Judas Is as Judas Does, Part 3 - Oct. 30th, 2022
John 13:6–11 KJV 1900
6 Then cometh he to Simon Peter: and Peter saith unto him, Lord, dost thou wash my feet? 7 Jesus answered and said unto him, What I do thou knowest not now; but thou shalt know hereafter. 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. 9 Simon Peter saith unto him, Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head. 10 Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all. 11 For he knew who should betray him; therefore said he, Ye are not all clean.
Introduction:
Eric Liddell, Scottish Missionary to China once said, “Circumstances may appear to wreck our lives and God’s plans, but God is not helpless among the ruins. Our broken lives are not lost or useless. God’s love is still working. He comes in and takes the calamity and uses it victoriously, working out his wonderful plan of love.”
Both Peter and Judas are on a collision course with losing everything for their eternity. One will make it, the other will not. One will submit to let Jesus be his pilot, the other will be driven off the proverbial cliff by Satan.
The raw material of a devil is an angel bereft of holiness. You cannot make a Judas except out of an apostle. The eminently good in outward form, when without inward life, decays into the foulest thing under heaven. You cannot wonder that these are called “perilous times,” in which such characters abound. One Judas is an awful weight for this poor globe to bear, but a tribe of them must be a peril indeed. Yet, if not of the very worst order, those are enough to be dreaded who have the shadow of religion without its substance. Of such I have to speak at this time: from such may God give you grace to turn away! May none of us ever be spots in our feasts of love, or clouds without water carried about of winds; but this we shall be if we have the form of godliness without the power thereof.
I hope to lead you today to dedicate/rededicate yourself and all the resources under your control (time, talent, and personality, etc.) to Jesus.
Jesus wants to cleanse you for service now, so He can reward you afterward.
1. We may not fully understand what Jesus does in our life sometimes to get us where He wants us to be.
2. Learn to trust Him; failure to do so means missing out on your “part” with Him.
3. Jesus wants you whole; Satan wants you partial.
More specifically, I want you to do three things: first, learn to trust Jesus for every unknown; second, submit your WHOLE self to Him for cleansing so you can serve Him ONLY; thirdly, I want you to leave today whole, don’t be a Judas!
Dirty Jobs
A popular cable television show with a different twist is Dirty Jobs (and its later version, Somebody’s Gotta Do It). In each episode of this show, the host finds himself embedded in a job circumstance that includes disgusting or dangerous elements. Situations have included sewer inspector, pig farmer, hot-tar roofer, bat guano collector, roadkill cleaner, and sausage maker.
There are many dirty jobs in our world. The circumstances of these jobs make a difference in our willingness to tackle them. But when we consider a job to be below us, are we really honoring Jesus?
Washing and Death
It is commonly agreed that Jesus’ act of washing his disciples’ feet represents a prefiguration of the cross.[332] This is probably indicated by the double entendre involved in loving his disciples “to the end” and its temporal context in John 13:1,[333] and by the “laying aside” and “taking” in v. 4 (cf. John 10:18).[334] But it is more explicit in Jesus’ explanation of the act, which merges into an announcement of the betrayal (John 13:11–30)[335] and of his going away to glorification (John 13:31–38). To call his disciples to follow his example of service (John 13:14–16) and love (John 13:34–35) was to summon them to lay down their lives for one another; the commandment was “new” (v. 34) not because love was a new commandment (cf. Lev 19:18), but because the model to be followed (“as I have loved you,” i.e., in the cross) was new.[336] Such unity would be necessary to stand in the face of the “world’s” hostility which the community was facing (John 15:18–16:4), which made the apostasy of secessionists (cf. John 15:6) all the more grievous.[337]
Those who were truly part of the community were already clean (John 13:10; 15:3; cf. Rev 7:14; 1:5 [v.1.]), but needed to continue to be cleansed (pruned, John 15:2, is καθαίρει; cf. John 13:10; 1 John 1:7, 9). To continue to be cleansed meant to continue to abide in Jesus the vine, and thus in the community with the true Christology (John 15:4),[338] the community united by the fruit of love for one another (John 15:5–14; cf. John 15:8 with John 13:35).
