Expositor's Bible Commentary Commentary John 13

The full Johannine account of the Passion begins at this point. John alludes to the nearness of the Passover as if to remind his reader that Jesus had been introduced by John the Baptist as the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (1:29). As the first Passover had been the turning point in the redemption of the people of God, so the Cross would be the opening of a new era for believers. John connects this with the manifestation of Jesus’ love for “his own” (i.e., his disciples), a love that has no limits. Jesus had accepted the responsibility for them and was obliged to instruct and protect them (17:6–12).

Whether this meal was the actual Passover or not has been warmly debated. It seems to have occurred on the same night as the arrest and betrayal. If so, it was presumably Thursday night, and the Crucifixion occurred on Friday. John stated later (18:28) that the Jewish delegates could not enter Pilate’s hall on Friday morning because they would be defiled and unable to eat the Passover. In that case, the Last Supper must have preceded the Passover by twenty-four hours. If, then, the Passover began on Friday night, the meal that took place on Thursday night would not have been the standard Passover Feast. The question is complicated by the fact, however, that the Synoptics imply that Jesus did intend to eat the Passover with his disciples (Matthew 26:17–20; Mark 14:12–17). No mention is made of the Passover lamb, however.

Of all the suggestions regarding this problem, two are plausible. (1) Two calendars were in simultaneous use: one national group, using one calendar, ate the Passover on Thursday night whereas the other group, using the other calendar, ate the Passover on Friday night. (2) Jesus, having been repudiated by the priesthood and consequently considered apostate, would not have been allowed to obtain a lamb for sacrifice and would have been compelled to celebrate the feast at a different time. Whatever solution may be accepted, it seems clear that Jesus did celebrate the meal with his disciples on Thursday night, that the hearing before Pilate and the Crucifixion took place on Friday when the other Passover lambs were being sacrificed, and that his body was placed in the tomb before sunset late that afternoon.

The focus of action in this section lies in Jesus’ washing the feet of the disciples. By this time, Judas had already determined to betray Jesus. His specific motive is not stated, and the impulse is attributed to Satanic suggestion. In other words, the conflict was basically actuated by a rebellion against God. It is possible that Judas, realizing that Jesus’ enemies were implacably hostile and were politically powerful, concluded that Jesus was doomed to lose in the struggle and so decided that he might as well gain immunity from sharing Jesus’ fate. Furthermore, he could compensate himself by claiming the reward for betrayal. His act, however, was more serious than an incidental piece of treachery; he sold himself to the power of evil (cf. v.27).

John emphasizes the fact that Jesus was not the innocent victim of a plot, unaware of what was transpiring around him. Rather, he was fully aware of his authority, his divine origin, and his destiny. John says much more about the inner consciousness of Jesus than the Synoptics do, either because he was more observant or because Jesus confided in him.

The immediate situation was that they had come to the banquet room directly from the street. Ordinarily on such an occasion the host would have delegated a servant to the menial task of removing the sandals of the guests and washing their feet. Since the meeting was obviously intended to be secret, no servants were present. None of the disciples was ready to volunteer for such a task, for each would have considered it an admission of inferiority to all the others (cf. 1:27).

Sometime during the meal Jesus rose, removed his outer cloak, tied a towel around his waist, and began to perform the work of the servant who was not present. It was a voluntary humiliation that rebuked the pride of the disciples. Perhaps it accentuated the tension of the situation, because Luke notes that when the disciples entered the room, they were arguing about who among them would be the greatest in the kingdom of heaven .

John emphasizes the fact that Jesus was not the innocent victim of a plot, unaware of what was transpiring around him. Rather, he was fully aware of his authority, his divine origin, and his destiny. John says much more about the inner consciousness of Jesus than the Synoptics do, either because he was more observant or because Jesus confided in him.

The immediate situation was that they had come to the banquet room directly from the street. Ordinarily on such an occasion the host would have delegated a servant to the menial task of removing the sandals of the guests and washing their feet. Since the meeting was obviously intended to be secret, no servants were present. None of the disciples was ready to volunteer for such a task, for each would have considered it an admission of inferiority to all the others (cf. 1:27).

Sometime during the meal Jesus rose, removed his outer cloak, tied a towel around his waist, and began to perform the work of the servant who was not present. It was a voluntary humiliation that rebuked the pride of the disciples. Perhaps it accentuated the tension of the situation, because Luke notes that when the disciples entered the room, they were arguing about who among them would be the greatest in the kingdom of heaven .

John emphasizes the fact that Jesus was not the innocent victim of a plot, unaware of what was transpiring around him. Rather, he was fully aware of his authority, his divine origin, and his destiny. John says much more about the inner consciousness of Jesus than the Synoptics do, either because he was more observant or because Jesus confided in him.

The immediate situation was that they had come to the banquet room directly from the street. Ordinarily on such an occasion the host would have delegated a servant to the menial task of removing the sandals of the guests and washing their feet. Since the meeting was obviously intended to be secret, no servants were present. None of the disciples was ready to volunteer for such a task, for each would have considered it an admission of inferiority to all the others (cf. 1:27).

Sometime during the meal Jesus rose, removed his outer cloak, tied a towel around his waist, and began to perform the work of the servant who was not present. It was a voluntary humiliation that rebuked the pride of the disciples. Perhaps it accentuated the tension of the situation, because Luke notes that when the disciples entered the room, they were arguing about who among them would be the greatest in the kingdom of heaven .