Is
Confession of Sin Necessary? John 13:1-11
We come to an entirely new
section of the Gospel of John. There is a major shift that takes place in the
thematic structure of the Gospel as John wrote, starting with this chapter. Up
to this point Jesus has been presenting His messianic claims to the entire
nation of
Up to this point we have seen
that the depths of God’s love has been evidenced in
the revelation of God in Christ. Notice it is an emphasis on grace in God
taking an action. Love is expressed in an action, not in terms of emotion or
sentiment or warm fuzzies. How do we know the love of
God? It is because it is objective in space-time history. He gave His unique
son to die on the cross. Paul echoes this in Romans 5:8 NASB “But
God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners,
Christ died for us.” We know God’s love only because we have the
self-revelation of God is words and sentences in rhe Bible. We don’t know God’s
love through some emotional experience, we know God’s
love because the Bible tells us about it. In fact, one theologian said that the
summation of everything in the Bible is “Jesus loves me, This
I know, For the Bible tells me so.” This is why we emphasise the teaching of
God’s Word.
In chapter thirteen Jesus is
going to teach some things in this chapter that tell us about the reality of
God’s love. What we have seen before is the revelation of God’s love in Christ
and now we have the explanation of the reality of the love of God, that this is
something divorced from emotion; it is not some inner feeling or warm fuzzy but
it is an objective revelation that God has told us. It is something concrete,
unchanging, immutable, something we can go to again and again to stabilise us
when we are going through emotional swings. Because of the turbulence in our
lives we can go to the never, never changing Word of God and read the promise
of God and know that our inner feelings and emotions can be stabilised by His
eternal, immutable truth.
In John 13:1-3 we see the
introduction to this section. John 13:1 NASB “Now before the Feast
of the Passover, Jesus knowing that His hour had come that He would depart out
of this world to the Father, having loved His own who were in the world, He
loved them to the end.
Twice John emphasises that
Jesus knows exactly what is going on. There is an emphasis in the first three
verses of Jesus’ sovereignty, divine control of human history. Jesus Christ
controls history. In the events that are going to take place here, if we read
this account looking at the introduction, we might think things are out of
control. Judas is going to betray Jesus and sell Him out to the Sanhedrin, and
poor Jesus. But what we see by John’s emphasis in these first three verses is
that Jesus knows exactly what is taking place, He is in complete control of the
situation, and everything is working itself out according to the plan and
purposes of God in fulfilment of prophecy from the Old Testament. So John is
telling us to be careful not to misinterpret what is going on here. We must
focus on the sovereignty of Christ knowing that he controls history and that
there are important things going on in this whole scenario as he begins to
teach the disciples the doctrinal principles that will govern their lives
during the new church age.
Verse 1 begins with a
temporal clause: “Now before the Feast of the Passover.” It begins with a
conjunction, de [de], a transition, simply a now clause. Then a temporal clause introduced
by the preposition pro [pro]. There is a problem here. Clearly the preposition indicates that the
feast itself has not begun, and for that reason some people think what this
means is that this is before the feast takes place. The 15th of
Nisan begins at sundown and extended to sundown the next night, so they had to
have the sacrifice of the Paschal lamb on the afternoon of the 14th.
The first day or the 15th is really the beginning of a long feast
that lasted eight days called the Feast of Unleavened Bread. This is important
because it is an Old Testament feast and everything in the Old Testament feasts
was designed to teach certain things through a very concrete visual method
doctrine about the person and work of Jesus Christ. That is what is called
typology, and typology simply means that there are certain things that mirror
ultimate fulfilment in the life of Christ. Just as a lamb was taken and roasted
on the fire for the Passover meal that was to tell certain things about Jesus
in His sinless humanity. So every aspect of this is very important for what it
reveals and what it displays.
The conundrum here is that
some people think that “before the Feast” means that the dinner here is not the
Passover meal. But it is clearly the night before He goes to the cross. If we
compare that with what is going on in the Synoptic Gospels this clearly
portrays this meal as a Passover meal. The problem chronologically is that we
have sunset to sunset of the 14th, sunset to sunset on the 15th,
and if the Passover meal is just after sunset on the 15th and Jesus
is crucified in the afternoon of the 14th and the night before He
has a meal, how can this be the Passover? Because the lamb
that they ate for a Passover meal was required by law to be sacrificed under
certain conditions in the temple precincts on the 14th. So
there is a chronological problem is to die on the cross in fulfilment of Old
Testament types. Between
So far in verse 1 what is
basically being said is that Jesus knew that His time had come. So before this
time, before the 14th, Jesus was fully aware of the significance of
all these events and he knows on the afternoon of the 14th He is
going to be going to the cross. What John is telling us is that because Jesus
knew that His time was up and that He would depart out of this world, John
says: “…, having loved His own who were in the world, He loved them to the end.