As we observe these three dialogues between Peter and Jesus as John’s presents to us the necessity of Jesus’ cleansing of His disciples, first consider,
I. Peter Perplexed & Jesus’ Promise (John 13:6-7)
A. Lord, What Are You Doing? (John 13:6)
John 13:6 KJV 1900
6 Then cometh he to Simon Peter: and Peter saith unto him, Lord, dost thou wash my feet?
It is not difficult to imagine Simon’s temperament in those early days. As a disciple, he was liable to burst out with strong expressions of feeling (e.g. John 13:6–9; Matthew 26:33), and naturally became the leader of the whole group. He is named first in every list of the apostles, and acted as their spokesman (e.g. Matthew 16:15f.). We can picture him as a young, hot-headed northerner with a turbulent disposition. It is all the more significant, therefore, that Jesus nicknamed him “The Rock.” This impulsive youth would become the solid and stable foundation on which the church would be built (Matthew 16:18). . . . This proved a remarkably difficult lesson for Simon to learn. His first reaction to Jesus’ prediction of suffering and death was horror and denial. The Messiah could not be killed. He had surely come to reign, not to die. So he blurted out,
Matthew 16:22 KJV 1900
22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.
[or,] “Never, Lord! This shall never happen to you!” (Matthew 16:22). But Jesus’ response was even more abrupt, in fact almost violent:
Matthew 16:23 KJV 1900
23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.
It was a temptation to Jesus to think that he might be a Messiah of the sort that Peter wanted—victorious, reigning, exalted. The disciple who had just been the recipient of the Father’s revelation had become the object of the devil’s deception. For Jesus had not come to drive the legions of Rome out of the Promised Land; he had come to die for the sins of the world. The way to his throne was up the steep hill of Calvary. He must suffer before he could enter into his glory; the price of his crown was a cross.
But Peter could not understand and would not revise his prejudices. Only a week later he saw Jesus transfigured, clothed in his real glory, and his prejudices must have been confirmed—even though he heard Jesus talking with Moses and Elijah about,
Luke 9:31 (KJV 1900)
. . . his decease which he should accomplish at Jerusalem.
and even though Jesus repeatedly spoke of his coming suffering and death (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33f., Mk. 10:45).
Mark 8:31 KJV 1900
31 And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.
Mark 9:31 KJV 1900
31 For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the third day.
Mark 10:33f KJV 1900
33 Saying, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests, and unto the scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles: 34 And they shall mock him, and shall scourge him, and shall spit upon him, and shall kill him: and the third day he shall rise again.
Mark 10:45 KJV 1900
45 For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.
So, when the time came, Peter tried to resist. In the upper room, he at first would not let his Lord do the work of a slave and wash his feet (John 13:6–8). In the garden of Gethsemane he resisted the arresting party: he drew his sword, lunged out in the darkness, and slashed off the ear of Malchus, the high priest’s servant (John 18:10).
John 18:10 KJV 1900
10 Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest’s servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant’s name was Malchus.
He could not let the King be arrested without a fight! But he must have felt frustrated and puzzled by Jesus’ response to his heroism:
John 18:11 KJV 1900
11 Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?
. . . Yes, one day this Prince will act to save his people and to judge the world (Acts 3:19–21; 10:42), but there is no need for his followers to draw swords. All they need to do is to wait—and bear witness.
So the impulsive apostle who first defended, and then denied, his Lord stood undaunted before the Sanhedrin, and submitted humbly to cross-examination. He was flogged and imprisoned. He slept the evening before expected execution (Acts 12:6).
Acts 12:6 KJV 1900
6 And when Herod would have brought him forth, the same night Peter was sleeping between two soldiers, bound with two chains: and the keepers before the door kept the prison.
And if tradition is to be believed, he finally died his Master’s death, being crucified in Rome during the persecution unleashed by the emperor Nero (compare John 21:18f.).
John 21:18f KJV 1900
18 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. 19 This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me.
Simon’s old fiery, fighting spirit was replaced by Peter’s new and living hope. Like his Master, he would come to glory through the cross.
B. Not Yet Perceiving; Afterwards Understanding (John 13:7)
John 13:7 KJV 1900
7 Jesus answered and said unto him, What I do thou knowest not now; but thou shalt know hereafter.
The differences between ginosko (No. 1) and oida demand consideration: (a) ginosko, frequently suggests inception or progress in “knowledge,” while oida suggests fullness of “knowledge,” e.g., John 8:55, “ye have not known Him” (ginosko), i.e., begun to “know,” “but I know Him” (oida), i.e., “know Him perfectly”;. . . John 13:7, “What I do thou knowest not now,” i.e. Peter did not yet perceive (oida) its significance, “but thou shalt understand,” i.e., “get to know (ginosko), hereafter.”
