night. Before the cock shall crow for the dawn of the next morning he will have thrice denied his Lord.

For the fulfillment of this prediction, see Luke 22:54-60. Peter had bravely attempted to defend his Master with a sword when the company came, led by Judas, but when Christ was led away, he ‘ followed afar off.’ His courage was departing. First, in the hall of the high priest, he denied to the maidservant that he knew Christ, then a little while later he denied to another. About an hour later another said, ‘ Of a truth this man also was with him; for he is a Galilean.’ And Peter denied with oaths, declaring, ‘ Man, I know not what thou sayest.’ Just then the cock crowed for the approach of day.” ]

Verse 1 A dramatic break in the outline of this Gospel appears here. The previous chapters related to Jesus’ revelation to the chosen people who rejected him, and with significant overtones of revelation to the entire world. Beginning here, the narrative develops Jesus’ special revelation to the disciples who received him, despite the betrayal by Judas and Peter’s denial. This chapter details the washing of the apostles’ feet (John 13:1-11), the statement of Jesus’ purpose in the painful disclosures about to be made (John 13:12-20), the identification of the traitor (John 13:21-30), the new commandment (John 13:31-35), and the prophecy of Peter’s denial (John 13:36-38). This section, which begins here and extends through John 20, records the events of the final week, climaxed by the resurrection. Now before the feast of the passover, Jesus knowing that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world to the Father, having loved his own that were in the world, he loved them unto the end. (John 13:1) Before the feast of the passover … 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 (John 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 meal reclining (Matthew 26:20), which he would not have done had it been the passover. See my Commentary on Matthew, Matthew 26:19. Knowing that his hour was come … Christ was fully aware, throughout his ministry, of the Father’s ordering of all of his steps and was fully conscious that the moment of his offering upon the cross was at hand. He loved them unto the end … might also be rendered, “unto the uttermost.” See the marginal reading. The true meaning probably includes both thoughts. It was the great love of Jesus for his own that motivated his supreme act of giving himself up to die for the remission of sins.

Verse 2 And during supper, the devil having already put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, to betray him.The devil … The great protagonist of evil on earth is a person, called here the devil, and identified as Satan throughout the Bible. He is a being of supernatural power but is himself a creature and does not share control of the universe with God. Satan has the power to suggest and motivate evil deeds, as here; but this power is effective only in those souls who have consented to evil domination. Judas had already consented to sin and readily became the instrument of Satan through an act of his own volition. See my Commentary on Matthew, Matthew 4:2; 8:26,32; 112:29; 28:11,15. Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son … JUDAS Judas was named one of the Twelve by Jesus and, along with the others, was commissioned to “heal the sick and raise the dead” (Matthew 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,"[1] 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? See my Commentary on Matthew, Matthew 26:49. 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. The death of Judas and the disposition of the returned money are discussed in my Commentary on Matthew, Matthew 27:10, where particular attention is given to the alleged contradiction in the two accounts of Judas’ death. ENDNOTE: [1] Clarence Darrow, Autobiography (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1932), p. 76.

Verse 3 Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he came forth from God, and goeth unto God, riseth from supper, and layeth aside his garments; and he took a towel and girded himself.All things into his hands … The Lord was about to give an object lesson in humility, but it was given in full consciousness of his power and Godhead. John was more perceptive in his association of the Godhead of Jesus with the darkest hours of the Lord’s humiliation. Matthew mentioned “all authority” as belonging to Christ but associated it with the Great Commission (Matthew 28:18-20). Of course, both Gospels are correct. Riseth from supper … If this had been the passover, Jesus could not have eaten it reclining (Exodus 12:11). Jesus rose up from the reclining position customary at meals in those days, laid aside his outer robe, or garment, and girded himself with a towel, the clothing suggestive of a slave.

Verse 5 Then he poureth water into the basin, and began to wash the disciples’ feet, and to wipe them with the towel wherewith he was girded.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 footwashing 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 (Philippians 2:1-9).

Verse 6 So he cometh to Simon Peter. He saith unto him, Lord, dost thou wash my feet?Peter was certainly among them who coveted the position of “head man” in the coming kingdom; and the paradox of Jesus the Lord of life stooping to wash his feet was such an incongruous thing that Peter protested it.

Verse 7 Jesus answered and said unto him, What I do thou knowest not now; but thou shalt understand hereafter.The Lord was in the act of teaching an incredibly effective lesson in humility; but the full significance of it would not be realized by any of the apostles until long afterward.

Verse 8 Peter saith unto him, Thou shalt never wash my feet. Jesus answered him, If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me.Thou shalt never wash my feet … Peter was like many in all ages who suppose that certain kinds of work are demeaning; but, in this marvelous episode, the Lord dignified the work of a slave by taking the towel into his own hands. If I wash thee not … Here Jesus spoke of washing in a different sense. Unless Peter should be washed of his false pride and ambition, unless he should share in that ultimate cleansing of the soul that would result from Jesus’ sacrifice, thus being truly “washed,” he could have no part with Jesus.