There are fourteen reasons why this must
be a Passover meal
1) Matthew, Mark and Luke specifically state that this is
a Passover meal. Matthew 26:2, 17-19; Mark 14:1, 12-16; Luke 22:1, 8, 13, 15.
2) It follows the procedures and policies that are stated
in the Mosaic Law in Deuteronomy 16:7. It takes place within the walls of
3) The upper room was clearly made available to them in
keeping with the Passover custom.
4) The meal is eaten at night. Normally the Jews wouldn’t
eat a major meal at night, so this, too, indicates that there was something
special about this meal. Matthew 26:20; Mark 14:17; John 13:30; 1 Corinthians
11:23.
5) In custom with the standard operating procedure of the
Passover meal Jesus limited Himself to a rather small group of the twelve
rather than eating with a larger group.
6) They ate in a reclining posture. A reclining posture
was reserved for special occasions.
7) The meal followed the Levitical ritual purification
procedures.
8) Jesus broke the bread during the meal rather than at
the beginning of the meal. Matthew 26:26; Mark 14:22.
9) They drank red wine which was also a sign of a special
occasion.
10) Some of the disciples thought that Judas left to purchase
items for the feast or perhaps to take money to the poor (they didn’t hear the
interchange). If it was to purchase items that would indicate that he couldn’t
do it the next day.
11) Some of the disciples thought that Judas left to give
money to the poor, which was another custom observed on the Passover. John
13:29.
12) The meal ended with the singing of a hymn, which was
typical of a Passover meal. They always ended by singing Psalm 118.
13) Jesus did not return to
14) The use and interpretation of the elements in terms of
the Lord’s table was in keeping with the Passover
ritual.
So for these fourteen
reasons it becomes clear that this meal is a Passover meal. How do we harmonise
this chronologically? John
1) That Jesus just simply eats the Passover meal early.
That, however, would be impossible because the Passover lamb had to be
slaughtered within the temple precincts and therefore no Passover lamb would
have been slaughtered yet.
2) Jesus and His disciples followed the calendar of the Essenes who lived down at
3) The Pharisees and the Sadducees operated on two different
calendars. With the Pharisees the Passover would be celebrated one night and
the Sadducees had a calendar that said the 14th and the 15th
is the next night.
4) The best solution is that they computed their days
differently. One way to divide time is from midnight to midnight, the Gentile
way, the Roman calendar way. Then the Judeans figured it from sunset to sunset,
Exodus 12:18. Then there is a Galilean calendar that ran from sunrise to
sunrise. This we see from Matthew 28:1 where it says the women came to the tomb
late on the Sabbath “as it began to dawn toward the first {day} of the week.”
So they are coming early in the morning just before dawn and it is called “late
on the Sabbath.” So 5am, or what we would call Sunday,
is still Saturday. Sunday didn’t begin until the sun came up. So obviously some
were operating on a different calendar system. The best solution to the problem
is that both of these were in operation during Jesus’ time. The Galileans and
the Pharisees operated on a sunrise to sunrise calendar. It tells us that
according to a Galilean calendar—and Jesus is with His disciples who are all
Galileans—their day starts at sunrise, so they would eat the Passover meal
legitimately based on their calendar on one night and the Judeans and the Sadducees
were operating on a completely different calendar and would observe Passover
the next night.
John 13:2 NASB
“During supper, the devil having already put into the heart [kardia] of Judas Iscariot, {the son} of Simon, to betray Him,
John
13:4 NASB “got up from supper, and laid aside His garments; and
taking a towel, He girded Himself.”
We know that the Roman soldiers gambled for His robe. He has on a very
expensive, tailor made garment. It is a seamless garment, one of the most
expensive suits he could have worn at the time. By stripping down to His
undergarments and just taking this towel and wrapping it about Him He is
dressing now, instead of an aristocrat with this expensive garment on, as the
lowest of the slaves. The rabbis would have various disciples and the disciple
of a rabbi would do almost anything for the rabbi except, according to the
Mishnah, was feet. This is so demeaning that the Jewish households would hire Gentile
slaves to do the foot-washing. No Jew would wash the feet of another Jew. So
Jesus is taking on the form and the function of a servant.
