John 13: weak theological construct

 John 13: an Old Testament construct by an apostle, perhaps self-styled

Written about 90 AD

Jesus Washes His Disciples’ Feet

[John 13 seems pivotal contradiction to Genesis 1:26-28. Quoting NIV,

Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish . . . and the birds . . . and over all the creatures . . .” So God created mankind in his own image . . . male and female he created them. God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the [other species].”

John 13 contradicts Genesis 1.

The John 13 ceremony stories express Christianity’s power to divide people over opinion about unknowns and phantasms -- to increase chaos rather than Genesis 1:28’s safety& security by& among human-beings to all species and to the earth.

John 13 depicts Father& Son using Judas as an object to arguably-fulfill ancient Hebrew scripture rather than accommodating Judas to affirm Genesis 1’s conclusion:  In the-God’s image, each person can& may choose safety& security. According to Genesis 1:28, until the actual betrayal, Judas could have chosen fidelity to Jesus rather than dependency on Satan.

Jesus affirmed Genesis 1 directly in Matthew 19:4 and in Mark 13:19 and indirectly in Matthew 26:52. Further, Genesis 1:28 asserts that human-being can pursue order& prosperity on earth and has the necessary powers (in the-God’s image). Each human individual may choose to either aid safety& security on earth or to be dependent. On that choice, fellow-citizens divide themselves. Necessity& justice demands that citizens who practice, facilitate, and encourage safety& security on earth (civic-citizens) constrain fellow-citizens who choose dependency.

In history, one civilization, Sumerian kings created codes of law 5,500 years ago, accepting the observation that their Gods could not usurp humankind’s responsibility. Jesus affirmed civil responsibility in Matthew 22:21, “. . . give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s”.

Nomads can& may aid a better future.]

13 It was just before the Passover Festival. Jesus knew that the hour had come for him to leave this world and go to the Father. Having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them to the end. [Most Christian churches resist the notion that Jesus’ appreciation of persons is selective to the elect – the antinomians. Christians teach their children that Jesus loves everyone, then impose the real story to young adults: provided they conform to the church. Some church elites don antinomianism.]

² The evening meal was in progress, and the devil had already prompted Judas [I re-read Genesis 1 to try to detect suggestion of the devil. There is none. Of course, there’s disorder, by default, but no evil.], the son of Simon Iscariot, to betray Jesus. ³ Jesus knew that the Father had put all things under his power [This directly contradicts Genesis 1:28, which states that female& male-human-being can& may provide safety& security on earth. The-God cannot usurp duty that entity assigned.], and that he had come from God and was returning to God; ⁴ so he got up from the meal, took off his outer clothing, and wrapped a towel around his waist. ⁵ After that, he poured water into a basin and began to wash his disciples’ feet, drying them with the towel that was wrapped around him.

⁶ He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, “Lord, are you going to wash my feet?”

⁷ Jesus replied, “You do not realize now what I am doing, but later you will understand.” [For the first time, I perceive the Jesus-to-disciples relationship as teacher to follower rather than God to emissaries. Perhaps the leap to Son-of-God is a consequence of Mesopotamian political competition. That is, the family of David competing with the reset of Abraham’s descendants, both divided branches competing with the rest of humankind.]

⁸ “No,” said Peter, “you shall never wash my feet.”

Jesus answered, “Unless I wash you, you have no part with me.” [Does anyone else perceive a quid pro quo? Peter submits to what he does not understand in order to remain in the group. I don’t know the-ineluctable-truth and think this John-phantasm divides humankind. Created in the image of the-God, no human is comfortable acting on coercion/force. Even when it comes to the mystery of salvation, the human-being wants to take responsibility. Responsibility is possible, by simply accepting the mystery of death without attempting to construct salvation.]

⁹ “Then, Lord,” Simon Peter replied, “not just my feet but my hands and my head as well!”

¹⁰ Jesus answered, “Those who have had a bath need only to wash their feet; their whole body is clean. And you are clean, though not every one of you.” [With this comment, John takes Peter’s person out of the discussion. Peter is just one of 11 objects being used to highlight the uncleanness of the 12 due to Judas. However, at this point, Judas is clean, too. He may be considering betrayal yet has not acted and could choose fidelity.]¹¹ For he knew who was going to betray him, and that was why he said not every one was clean. [John’s speculation accuses Jesus of accommodating the betrayal. Where’s John’s evidence against Jesus? BTW: This reminds me of Agathon, who said that not everyone behaves for the-good.]

