Schreiner: Jesus’ taking upon himself the role of a servant

We also have an allusion to Jesus’ death in the washing of the disciples’ feet (John 13:1–17). Jesus’ love to the end signified his willingness to die for his disciples (John 13:1). The washing represents the cleansing effected by Jesus’ death.

Hence, if Peter refused to be washed, he had “no share” (meros) with Jesus (John 13:8); that is, he has no inheritance among God’s people. Only those who are washed by Jesus enjoy forgiveness of sins. Only one washing is needed because Jesus’ death is efficacious (John 13:10), and the need for the disciples to be washed at this juncture of Jesus’ ministry demonstrates that they still need his cleansing death. Jesus, of course, did not think that physical washing itself was sufficient to grant cleansing. He cleaned Judas’s feet, and yet Judas was not truly clean (John 13:11). Judas did not genuinely belong among those whose sins were forgiven.

Jesus’ taking upon himself the role of a servant in washing the disciples’ feet points forward to his servant role on the cross, where he washed his own by dying for sin and granting cleansing to those who trust in him. All those who have received Jesus’ gracious work and word are genuinely clean (John 15:3)

Schreiner, T. R. (2008). New Testament theology: magnifying God in Christ (pp. 285–286). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.

Comments

John Stott on the "old man" and the "body ruled by sin" in Rom 6 v 6

There are, in fact, two quite distinct ways in which the New Testament speaks of crucifixion in relation to holiness. The first is our death to sin through identification with Christ; the second is our death to self through imitation of Christ. On the one hand, we have been crucified with Christ. But on the other we have crucified (decisively repudiated) our sinful nature with all its desires, so that every day we renew this attitude by taking up our cross and following Christ to crucifixion. The first is a legal death, a death to the penalty of sin; the second is a moral death, a death to the power of sin. The first belongs to the past, and is unique and unrepeatable; the second belongs to the present, and is repeatable, even continuous. I died to sin (in Christ) once; I die to self (like Christ) daily. It is with the first of these two deaths that Romans 6 is chiefly concerned, although the first is with a view to the second, and the second cannot take place w...

Boice: “... the federal way of dealing with us was actually the fairest and kindest of all the ways God could have operated. ”

Adam had been appointed by God to be the representative of the race so that if he stood, we too would stand, and if he fell, we would fall with him. Adam did fall, as we know. So death passed upon everyone. “But isn’t that terribly unfair?” someone protests. “Isn’t it cruel for God to act in this fashion?” ... the federal way of dealing with us was actually the fairest and kindest of all the ways God could have operated. Besides, it was the only way it would later be possible for God to save us once we had sinned. In other words, federalism is actually a proof of God’s grace, which is the point the passage comes to (vv. 15 ff.). It was gracious to Adam first of all. Why? Because it was a deterrent to his sin. God must have explained to Adam that he was to represent his posterity. That might have restrained him from sinning. A father who might be tempted to steal his employer’s funds (and would if only he himself were involved), might well decide not to do it if he kne...

Repackaging the gospel? It's more like obscuring the gospel!

Preface : I recognize this post may make me unpopular with some, but I think it is an important issue to blog about here. I’ve had time to reflect on this video and in my opinion, I think what is in this video raises some questions. This gentleman featured below is slotted to speak at the SBC's 2020 Pastors' Conference and it prompted me to think more about this illustration. I want to note that I don't know him and I have no personal issue with him. I assume he is a brother in the LORD. Having said that, I see some significant issues here that relate to this type of preaching being clear on the gospel of Jesus Christ. In fact, it appears to be obscuring it in my observation. Concern: Should the SBC or churches, in general, be in the habit of holding this up as a good and healthy example? Let's think about it some together. (Watch this clip below here first.) Context: The clip was posted to stand on its own a...

Search This Blog