Verse 9 Simon Peter saith unto him, Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head.Peter vacillated between extremes. He could walk on the water and then cry out a moment later for help. He confessed Christ but promptly assumed a stance of rebuking the Lord. He affirmed undying loyalty to Christ and denied him the same day. Here he first refused Jesus’ washing of his feet and then demanded to be washed all over. Some have explained this latter act as an over-enthusiastic submission to Jesus’ will, but there is more to it than that. Peter mistakenly thought that Jesus was still referring to the physical act of foot-washing, when actually he was referring to the spiritual cleansing so much needed by Peter and all of them.

Verse 10 Jesus saith unto him, He that is bathed needeth not save to wash his feet: and ye are clean, but not all.It is not necessary to construe the first part of this reply of Jesus as something mysterious and deep beyond human comprehension. It meant, “Only your feet need washing.” It is only at the end of this verse that Jesus left off speaking of physical things, the final clause being intended spiritually.

Verse 11 For he knew him that should betray him; and therefore said he, Ye are not all clean.Jesus’ thoughts in this incident are quite clear. While literally washing the disciples’ feet in order to teach them humility, the thought suddenly came to him: “This physical uncleanness is not really the big problem; it is their spiritual cleanliness which is needed.” For discussion of Judas Iscariot, see under John 13:2. The thought of their spiritual cleanliness, or rather uncleanness, encompassing the treachery of Judas and the denial of Peter, led to the painful revelation of those events later during the supper.

Verse 12 So when he had washed their feet, and taken his garments, and sat down again, he said unto them, Know ye what I have done unto you?In John 13:4, it was stated that Jesus laid aside his garments, and here that he took them again. This laying aside and taking again of his garments has been referred by some to the analogy of Jesus’ laying aside his eternal glory in order to enter human life and perform the act of human redemption, after which he resumed his eternal glory, thus making the incident of the foot-washing a figure of the salvation accomplished. The reading of rather lengthy discussions of this has failed, however, to persuade this student that any such analogy was intended. What the episode really meant, Jesus explained. “Do you know …” has the weight of “Do you really know the meaning of what I have done unto you?”

Verse 13 Ye call me Teacher, and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am.Lord … The use of this term by the apostles shows the exalted nature of their concept of Jesus Christ, thus hailing him as the divine ruler of life. The use of “Teacher” along with this title does not diminish the impact of it.

Verse 14 If I then, the Lord, and the Teacher, have washed your feet, ye also ought to wash one another’s feet.Jesus’ reversal of the two titles, placing “Lord” first, is significant, because it is as “Lord” that he must be confessed (Romans 10:9). This dramatically emphasized his humility in washing their feet. Menial service for one’s fellow Christians is taught by this example.

Verse 15 I have given you an example, that ye also should do as I have done unto you.This verse is the anchor of certain religious teachings which would honor as a continuing ordinance the ceremony of washing feet; but this was not a ceremony in any sense of the word. As Lipscomb noted: There is nothing in this that could indicate a special ordinance or formal observance to be perpetuated in the church. The foot washing of both the Old Testament and the New Testament was an act of helpful kindness when needed.[2]Footwashing was a social custom of those times, founded on the wearing of sandals and the prevalence of dusty roads; and at the time Jesus washed the disciples’ feet, it filled a definite need, a need no longer in existence and which, if feigned in some kind of ceremony, amounts only to play-acting. Certainly, the Lord did not say of this, as he said of the communion, “This do until I come.” No apostolic instructions have come down to us with reference to when, where, or how such a thing should be observed; and the fair conclusion is that it was never observed as any kind of a religious ceremony during the times of the holy apostles. Also, it is not amiss to point out that the ceremonial washing of CLEAN feet by some religious groups today bears no resemblance whatever to what the Lord did here. Paul instructed Timothy regarding the enrollment of widows on the list of the church’s charities thus: Well reported of for good works; if she hath brought up children, if she hath used hospitality to strangers, if she hath washed the saints’ feet, if she hath relieved the afflicted, if she hath diligently followed every good work (1 Timothy 5:10). In Paul’s words here, foot washing appears in a list of good works and on a parity with bringing up children and showing hospitality to strangers; and, until churches are willing to ceremonialize the other good works of this passage, it seems that they should also refrain from ceremonializing foot washing. Hendriksen said: No, he is not commanding the disciples to do WHAT he did; but he has given them AN EXAMPLE in order that they, of their own accord, may do as he has done …. Jesus has shown his humility under their very eyes.[3][2] David Lipscomb, A Commentary on the Gospel of John (Nashville: The Gospel Advocate Company, 1960), p. 210. [3] William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel according to John (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1961), II, p. 235.

Verse 16 Verily, verily, I say unto you, A servant is not greater than his lord; neither one that is sent greater than he that sent him.An expression similar to this was used by Jesus to show that his disciples would be hated and persecuted like himself (Matthew 10:24; John 15:20), and that the disciples of the Pharisees were as blind as their leaders (Luke 6:40). Tertullian made the words of this verse a mandate that no disciple might advocate a doctrine contrary to the teachings of the Lord, saying, “If Marcion be even a disciple, he is not yet `above his Master.’"[4] Here, Jesus taught that disciples should not hold themselves above performing menial tasks for each other. ENDNOTE: [4] Tertullian, De Fuge in Persecutione, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1951), Vol. IV, p. 119.