This is a portrayal not
just of being a simple servant and of love for one another, it goes far beyond
that. He is showing the specifics of how He is going to do this on the next
day. John 13:5 NASB “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.” Then He comes to Simon Peter, probably the last one He came to, and
Peter in his typical stubborn manner says: [6] “Lord, do You
wash my feet?” That is, there is no reason for you to be washing my feet. [7] “Jesus
answered and said to him, ‘What I do you do not
realize now, but you will understand hereafter’.” Notice: “said to him” is 3rd
person singular pronoun. He, Jesus, said to him, Peter. He is talking to one
person; He is not talking to anybody else. The point is, “What I am doing,”
present active indicative, “you do not know now,” at this immediate time. In
other words, Right now you don’t understand this; it is important and you will
understand it in the future.
John 13:8 NASB “Peter
said to Him, ‘Never shall You wash my feet!’…” Peter
is emphatic, he uses a double negative in the Greek and he intensifies that by
using the word a)iwnoj which is the word for eternity: You will not ever,
for all eternity, wash my feet. The Lord answers: “… Jesus answered him, ‘If [3rd
class condition] I do not wash [nipto] you, you have no part with Me’.”
For “wash” He uses the word nipto
[niptw]. The word “part,” meros
[meroj] also indicates portion of inheritance. It is doubtful
that He is talking about salvation here to Peter at this point. There is a hint
here. He is going to use two words for washing, nipto
and louo [louw]. luo indicates
bathing, full washing, a bath; nipto
can mean just a partial washing, like washing the feet or the hands. Bathing, luo, indicates salvation phase one; nipto indicates forgiveness of phase two
sins, cleansing, use of 1 John 1:9. Portion would indicate inheritance in the
kingdom. So Jesus is saying Peter is going to forfeit his position in the
kingdom—not salvation but position in the kingdom—if He doesn’t wash him.
John 13:9 NASB “Simon
Peter said to Him, ‘Lord, {then wash} not only my feet, but also my hands and
my head’.” In other words, give me a bath; let’s go the whole way. Then the
Lord has to straighten him out again and this is where everything comes
together. [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.}’” The
word “bathed” is louo, perfect
middle participle, meaning the one who has bathed in the past with results that
go on. That is the emphasis of the perfect tense. LUO is talking
about complete washing as opposed to nipto
which is partial washing. So Jesus says that he who has been bathed needs only
to wash to be completely clean again. Why? Because everything else has already
been cleansed and now the feet need to be cleansed again because you have been
out walking around and they have become dirty. “…and you [all] are clean,”
plural. He was talking to Peter; now He is talking to all the disciples. And He
means completely clean because He uses the adjective holos [o(loj]
which means whole or complete.
The word “clean” is katharos [kaqaroj] which means to be ritually clean or purified. It
used is two senses, alone and with the adjective “complete.” What this means is
complete cleansing = justification, phase one salvation. When it is just used
without the adjective to modify a whole it is referring to cleansing from sin,
post-salvation confession, cleansing from sin. “…but not all {of you.}’” Jesus
begins in verse 7 with a conversation solely to Peter, as expressed through the
second person singular pronouns and verbs, but by the end of verse 10 Jesus is
saying something about the entire group: that they are all completely clean but
not everyone in the group is completely clean, completely clean meaning saved. At
least one of them is not holos katharos,
wholly clean.
holos
katharos is a designation of salvation,
not a designation of simple forgiveness of sin. So the point is that this
indicates that at least one person of the twelve has not been wholly cleansed,
is not a believer. “He who has bathed needs only to wash his feet, but is
completely clean; and you are clean, but not all {of you.}” John
In the Old Testament in
Exodus 29:4 we are told about the consecration of Aaron to the priesthood. When
Aaron and his sons were dedicated to the priesthood they were to be washed. “Then
you shall bring Aaron and his sons to the doorway of the tent of meeting and
wash them with water.” This is one of the few times in relationship to the
priesthood that there is this Greek word louo
used in the Septuagint. It was used of the cleansing of the priest to initiate
his ministry. It was complete bathing so they used LOUO. Then when
it came to his ritual cleansing every time he went into the temple, when all he
did was wash his feet and his hands, they used nipto.
Everything that Jesus is saying here in John 13 has to do with the complete
grace provision of God. God has provided our salvation but His grace does not
stop there. God knows that after salvation we are going to commit numerous
sins, but the blood of Jesus Christ (1 John 1:7) continually cleanses us from
our sins. That means we cannot lose our salvation.
This is what Jesus is
teaching the disciples here. He is teaching them about God’s love, that He has
provided everything the believer needs in life. The whole act of foot-washing
here is not simply to show that we are to serve one another but that God has provided
everything for forgiveness. That is why when Jesus comes back and talks about
this it is not just talking about serving. John