Not Now but Afterwards
What I do thou knowest not now; but thou shalt know hereafter. John 13:7.
Our Lord’s saying goes deeper than the immediate application of this precious word. God trusts some of His saints in the dark. To some He allows chapters that defy all explanation, that do not make sense, that seem to contradict all we have been taught to expect. From some He seems to withdraw His presence; some He lets pass from this world in strange and sinister ways. We must never make too much of deathbed stories, for some choice saints have had anything but a shouting exit.
We must take account of this, for all lives do not follow the course we would have anticipated. Paul dropped from height to depth in the same chapter (2 Cor. 12), from third heaven to thorn in the flesh, and God may give us along with a mountain-top vision a dark valley where deliverance is not granted.
Some chapters are to be experienced now and understood hereafter. It is well to be forewarned about them and forearmed for them, even if they do not come, lest Satan overwhelm us as he sought to do with Job and Peter.
God marks across some of our days, “Will explain later.”
It was—and still is—a hard lesson to learn. The temptation to deny the necessity of suffering is alluring to the church. It is much more attractive to believe in a Christ who delivers us from suffering, than through it. But Peter points us firmly to this second Christ. The first was his initial dream, shattered on that resurrection morning when death was destroyed by one who had borne it himself, and not just defeated it from a distance.
Sometimes following Jesus can leave us with more questions than answers, especially when the way He might want to work in our life is not only outside of our expectations, but appears to go against the grain, and is completely opposite to our way of thinking. Some day, we will look back and finally “perceive” what to us now is just foggy. This is all part of the process of Jesus purging us, washing us, and cleansing us for bigger and greater ways that we can be used of Him in the lives of others. Being perplexed leads us to consider the second dialogue between Peter and Jesus,
II. Peter’s Presumption & Jesus’ Part (John 13:8)
John 13:8 KJV 1900
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.
A. "Not So, My Lord!” or “Never, Ever, Forever and Ever” (v. 8a).
Seeds of Carnality are costly. Compare Lot’s refusal of the Lord’s plan for his deliverance and what it cost him and his family in the end.
Actions speak louder than words.” This expression is not always true, but it is sometimes true. And in some V 4, p 1008 p 1008 instances it is only actions that speak at all. The need for action in some instances reminds me of the farmer who was stuck in the middle of the road with his donkey. The donkey had planted his feet firmly on the ground and would not move no matter what the farmer did. So the man stood there shouting at the donkey, kicking him and getting angrier all the time. While this was going on another farmer came down the road and immediately sized up the problem. “Do you want help?” he asked.
“I sure could use it,” the first farmer answered. “But I don’t think it will do any good. I’ve been shouting at this stupid donkey for half an hour, and he just won’t budge.”
“I can fix that,” the second man answered. He went over to the side of the road, picked up a club, and then came back and hit the donkey between the eyes. After that he stood back and said “Gee haw!” in a normal tone of voice, and the donkey started off.
“I don’t understand it,” said the owner. “I yelled at him, and he acted as if he didn’t even hear me. You spoke in a normal tone of voice, and he moved off.”
“That’s true,” said the second man, “but first I got his attention.”
The right action is valuable in many circumstances, of course. It applies in child rearing, for instance. I have saved many useless words with my children by a well-timed use of a related attention-getting mechanism. Or again, it applies in teaching. Sometimes a gesture or an object lesson gets the point across faster and better than any number of words.
B. Forfeiture or Fellowship? (v. 8b).
Raymond Brown has pointed out that the Greek expression eichein meros, which is translated here “part of Him,” means more than having fellowship with Jesus. Meros has the same meaning as the Hebrew beleq, the word which describes the heritage which God has promised Israel.
This brings us to an important point. Cleansing is not possible without the co-operation of the sinner. God provides [both] salvation and cleansing of our sin, but man must accept what the Lord has done. By faith, we must put our trust in the Lord. We must choose to do this ourselves. The Lord does not force [washing] upon us.