Verse 17 If ye know these things, blessed are ye if ye do them.It is not in the mere knowledge of sacred truth, but in the faithful obedience of it, that men are blessed. Taken alone, this verse might be interpreted as meaning that merely doing the truth would bless the doer; but such is not exactly the truth for knowing and doing truth bless them that are in the true fellowship with Jesus. One of the Twelve (Judas) was not in fellowship; and, therefore, Jesus promptly indicated the exception.

Verse 18 I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: but that the Scripture might be fulfilled, he that eateth my bread lifted up his heel against me.McGarvey paraphrased this thus: I do not speak of blessing you all, for there is one who shall never be blessed. His conduct does not deceive or surprise me, for I know those whom I have chosen whether they be good or bad.[5]That the Scripture might be fulfilled … Even the treachery of an apostle was prophesied in Psalms 41:9, which reads: Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, Who did eat of my bread, Hath lifted up his heel against me. Of the Twelve, only Judas carried the bag and sat next to Jesus at the table, even dipping his hand in the dish with him. The Psalm cited, therefore, has the effect of a positive identification of Judas as the traitor. There is no implication in this, that Jesus chose Judas for the purpose of the betrayal. God’s foreseeing future events imposes upon those events no necessity of happening, any more than a mortal’s knowledge of past events caused them to occur. ENDNOTE: [5] J. W. McGarvey, The Fourth Gospel (Cincinnati, Ohio: Standard Publishing Company, 1914), p. 651.

Verse 19 From henceforth I tell you before it come to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye may believe that I am he.The treachery of Judas and denial of Peter were events of such negative force that Jesus moved to protect his disciples against the impact which such actions would have upon their faith. The whole terrible ordeal of the trials, crucifixion, and death, was almost upon them; and the apostles were here schooled against the very worst that could happen. That I am he … Jesus never lost sight of the fact which he came into the world to establish, namely, that he was God appearing in human form, entitled to human worship and adoration upon the part of all who would enter into eternal life, and himself being the source of that eternal life. Even negative events like the betrayal and denial were laid under tribute to maintain and buttress the apostles’ faith, this being accomplished by the Lord’s accurate prophecy of them.

Verse 20 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth me; and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.The rejection of Jesus is the rejection of God. This was a constant theme of Jesus’ entire ministry, and it means that Jesus is God come in the flesh. It was probably reiterated here in the final hope that Judas might, even at that late hour, repent.

Verse 21 When Jesus had thus said, he was troubled in the spirit, and testified, and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me. The disciples looked one on another doubting of whom he spake.The prophecy had been quoted, along with the fact that a familiar friend would betray the Lord, and Jesus had taken the trouble to reveal his reason for the sad disclosure about to be made. Therefore, he would now become specific; the traitor would be singled out, and the sacred company would soon be rid of his presence. One of you shall betray me … was a shocking announcement. Each disciple seems to have found some sense of evil in his own heart; and they began to question, “Is it I?” (Mark 14:19). What a dark hour it was when the innermost circle of the Lord’s followers read the stain of sin within themselves and pondered the awful prophecy that one of themselves would betray him. A baleful doubting fell upon them all. He was troubled in spirit … No wonder the Lord was troubled. The agony approaching was more than enough to fill the soul with dread, even the soul of the Blessed; but there was also the problem of the Twelve. Could they stand the acid test they were about to endure? It was the hour of darkness and the powers of evil. All the powers of hell would surge to their zenith and the full tides of evil reach their flood upon the cross.

How could that little band, eating a last meal together in an upper room, overcome the gargantuan wickedness that would lay the Son of God in a tomb? How could they, without any of the sophisticated tools of wealth, education, and power, cope with the horrors about to be unfolded? The secret of their eventual triumph was disclosed in the first verse of this chapter, “He loved them to the uttermost!” That love proved to be motivation enough to overcome all human weakness. The troubling of Jesus’ spirit here gave way, later on, to his brimming confidence that evil would be defeated. “Be of good cheer; I have overcome the world” ( John 16:33).

Verse 23 There was at the table reclining in Jesus’ bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved. Simon Peter therefore beckoneth to him, and saith unto him, Tell us who it is of whom he speaketh.At the table reclining … According to the custom of the times, the guests surrounded the table, which was not an elevated platform at all, such as modern tables, but only a slightly elevated place, or only a covering placed on the floor. Each guest lay on his elbow, leaving one hand free for eating. In such a position, it was easy for one guest to whisper to another. Whom Jesus loved … This expression appears seven times in John, twice with reference to Lazarus and his sisters, and five times with reference to John himself. As Gaebelein said: John has been charged with egotism in speaking thus of himself; but the charge is unfounded. He wrote under the guiding hand of the Holy Spirit who put these words in his pen.[6]John had already stated in John 13:1 that the Lord loved all of his disciples “to the uttermost.” Simon Peter … used some kind of body language in his request of John, “beckoning” to him to find out who Jesus meant. Whatever the gesture was, John understood it. ENDNOTE: [6] Arno C. Gaebelein, The Gospel of John (Neptune, New Jersey: Loizeaux Brothers, 1965), p. 255.

Verse 25 He leaning back, as he was, on Jesus’ breast saith unto him, Lord, who is it?Jesus promptly complied with John’s relayed request from Peter. Matthew indicates that Jesus’ reply was addressed openly to all.

Verse 26 Jesus therefore answereth, He it is for whom I shall dip the sop, and give it to him. So when he had dipped the sop, he taketh and giveth it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot.Westcott and others speak of the custom of giving a sop to an honored guest, inferring from this that Jesus here made one last effort to reach Judas’ heart; but nothing like that is evident here. Jesus was identifying the traitor by an action often engaged in before, but not with the overtones of this situation. As soon as this was done, Judas knew that his identity was known to all but pretended that it was not true, saying, “Is it I?” Jesus told him plainly that it was indeed he (Matthew 26:25), and commanded him to “do quickly” what he had purposed to do (John 13:27).

Verse 27 And after the sop, then entered Satan into him. Jesus therefore saith unto him, What thou doest, do quickly.The entering of Satan into Judas at this time indicates an unusually malevolent entry; because Satan had been in Judas before, as for example, when he bargained for the thirty pieces of silver. Therefore, this indicates that Satan took possession of Judas permanently, in consequence of his judicial hardening, a fact suggested, and even demanded, by the fact of Jesus’ command for Judas to act quickly. Until this point, there had been hope for Judas; but, after Satan took him over, his descent into wretchedness and death was swift, dramatic, and irrevocable. The example of what happened to Judas here should give every person pause in the contemplation of evil. Once the die is finally cast and Satan claims possession of the soul, swift and inevitable destruction always ensues. Another example of this same ruthless destruction on the part of Satan is seen in the case of the demons being permitted to enter the swine (Matthew 8:32). What thou doest, do quickly … God will not always oppose the will of evil men. There comes the day when Balaam is commanded to “Go with the men” (Numbers 22:22), and Judas is ordered to get on with the betrayal. The sop … is repeatedly mentioned here and cannot fail to emphasize the triviality of Judas’ reward. It was a mere trifle, a financial sop, a mere handful of change that he received for betraying the Saviour.

Verse 28 Now no man at the table knew for what intent he spake this unto him. For some thought, because Judas had the bag, that Jesus said unto him, Buy what things we have need of for the feast, or, that he should give something to the poor.Here is final and certain proof that the meal eaten was not the passover; otherwise, it would have been impossible for some of the disciples to have thought that Judas was being dispatched on an errand to buy things needed for its observance. Or give something to the poor … This affords an indirect glimpse of the habit of charity practiced by the apostles under Jesus’ direction. The significance of this lies in the poverty of the group themselves. They, like Jesus, had nowhere to lay their heads, and sometimes they improvised lunch by plucking a few heads of wheat to eat as they crossed a field (Matthew 12:1); but, despite their own poverty, it was no unusual thing for them to give of their little store to those of even greater need.

Verse 30 He then having received the sop went out straightway: and it was night.The spiritual overtones of many of the expressions found in this Gospel are magnificent. See concerning “sop” under John 13:27. And it was night … What a commentary is this upon the situation confronting the Lord on this last night with his disciples before the crucifixion. The traitor was on the way to the high priest; within the hour, plans would be made for soldiers to take him; the Sanhedrin switched their strategy and would stage a formal trial, doubtless presuming upon what they hoped would be effective testimony from Judas; the Shepherd would be apprehended and the sheep scattered; suborned witnesses would spin their lies in exchange for temple gold; Caiaphas, who had already determined to kill Jesus, would pretend to be shocked and rend his priestly garments contrary to the law; and, for an hour, the wicked hypocrites would prevail. Even resolute Peter would falter under the questioning of a girl; and before the night ended runners would fan out over the dark city to summon a formal meeting of the Sanhedrin; which body would put out, so they thought, the Light of all nations; but instead they put out the Light of Jerusalem and plunged their city into a darkness from which it would not emerge for twice a thousand years. “And it was night!” He … went out … is another expression with connotations greatly in excess of the denoted fact that Judas left the sacred company. Sin always casts the sinner out. The parents of all living sinned and were cast out of Eden; Jacob sinned and lied against his brother and his father’s sightless eyes and went out that night to rest his head upon a stone; Gehazi sinned and lied to Elisha and went out a leper white as snow; the prodigal son sinned and lusted after the wine shops and bright, lights of the far country and went out from a loving father to be a swineherd; Peter sinned and denied the Lord and went out into the darkness to weep; Judas sinned and betrayed the Lord and went out to a suicide’s death and eternal infamy. On and on the record of sin repeats the monotonous tale, “Out, out, out …” Always out! And the present day is no exception. Sin enters men’s hearts, and then they go out: out from the homes of father and mother, out from the love of wife and child, out from the sacred fellowship of the church, out from the Bible school, out from the prayer meetings, out from the study of the word of the Lord, out from the tender devotions of the family, out from every decent and uplifting influence, out from hope and salvation; and, finally, when sin is done with the sinner, it casts him out into eternal darkness and remorse. When sin is permitted to have dominion over a man, his epitaph has already been written, “And he went out!”