Jesus’ response was like a firm courtroom verdict that gave the offender a straightforward alternative that admits no bending. It was a strict either/or that had to be accepted or rejected, and the consequences were clearly evident. Either Peter would be washed or he would be excluded from being an heir of Jesus. The thunderous force of “no part with me” is devastating. The text here has obvious eschatological implications involving ideas of inheritance (cf. related ideas at John 14:3; 17:24; cf. also Rev 20:6; 22:19; Matt 24:45–51, and note particularly the same word translated “share” in Luke 15:12).
John 14:3 KJV 1900
3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.
John 17:24 KJV 1900
24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.
Revelation 20:6 KJV 1900
6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
Revelation 22:19 KJV 1900
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Matthew 24:45–51 KJV 1900
45 Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season? 46 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing. 47 Verily I say unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods. 48 But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; 49 And shall begin to smite his fellowservants, and to eat and drink with the drunken; 50 The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of, 51 And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Luke 15:12 KJV 1900
12 And the younger of them said to his father, Father, give me the portion of goods that falleth to me. And he divided unto them his living.
In contrast to the self-seeking of the disciples, Jesus took a place of humility. He set the example of service, not of strife, of self-abasement rather than of self-exaltation. His assumption of the towel was a representation in miniature of His entire career, an accurate picture of Philippians 2:6–8:
Philippians 2:6–8 KJV 1900
6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
The humiliation of Jesus was instrumental to the removal of spiritual uncleanness, and He intended that His followers should dedicate themselves to the same ministry. Their energies should be devoted to the service and cleansing of one another rather than to seeking elevation at the expense of each other. “Bondslave” and “apostle” were the terms which Jesus used to describe their work. The bondslave was the property of his owner; the apostle was at the disposal of the one who had commissioned him for his task. He who took upon Himself the form of a [servant] (Phil. 2:7) and who was the “Apostle and High Priest of our confession” (Heb. 3:1) has by His own example established forever the measure of service in these two capacities. If He is Master and Lord, as He claimed (John 13:14), the bondslave and apostle is bound to follow His precedent.
John 13:14 KJV 1900
14 If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another’s feet.
While we may not always understand His ways, we can learn to trust Him. If we deny Him, He will surely one day deny us. These first two dialogues have revealed much about learning to follow Jesus, but the third is the real kicker!
III. Purity or Partiality? (John 13:9-11)
PARTIALITY, n. parshal´ity. Inclination to favor one party or one side of a question more than the other; an undue bias of mind towards one party or side, which is apt to warp the judgment. Partiality springs from the will and affections, rather than from a love of truth and justice.
A. Lord, Don’t Stop Washing! (John 13:9)
John 13:9 KJV 1900
9 Simon Peter saith unto him, Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head.
Peter received the Lord’s grace, though he still misunderstood. Hands = Jesus will not allow Peter to be a Judaizer.
“Is it not most significant that nothing is said in this chapter about the washing of the disciples’ hands? Does it not point [to] a leading contrast between the Mosaic and the Christian dispensations? Under the law, where there was so much of doing, the priests were required to wash both their hands and their feet (Ex. 30:19); but under grace all has been done for us, and if the walk be right, the work will be acceptable!”[896]
Head = part for the whole? In total, a picture of cleansing for the priesthood, initial bathing once, daily laver for service.
“Peter has gone from stopping Jesus from serving him at all to commanding Jesus to serve him even more.”
Washing at the laver (Exod. 30:17–21). As the priests served God in the tabernacle or temple, their hands and feet got dirty. God commanded them to wash their hands and feet at the brass laver in the holy place. And if they did not wash, they were in danger of death. This same principle applies to God’s believer-priests today: if we want to have fellowship with the Lord, we must come to him for cleansing (John 13:1–11; 1 John 1:5–2:2). The priests were washed all over at their initial ordination, which is a picture of salvation. But they needed this regular cleansing, which is a picture of daily sanctification.
B. Washed = Whole = Cleansed (John 13:10)
John 13:10 KJV 1900
10 Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all.