Verse 31 When therefore he was gone out, Jesus saith, Now is the Son of man glorified, and God is glorified in him; and God shall glorify him in himself, and straightway shall he glorify him.Four times the verb “to glorify” appears in these lines; but why this shout of victory at the very moment the traitor was dispatched for the act of betrayal? John wished to stress that the sufferings and death of Christ were not forced upon Jesus by circumstances out of his control, but were in fact accepted and directed by himself throughout. It was the Saviour’s obedience to God’s will that glorified both himself and the Father with whom he was one. Far from cowering before the blackness of the gathering storm, Jesus sent the traitor to perform the act that would trigger its release. The storm would not come, as the Pharisees planned (Matthew 26:1-5), after the passover was ended, but in the midst of it; because Jesus, not the Pharisees, was the architect of those awful events. Jesus would be glorified in the fulfillment of his sacred mission of salvation; mankind would be redeemed; the prophecies reaching back to Eden would be vindicated and fulfilled; the head of Satan would be crushed; and the purpose of God from before times eternal would be realized in the events which Jesus had that very moment set in motion. And straightway shall he glorify him … The emphasis here is upon “straightway.” It is as though Jesus had said, “Now the purpose of all ages shall be realized; let it begin now; action!” Illustration: Winston Churchill thus described the moment of decision which launched the invasion of Europe: The hours dragged slowly by … conditions were bad … the weather experts gave some promise of temporary improvement on June 6th, but predicted the indefinite return of rough weather after that. Faced with the desperate alternatives of accepting the risk or postponing the attack, General Eisenhower, with the advice of his commanders, boldly, and as it proved, wisely chose to go ahead with the operation … At 4:00 A.M., June 5th, the die was irrevocably cast: the invasion would be launched on June 6,1944.[7]It was a long, long night for Eisenhower; but at the hour appointed he boldly commanded, “Let ’er rip!” This illustration is given for contrast. The Lord did not consult with advisors; there was no uncertainty as to the time; the issues were not in doubt; human experts were of no avail; only God could do what Jesus did; and there was never the slightest doubt that the operation would succeed. Jesus’ triumphant words were, “God is glorified!” Hendriksen observed that: Whenever we think of Christ’s sufferings, we never know what to admire most: whether it be the voluntary self-surrender of the Son to such a death for such a people, or the willingness of the Father to give up such a Son to such a death for such a people.[8][7] Winston Churchill, Closing the Ring (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1951), p. 630. [8] William Hendriksen, op. cit., II, p. 251.

Verse 33 Little children, yet a little while I am with you. Ye shall seek me: and as I said unto the Jews, Whither I go ye cannot come; so now I say unto you.Little children … is found nowhere else in the Gospels and was used here, perhaps, for the first time by the Lord. This tender address and the circumstances under which it was used endeared the words to John who made them a permanent part of his vocabulary (1 John 2:1; 1 John 2:12; 1 John 2:18; 1 John 2:28 etc.). As I said unto the Jews … See John 7:34 and John 8:21-22. In those instances, Jesus referred to the eternal impossibility of wicked men having fellowship with himself; but here he referred to the temporary separation of the Lord from the disciples by reason of his approaching death and departure to the heavenly world. As Hovey noted: In going to his Father through the dreadful pathway of death, he would enter upon a life distinct from the present, and inaccessible to his own in their earthly state. In view of this impending separation, he proceeded to enjoin them to love one another.[9]ENDNOTE: [9] Alvah Hovey, Commentary on John (Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, 1885), p. 277.

Verse 34 A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another; even as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples if ye love one another.THE NEW If this commandment had been merely a restatement of the Mosaic principle of loving one’s neighbor as himself, it would not have been new. The newness of it is implicit in the words, “even as I have loved you.” As Reynolds stated it: So a new type of love is given, as the Greek expositors generally have urged. There is a deeper intensity in this love than can be found in Moses’ “Love thy neighbor as thyself.” In that commandment which embraces the whole law, self-love is assumed and made the standard for the love of neighbor. The new commandment, on the other hand, is based on a new principle, measured by a higher standard than love of self. This is based on Christ’s love, which was self-abandoning and self-sacrificing love.[10]R. W. Frank stated that: In Christian thought, “God is love.” An everlasting, all-comprehensive, benevolent, and sacrificial love is held to be the very essence of God. This redeeming love was revealed in Christ who summed up the law and the prophets in the two-fold commandment of love.[11]In the earliest ages of the church, there seems to have been far more success on the part of Christians in obeying this commandment than in present times. The lack of love among Christians is a glaring weakness of faith today. Again from Reynolds: So long as this great power prevailed, the church made astonishing progress; when the so-called disciples of Christ began to hate and kill one another the progress was arrested. But thank God, “the new commandment” has always had marvelous power over the church of Christ.[12][10] H. R. Reynolds, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1962), II, p. 196. [11] R. W. Frank, Encyclopedia of Religion (New York: Philosophical Library, 1945), p. 453. [12] H. R. Reynolds, op. cit., II, p. 196.

Verse 36 Simon Peter saith unto him, Lord, whither goest thou? Jesus answered, Whither I go thou canst not follow me now; but thou shalt follow afterwards.Peter was determined to follow Jesus both to prison and to death, and there is no doubt of Peter’s sincerity. What he did not at that time realize was that the power to do such a thing is not resident in men but comes only from above. The access to such heavenly strength would come to Peter only after the victory of Jesus upon the cross had made it possible. In his reply, Jesus addressed Peter’s intentions, not his question, and pointed out (1) Peter’s present inability to follow the Lord, and (2) the full ability of Peter to do so after the enabling sacrifice on Calvary had been made.

Verse 37 Peter saith unto him, Lord, why cannot I follow thee even now? I will lay down my life for thee.Peter’s sincerity was so genuine that he could not understand why Jesus did not accept his intentions as fact. However, Peter had only mortal and imperfect knowledge of his own strength, whereas Jesus had full knowledge of all things; and Peter’s unwillingness to accept Jesus’ words revealed the weakness in Peter even in this moment of his boldest assertion of strength. His bold assertion of willingness to lay down his life for Jesus had a contradictory note in it, being squarely opposed to what Jesus had just said of his not being able now to follow Jesus. No disparagement of Peter’s love should enter our thoughts; because, before life was over, he would make good the promise here, a promise impossible for him to keep until later; but a promise he would nevertheless honor with his martyrdom.

Verse 38 Jesus answereth, Wilt thou lay down thy life for me? Verily, verily, I say unto thee, The cock shall not crow, till thou hast denied me thrice.This was the second bombshell detonated in that small company on the dark betrayal night. Not only Judas - but Peter would deny the Lord! The reason for so painful disclosures was given (John 13:19); and Jesus stressed such things to prevent the faith of the whole group from utter collapse under the sledge hammer blows that would fall during that tragic night. For extended study of Peter’s denial, see my Commentary on Matthew, Matthew 26:58.

Questions by E.M. Zerr For John 131. What hour was at hand? 2. It was before what feast? 3. Where did Jesus expect to go from this world ? 4. Describe his love for his own. 5. What was taking place among them? 6. Tell what the devil had done. 7. What did Jesus know? 8. What articles did he procure ? 9. From what did he arise to do this? 10. What did he now begin to do? 11. To which apostle does he come? 12. What did he observe Jesus doing? 13. And yet what did he not know? 14. Why did he protest? 15. How did he explain himself? 16. Who was not to benefit by this washing? 17. After the washing what did Jesus resume? 18. Repeat the lesson he gave from the washing. 19. What spirit was it meant to teach? 20. Tell how they might be made happy. 21. Whose heel was to be lifted against Jesus? 22. Why did he foretell it to the disciples? 23. What two must be received together ? 24. State the feeling of Jesus now. 25. What did he say? 26. Tell what the disciples then did. 27. What was their feeling? 28. Tell what one of them was doing. 29. What is said of him and Jesus? 30. State the request Peter made to him. 31. How did Jesus answer? 32. To whom did the answer apply? 33. What did Jesus bid him do? 34. How was this misunderstood? 35. Why did Judas leave the group? 36. What announcement did Jesus then make? 37. Who was to be glorified? 38. How long was he to be with the children ? 39. State the prediction he made to them. 40. Why was this to be so ? 41. What new commandment did he give them ? 42. To what example did he refer? 43. How would this affect others? 44. What question did Peter ask ? 45. He was told he could not do what ? 46. When could he do so? 47. What indicated his impatience ? 48. Tell what rash statement he made. 49. What was it supposed to accomplish ? 50. Repeat the prediction Jesus made.

John 13:1

1 This was the fourth and last Passover that Jesus attended after his baptism. Before the feast means just before, for the hour of his death was in sight; he was to die the next day. Loved them unto the end. Regardless of the many weaknesses the apostles had shown at various times, Jesus never wavered in his love for them.

John 13:2

2 This chapter corresponds with Luke 22:1-23 in most respects. There are some items of that last night given in Luke’s account that John does not give, and vice versa. The most significant difference being at the point when Jesus instituted his own supper. Not that any disagreement exists, but the items are more detailed in some accounts than in the others, and I shall comment on that when we come to verse 23. Until then the comments will be made on the verses in their order. Being ended is translated “taking place” by the Englishman’s Greek New Testament.

That is correct, for the passover supper was far from being ended when Jesus did the things that are recorded now. The devil having put. This was done when Judas saw what he called the “waste” of the precious ointment. (See the comments at Matthew 26:14.)

John 13:3

3 Jesus knew that the work his Father had given him to do was about done, and that he would soon return to Him from whom he had come into the world.

John 13:4

4 The garments Jesus laid aside were the outer ones that were worn over the closer-fitting ones next to the body. They were discarded for the time in order to give more freedom for the manual performance he intended to do.