Every OT law code deals with moral, ceremonial, civil, and criminal matters and, to our eye, does so somewhat indiscriminately (see, e.g., Exod 22–23). On what basis, then, can we discard such an important part of our Scripture? Nonetheless, ritual purity is a problem for us, particularly given that the rules do not apply. As Christians, we are simply not required to maintain the distinctions between clean and unclean food, exclusions from community on the basis of bodily emissions or skin diseases; indeed, regarding the latter, Jesus’ example suggests we are required not to do so. Are we back, then, to dismissing this as irrelevant material? I want to suggest an alternative: rather than being caught in the dilemma of ignoring or obeying the purity system in all its details, we are called to understand its function in OT theology and seek to be shaped by it. . . . The concern seems to be with death and the way it intrudes on life. . . This indicates that the concern is not primarily with physical health but rather with ritual purity and whether the affected person can participate in tabernacle worship. . . it symbolically enables the person’s transferal from the realm of death outside the camp to the realm of life within it. . . . The key categories are unclean, clean, and holy, and there are temporary and (almost) permanent examples of each. “Clean” is the default state of persons and objects (and animals) and roughly equates with that which is “normal” and has no association with death. “Uncleanness” is the result of some defect—permanent for some animals, temporary for people (if of indefinite duration in the case of, say, a chronic skin abnormality of the relevant kind)—or contact with death. Things that normally are clean can be made unclean: for objects, by way of contact with the unclean or the dead; for people, by way of contact with the unclean or dead or because of sin. Sin is best understood as a violation of Yahweh’s (and Israel’s) holiness, and it is a serious matter, both morally and ritually. Most temporary abnormalities are relatively easily dealt with, say, by washing; sin, however, requires sacrifice to make the person clean again. Finally, if clean equates with normal, “holy” means special. It is that which preeminently characterizes Israel’s God; other people or things become holy because of their relationship with Yahweh. It is a theological category, not a moral one. With reference to Yahweh, holiness speaks of God’s otherness, that is, transcendence. Yahweh is the quintessentially “special” one. Other things are holy because they are set apart from the ordinary and set apart for Yahweh . . . . Nothing that is unclean can be holy; some things (including people) that are unclean can be made clean, normally by way of cleansing (with or without sacrifice), and some things (including people) that are clean can be made holy, normally by way of cleansing and sacrifice. . . . The basic idea is that the legislation for ritual purity presents us with a picture of an ordered world in which things are embraced or avoided depending on how they fit in the symbolic universe. The key issue is how they relate to the normal and “safe” (that which is connected with life) or the abnormal and “dangerous” (that which is connected with death). Clean animals are seen as “normal,” as exemplars of what a food animal ought to be, and those that have the least association with death. . . . Only the normal can be clean (and hence associated with that which is holy); that which is clearly abnormal, such as persons suffering from skin diseases, cannot be counted clean—that is, as potential worshippers of the holy God. Thus, they are unclean. Indeed, that which is abnormal, that which does not fit into the categories of the symbolic universe, is associated with danger and with death (the ultimate danger or disruption). Those who have enduring abnormalities and thus are seriously unclean are excluded from the place of life, where God is, and are symbolically consigned to the realm of danger and death, outside the camp (the place where the goat bearing Israel’s death-dealing sin and uncleanness is sent [Lev 16]). To return to the community, and so to rejoin the company of those who worship the holy God, requires their symbolic transfer from death to life by way of washing and sacrifice. . . . Cleanness is about avoiding danger and death and embracing life and normality. The system of ritual purity, then, is a pointer to the OT’s recognition that this is an ordered universe, and that this order has symbolic/theological and moral dimensions. . . . Leviticus 15:31
Leviticus 15:31 KJV 1900
31 Thus shall ye separate the children of Israel from their uncleanness; that they die not in their uncleanness, when they defile my tabernacle that is among them.
ensures that the Israelites are separated from that which would make them unclean, which would desecrate God’s dwelling place (after all, nothing unclean can be holy), turning God’s life-giving presence into a source of death. . . . There is a clear common thread here: the maintenance of God’s holiness and Israel’s. These distinctions are one key way that Israel both shows and guards its holiness, a holiness that derives from Yahweh and is directed to him.