John 13:5

5 A great deal of confusion has come upon the religious world over the subject of feet washing. I shall quote from Smith’s Bible Dictionary concerning this: “Washing the Hands and Feet. As knives and forks were not used in the East, in Scripture times, in eating, it was necessary that the hand, which was- thrust into the common dish, should be scrupulously clean; and again, as sandals were ineffectual against the dust and heat of the climate, washing the feet on entering a house was an act both of respect to the company and refreshing to the traveler. The former of these usages was transformed by the Pharisees of the New Testament age into a matter of ritual observance, Mark 7:3, and special rules were laid down as to the time and manner of its performance. Washing the feet did not rise to the dignity of a ritual observance except in connection with the services of the sanctuary. Exodus 30:19; Exodus 30:21.

It held a high place, however, among the rites of hospitality. Immediately that a guest presented himself at the tent door, it was usual to offer the necessary materials for washing the feet. Genesis 18:4; Genesis 19:2; Genesis 24:32; Genesis 43:24; Judges 19:21. It was a yet more complimentary act, betokening equally humility and affection, if the host himself performed the office for his guest. 1 Samuel 25:41; Luke 7:38; Luke 7:44; John 13:5-14; 1 Timothy 5:10. Such a token of hospitality is still occasionally exhibited in the East.”

John 13:6

6. The mere act of having his feet washed would not seem strange to Peter, but he was astonished that his Lord was going to do that for him.

John 13:7

7 What I do thou knowest not now. The customary practice of washing the feet, and the conditions that originated it, were known to Peter. (See the historical quotation at verse 5.) Hence we know that Jesus meant to teach a lesson aside from those facts, that would have a moral and spiritual significance.

John 13:8

8 Still seeing only the lowly service of hospitality in the act, Peter protested having Jesus wash his feet. This statement opened the way for Jesus to begin the lesson he intended by the performance. He introduced it by the assertion that such a protest was equivalent to rejecting the partnership with Him.

John 13:9

9 This suggested to Peter that he had missed the point of the whole performance, and that some great benefit was to be derived from his Lord that was not visible in the literal washing. With such a thought about it, he concluded he wanted even a fuller amount of the favor, and asked Jesus for a more general washing.

John 13:10

0 Jesus understood that Peter still had literal or material washing in his mind, although he seemed to expect some mysterious effects from it. He therefore made his first remarks from that standpoint, meaning that since they were normally clean in the main except their feet, those parts would need washing since they had just come in from a journey on foot. After saying that much on the material side of the subject, admitting them all to be clean in that respect, Jesus immediately added the exception that must be understood from the moral or spiritual standpoint, when he used the short phrase, but not all.

John 13:11

1 John explains in this verse what Jesus meant in the preceeding one. The act of Judas in betraying Jesus was planned by an unclean heart, and hence the Lord referred to him in this indefinite way as being unclean.

John 13:12

2 Jesus completed the feet washing while making the aforesaid speech, resumed wearing his outer garments, and again took his place at the table where the passover supper was still in progress. Set down is from , which Thayer defines, “To recline at table.” In old times people reclined while eating, at a table only a few inches higher than the floor. The diners would lie on their sides and rest the head on one hand while serving themselves with the other. They lay at a 45-degree angle with the table, which placed the head of one person virtually in the bosom of the one behind him, and in very intimate cases the two would be very near each other. This position explains how Jesus could wash their feet even while they were eating without disturbing them, and without getting into any inconvenient or unbecoming posture, as would have been necessary were they sitting at a modern table with their feet under it. It explains also how the woman could stand behind Jesus while he was eating (Luke 7:36-38). After Jesus had taken his place again at the table, he asked them if they knew what had been done; meaning whether they knew what it signified.

John 13:13

3 Master is from a word that means teacher, and Lord means a ruler. The apostles had recognized Jesus as having both of these functions over them.

John 13:14

4 As the world would look at the matter, each of the aforesaid qualifications would entitle a man to the services of others. Instead of assuming such a superior attitude, Jesus acted the part of a servant in performing a necessary though humble favor. He specified the washing of each other’s feet as an example of the kind of spirit they should manifest in their dealings with each other.

John 13:15

5 This verse is more general and shows Jesus intended his act to be an example of humility, a characteristic that had been wanting so many times in their conduct.

John 13:16

6 This verse is more teaching along the same line as the preceding ones. In the kingdom of Christ there are to be no great and small members as men count greatness.

John 13:17

7 This short verse contains a great principle that permeates the entire structure of man’s relation to God. No one can serve Him without knowing what will please Him, but even that knowledge is useless unless It is carried out in performance.

John 13:18

8 I speak not of you all. Jesus knew his lesson of humility would not benefit all of his apostles, for a man like Judas would not be influenced by anything that did not contribute to his selfishness. Jesus did not name the traitor, but cited a prediction about him that is in Psalms 41:9. Lifted up his heel is a phrase based on the ancient manner of reclining at table while eating. (See the comments at verse 12.) In that position a person could receive a morsel of bread from another, and at the same time make the personal attack against him with his heel.

John 13:19

9 This verse shows another instance where a prediction becomes an evidence after it is fulfilled. (See the comments at Luke 21:13.)

John 13:20

0 This verse teaches the relation between God, his Son and the apostles. They all are so connected in the divine plan, that no man can either accept or reject either part of the group, without doing the same thing to the others. Jesus taught this same great truth in Matthew 10:40, which was just after selecting his 12 apostles and was giving them their “first commission.”