Holiness is an important concept, though it is much misunderstood. For various reasons we tend to see it as a moral category: that which is holy is preeminently good; it is God’s goodness (holiness) that means God cannot tolerate sin. Now that may be true, but only by association. Holiness is primarily a quality of God; it speaks of God’s transcendence, of otherness. Things and people can become holy—that is, set apart for God and his use. Holiness, then, is primarily “set-apartness.” Something is holy to Yahweh if it is separated from the common and set apart for Yahweh’s use. A colleague of mine, Anthony Petterson, uses the helpful (if mundane) analogy of a toothbrush. My toothbrush is holy to me. It is set apart from common use for my use only. I share a house with my wife and three daughters, but none of them share my toothbrush. If they brushed their teeth with my toothbrush, it would no longer be holy: in fact, after remonstrating with them, I would throw it away and get a new one. It is holy; it is mine. This helps explain what it means for Israel to be holy: they are set apart for Yahweh and come to share (to some extent) Yahweh’s holiness.
That latter point is important. When I used the toothbrush analogy at a church camp recently (with due thanks to Anthony), the pastor’s wife confessed that she had, in fact, lost her toothbrush when they packed for camp and had been using her husband’s. I was, I confess, rendered speechless. Such a thing certainly wouldn’t happen in my house, but it didn’t seem to overly bother her husband; they share their lives, so why not a toothbrush? I’m not convinced: my toothbrush is still mine, and mine alone. However, her sharing her husband’s toothbrush does illustrate something: because of her relationship with her husband, he counted her as holy (set apart) and so allowed her to use his toothbrush (I hope with clear conditions!). Yahweh does likewise with Israel. By entering into relationship with Israel Yahweh makes them holy and allows them to use Yahweh’s holy things. The sanctuary and sacred objects are, in fact, one of the ways in which Israel expressed and maintained their special (holy) relationship with Yahweh. However, for them to use these things, which have been set apart from the common and reserved for Yahweh’s use, they too must be holy—that is, different, distinct, demonstrably set apart. That is what the legislation for ritual purity is primarily about; it is how Israel shows and maintains their “set-apartness” from the common and for God. . . . The consequences for Nadab and Abihu are devastating: offering “strange fire” leads to their fiery destruction. Clearly, the holiness of this place and its proper treatment are crucial. . . .
Clearly, the worship life of Israel and how it is to be conducted and guarded against “contamination” are of vital concern. That is what the rules about ritual purity are designed to do: guard Israel against contamination so that they might be able to express their special covenant relationship with God in worship.
Now, what are we to do with all this? Clearly, ritual purity plays an important role in the OT. It ensures that Israel is and remains a special people, set apart from the nations for God and God’s purposes. These social practices are a way of establishing the boundary between Israel and the nations; the distinction between clean and unclean (especially clean and unclean animals) is the way Israel expresses its distinction from the nations. But that, in turn, serves a “missional” aim: Israel’s purpose, the reason they are set apart, is to demonstrate to the nations the nature of true community and so further God’s saving purposes for all humanity. For Israel, the failure to be distinct means that they have failed to live as the people of God and thus have failed to be God’s agents in the world. However, the nature and basis of our being the people of God are radically different in Christ. The people of God are not a national-political entity whose boundaries are determined by adherence to circumcision, Sabbath, and the food laws. We are a scattered people formed by the Spirit around the person of Jesus, the Messiah, and the boundaries of our community are determined by adherence to Jesus in faith and the commitment to living as his disciples (1 Pet 1:1–2). We are, nonetheless, a holy (set apart) people: the people of God (1 Pet 2:9–10), called to be holy even as God is holy (1 Pet. 1:13–16). The expression of that holiness is, however, radically different since the advent of Jesus.
We see the revolutionary nature of holiness in the person of Jesus. Not only does he remind his hearers that God’s special people are not defined by purely social practices, such as eating kosher foods, but he also calls them to recognize that they are distinct in the overall conduct of their lives. It is what comes out of the heart, not what goes into the stomach, that can render someone no longer fit to be counted among God’s holy people (Mark 7:14–23). In making all foods clean, however (Mark 7:19), Jesus demolished the demarcation between Jew and Gentile, demonstrating that faithfulness, not ethnicity, is the primary criterion for being the people of God, as Peter recognized in his vision in Acts 10. Ethnic holiness and the sociological boundary markers of a separated community are no longer our concern.
However, Jesus’ relation to holiness and cleanness was not principally negative. In the OT uncleanness was contagious: anyone, no matter how clean, who touched an unclean person or object was thereby rendered unclean. In Jesus, however, holiness is contagious. This is so in a familiar sense: as Jesus shows in John 13, by his cleansing work, especially his then imminent death, we who were unclean have been made clean (John 13:6–10). It is also seen in an unfamiliar sense, directly related to the paradigmatic cases of uncleanness in Leviticus. Jesus healed the lepers (e.g., Luke 5:12–14). Touching those who were ritually unclean should make Jesus unclean; however, things happen in reverse. Rather than the clean (even holy) being made unclean by contact with the unclean, the unclean is made clean by contact with Jesus; he then calls them to perform those actions that will demonstrate to everyone that they have been restored to health and so to the (worshipping) community. His holiness is contagious; it is, if you like, a saving contagion. Exactly the same thing happens in the interesting story of Jesus healing the woman with prolonged bleeding (Luke 8:42b–48). There is too much in this story for us to look at it in detail, but we should note here that by touching Jesus, who is holy, the unclean woman is made clean. Her faith (no matter how flawed and faltering) saves her, connecting her with Jesus, who rescues her from her physical, social, and theological brokenness, restoring her to relationship with those around her (and, indeed, in the end with God). In Jesus, holiness is no longer something to be guarded to ensure that it is not negated by uncleanness; instead, it has become a dynamic, life-giving force that negates uncleanness and makes people whole.
Our “cleanness,” even our holiness, is assured. We are cleansed and made holy by Jesus. We do not need to guard our holiness, and certainly not by a set of social practices designed to mark us off and keep us safe from “outsiders.” We are “outsiders” who have been brought into the people of God by Jesus’ sacrifice for us (Eph 2). Holiness, of course, still matters. God has called us to “be holy as I am holy”; however, the holiness of the new people of God corresponds to the nature of the new people of God. It is not a sociological holiness but rather a personal and relational holiness, expressed in the total conduct of our lives, lives meant to imitate the God who has saved us (1 Pet 1:2, 13–22). . . . The chief mark of that holiness, as John and 1 Peter remind us, is love (John 13:34–35; 1 Pet 1:22–23). It is love that is the sign of our covenant relationship with God, and love that demonstrates our imitation of the one who loved us and gave himself for us (1 John 4:7–21). Once again, we are reminded of our moral vision, of our call to live as a community of character
C. Judas Is as Judas Does (John 13:11)
John 13:11 KJV 1900
11 For he knew who should betray him; therefore said he, Ye are not all clean.
Before he was chosen to become an apostle, Judas was in the large crowd of disciples that followed Jesus (Matt. 5:25), but why was he following the Lord? Was he hoping for the restoration of the Jewish kingdom? Was he fascinated by the miracles? You can be in the crowd and not be in God’s family! Then he was called to be an apostle. You can be a member of the inner circle and be a devil! How did Judas respond when he heard the Sermon on the Mount, especially Matthew 7:21–27? You can be at the table with the Lord and still surrender to the devil! Judas is certainly a warning to every religious person who masquerades as a child of God. At this point you may want to study the parable of the tares (Matt. 13:24–30, 36–43).
The title “the one doomed to destruction” (John 17:12) could be one key to Judas’s tragic life, for the word apoleia (destruction) is translated “waste” in Matthew 26:8 and Mark 14:4, where Judas and the other disciples ask, “Why this waste?” Judas was “the son of the wasteness.” He certainly wasted a glorious opportunity to be saved and to know and serve Jesus. He wasted a good name—Judah, which means “praise.” His life ended in waste and he left a cemetery behind. To be sure, Judas is one of the most enigmatic of all the personalities in the Bible, yet we must try to make something out of his life and death. Jesus gave Judas power to do miracles and the responsibility to preach sermons (Luke 9:1–6), and he was apparently successful, for the other disciples never once questioned his right to be among them. They did not know there was a traitor among them until the very end. These are certainly deep waters.
There are many lessons to be learned from Jesus washing the disciples’ feet. Surely, He Himself is using it to teach us how to love one another, and humbly serve one another, as He has given us the example to do. Surely we must keep a short account of sin in our daily walk if we are to maintain fellowship with the Lord. But the most heartbreaking image of this washing of feet is that as the Disciples are the Body of Christ, then there was one of their members, Judas, who unlike Peter, who though headstrong and mouthy at times, deep inside had a love for Jesus that caused him to yield to His will in the end. Judas on the other hand, will use the very same feet that Jesus just washed, to go to the world, the flesh, and the devil to whom he had sold out to, and forever forfeit any chance of a blessed hereafter.