John 13:21

1 Troubled is from the same Greek word as that in John 12:27, and the definition is the same in each place. However, the cause of His agitation in the present instance was the thought of being betrayed by one of the group at the table.

John 13:22

2 When Jesus announced in general terms that one of them was going to betray him, they each gave an inquiring look at the others. There was only one man among them who knew whom Jesus meant, and that was Judas the traitor.

John 13:23

3 The events of this last night, especially as they pertain to the Lord’s supper, are not all stated in any one of the Gospel records; neither are the accounts given in chronological order. Before going any farther with this chapter, the reader should see the notes at Matthew 26:20. I shall now comment on the verses here in their order. Leaning on Jesus’ bosom. This act is explained by the comments on verse 12, concerning the position of the body while eating. Whom Jesus loved. According to chapter 21:20, 24, this apostle was John. Jesus was human as well as divine, and had his personal friends as other men do. (See the comments at John 11:3.)

John 13:24

4 As John was nearest to Jesus, Peter made a sign to him that he should ask Jesus to point out the traitor.

John 13:25

5 John then asked Jesus direct whom he meant.

John 13:26

6 When Jesus answered John’s question Judas did not hear it. The answer was accompanied with the act of dipping a piece of bread in the dish containing the broth. He did this at the same time that Judas did, which was part of the sign to the other apostles, that answered their question of who was to be the betrayer. (See Matthew 26:23.) There was nothing strange in their both dipping into the dish at the same time. (See the comments about hands and feet washing at verse 5.) The unusual thing was that of giving the piece to Judas when he had already served himself with one. According to Matthew 26:25, when this act was done, Judas asked Jesus if it was he who was to betray him. Judas could not have asked the question for information, for he had already contracted with the chief priests to betray his Lord. But all of the others had asked the same question, and if he had kept silent, it would have been so conspicuous as to manifest his guilt.

John 13:27

7 Satan entered into him. Not that it was the first time (Luke 22:3), for he had previously made his agreement with the chief priests to betray Jesus. But Satan made another and more insistent demand that he carry out his wicked promise. Jesus knew all about it, and hence he added the words of the last sentence. It means the same as if Jesus had said: “Since you have determined to betray me, do not delay .to perform the act according to your agreement with the chief priests.

John 13:28-29

9 Need of against the feast. Not the passover feast, for that was a one-day affair, and it was about over at this time. But that day was followed immediately with seven more days of unleavened bread which was also called a feast (Leviticus 23:5-6). The apostles thought that possibly Jesus meant for Judas to go and attend to that matter, since he was their treasurer and handled the money. They had just learned that Judas was going to betray Jesus, but they did not connect that with the suggestion of Jesus about the promptness to be exercised by Judas.

John 13:30

0 Judas “took Jesus at his word” and went immediately out after receiving the sop. He went to the chief priests and obtained a band of men for his wicked use. Thayer defines this band as “a detachment of soldiers.” The sop was used as a part of the passover feast. Judas went out as soon as he had received the sop and never came back. The Lord’s Supper was instituted after the passover supper. (See the comments at Matthew 26:20.) From the aforesaid truths we will see that Judas was not present when the Lord’s supper was instituted.

John 13:31

1 Now is accommodative and means the time was at hand when the Son of man was to be glorified, referring to the scenes that were to end with the crucifixion. Glorified is from DOXAZO, which Thayer defines at this place, “To exalt to a glorious rank or condition.” The supreme sacrifice which Jesus was soon to make would exalt him to the highest rank of worthiness, for it would constitute Him the atoning sacrifice for the whole world. It would also glorify God since it was his Son who was to be given to the world in this great loving sacrifice. (See John 3:16.)

John 13:32

2 This means virtually the same as the preceding verse.

John 13:33

3 Little children was an endearing term, used to indicate the nearness that Jesus felt for his apostles. Ye shall seek me means that after Jesus was taken from them, the apostles would long for his presence again, because they would miss his loving counsel. They would not be able to follow him then (verse 36), because he was going to die soon, and they must remain in the world to do the work for their Master.

John 13:34

4 New commandment. The people of God have always been commanded to love each other, hence that was not what was new. But the motive for that love was new, namely, because I have loved you. This was not an arbitrary reason but a logical one. If I know that Jesus loves my brother, I would conclude that the brother was entitled to that love. And if he is good enough to obtain the love of the Master, surely he is good enough for the love of me who am only a fellow-servant of the Master.

John 13:35

5 Since such love as the forementioned is so different, then when men see it manifested between the apostles, they will take it to mean they are disciples of Jesus.

John 13:36

6 Peter was referring to the statement of Jesus recorded in verse 33. Jesus repeated the statement, then added that Peter would follow him afterwards. He said this with reference to the manner in which Peter would die. (See chapter 21:18, 19.)

John 13:37

7 Peter was always inclined to be rash and impulsive. In his eagerness to go with Jesus (wherever that was to be), he made this exaggerating assertion.

John 13:38

8 This prediction of Jesus is recorded in Matthew 26:34; Mark 14:30, and Luke 22:34. In some of the passages the prediction includes a few more details than the present one. There is a special feature of the fulfillment in Luke 22:61.