This breaks my heart. In the dozen or so years that I have been full-time in the pastorate, I have witnessed time and again those who would come, and pretend for a while, and look good on the outside, but inside were full of dead men’s bones. I weep to think that there could even be one here this morning who would deny the Beloved Son of God and sell their soul instead to the son of perdition and find destruction in the end. Only a wholly washed body with clean feet will take you to an inheritance incorruptible in Christ Jesus our Lord, but a dirty body is doomed. Even then, the Lord Jesus cleanses the way of the sinner so that though he be lost in the end, his actions can still be turned to be used for good to them that love the Lord, who are the called according to His purpose.
Did not God use a pagan king of Assyria to fulfill His will to bring judgment to His people to lead them to repentance and faith? Did not Haman’s own gallows serve the purposes of God to deliver His people from death and destruction?
Though Judas had yet remained in unbelief, Jesus was cleansing Judas’ feet for the service that would lead to Christ rending the vail in twain from top to bottom for all to be able to come to God by faith in His finished work on Calvary!
Conclusion:
THE FEET
By Nature:
I. Almost Gone (Ps. 73:2)
Psalm 73:2 KJV 1900
2 But as for me, my feet were almost gone;
My steps had well nigh slipped.
II. Running to Evil (Prov. 1:16)
Proverbs 1:16 KJV 1900
16 For their feet run to evil,
And make haste to shed blood.
III. Running to Mischief (Prov. 6:18)
Proverbs 6:18 KJV 1900
18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations,
Feet that be swift in running to mischief,
IV. On the Dark Mountains (Jer. 13:16)
Jeremiah 13:16 KJV 1900
16 Give glory to the Lord your God, before he cause darkness, and before your feet stumble upon the dark mountains, and, while ye look for light, he turn it into the shadow of death, and make it gross darkness.
V. Sunk in the Mire (Jer. 38:22)
Jeremiah 38:22 KJV 1900
22 And, behold, all the women that are left in the king of Judah’s house shall be brought forth to the king of Babylon’s princes, and those women shall say, Thy friends have set thee on, and have prevailed against thee: thy feet are sunk in the mire, and they are turned away back.
VI. Swift to Shed Blood (Rom. 3:15)
Romans 3:15 KJV 1900
15 Their feet are swift to shed blood:
VII. Slide in Due Time (Deut 32:35)
Deuteronomy 32:35 KJV 1900
35 To me belongeth vengeance, and recompence;
Their foot shall slide in due time:
For the day of their calamity is at hand,
And the things that shall come upon them make haste.
By Grace:
I. Washed (John 13:10)
John 13:10 KJV 1900
10 Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all.
II. Kept (1 Sam. 2:9)
1 Samuel 2:9 KJV 1900
9 He will keep the feet of his saints,
And the wicked shall be silent in darkness;
For by strength shall no man prevail.
III. Set Upon a Rock (Ps. 40:2)
Psalm 40:2 KJV 1900
2 He brought me up also out of an horrible pit, out of the miry clay,
And set my feet upon a rock, and established my goings.
IV. Not to Be Moved (Ps. 66:9)
Psalm 66:9 KJV 1900
9 Which holdeth our soul in life,
And suffereth not our feet to be moved.
V. Shod with the Gospel (Eph. 6:15)
Ephesians 6:15 KJV 1900
15 And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace;
VI. Bringing the Gospel (Rom. 10:15)
Romans 10:15 KJV 1900
15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!
VII. Bruising Satan (Rom. 16:20)
Romans 16:20 KJV 1900
20 And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.
Jesus wants to cleanse you for service now, so He can reward you afterward.
1. We may not fully understand what Jesus does in our life sometimes to get us where He wants us to be.
2. Learn to trust Him; failure to do so means missing out on your “part” with Him.
3. Jesus wants you whole; Satan wants you partial.
I want you to do three things: first, learn to trust Jesus for every unknown (trust Him to wash all your sins away); second, submit your WHOLE self to Him for cleansing so you can serve Him ONLY; thirdly, I want you to leave today whole, don’t be a Judas!