¹² When he had finished washing their feet, he put on his clothes and returned to his place. “Do you understand what I have done for you?” he asked them. ¹³ “You call me ‘Teacher’ and ‘Lord,’ and rightly so, for that is what I am. ¹⁴ Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another’s feet. ¹⁵ I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you. [This smacks of the erroneous “Golden Rule” and its 9 variants; philosophynow.org/issues/74/The_Golden_Rule_Not_So_Golden_Anymore. Our friend Chris Nalepa points out that some persons, for example, some narcissists want to harm and don’t want to be harmed.] ¹⁶ Very truly I tell you, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him [I think there should be a footnote referring to John 6:38.]. ¹⁷ Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them.

Jesus Predicts His Betrayal

¹⁸ “I am not referring to all of you; I know those I have chosen. But this is to fulfill this passage of Scripture: ‘He who shared my bread has turned against me.’ [See Psalm 41:9-10 for vigilante thinking. Who among people living in 2022 would like to be used to justify ancient sophistry? I perceive Judas a victim of John and don’t accept John’s Jesus-of-constructed-vengeance. I prefer the Jesus I glean from Nomads experiences& observations. Of course, whatever happened to Jesus happened, and I don’t know.]

¹⁹ “I am telling you now before it happens, so that when it does happen you will believe that I am who I am. [Recall “Before Abraham was born I am.” That implies before Sargon was born, too. We may discover that Jesus is the-God.] ²⁰ Very truly I tell you, whoever accepts anyone I send accepts me; and whoever accepts me accepts the one who sent me.” [John 6:38 again.] [When I returned to UBC on October 17, 2021, I still perceived& accepted that I was not among the elect. I now perceive I am elect to advocate the practical Jesus, at least on par with Albert Einstein, rather than Christianity’s competitive demands on both humankind and the-God. I think Jesus accommodates a year-1787 American message: common sense (Thomas Paine visiting America) and self-reliance (Ralph Waldo Emerson)*, physics discloses lies (Einstein), Vaughn Crombie’s belief about his mom’s influence --- read the Bible, go to church, and be good boys, or my favorite, responsible-human-independence (RHI). *researchomatic.com/Compare-And-Contrast-Between-Emersons-Self-Reliance-And-Paines-Common-Sense-46158.html] [John could& did claim he is an apostle of Jesus.]

²¹ After he had said this, Jesus was troubled in spirit and testified, “Very truly I tell you, one of you is going to betray me.”

²² His disciples stared at one another, at a loss to know which of them he meant.²³ One of them, the disciple whom Jesus loved [May we detect competitive humility or pride?], was reclining next to him. ²⁴ Simon Peter motioned to this disciple and said, “Ask him which one he means.”

²⁵ Leaning back against Jesus, he asked him, “Lord, who is it?”

²⁶ Jesus answered, “It is the one to whom I will give this piece of bread when I have dipped it in the dish.” Then, dipping the piece of bread, he gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot. ²⁷ As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him. [A Jesus that would objectify a human being, even the son of Simon Iscariot, is not a-God I will choose. Thus, I am not elected by the-God to believe John’s writing. I am elect to advocate the practical Jesus whom, for example, human-beings can discover through transparent sharing.]

So Jesus told him, “What you are about to do, do quickly.” ²⁸ But no one at the meal understood why Jesus said this to him. ²⁹ Since Judas had charge of the money, some thought Jesus was telling him to buy what was needed for the festival, or to give something to the poor. ³⁰ As soon as Judas had taken the bread, he went out. And it was night.

Jesus Predicts Peter’s Denial

³¹ When he was gone, Jesus said, “Now the Son of Man is glorified and God is glorified in him. ³² If God is glorified in him, God will glorify the Son in himself, and will glorify him at once. [Glorified means made celestial, divine, otherworldly.]

³³ “My children, I will be with you only a little longer. You will look for me, and just as I told the Jews, so I tell you now: Where I am going, you cannot come.

³⁴ “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. ³⁵ By this everyone will know that you are my disciples [I prefer to appreciate every civic-person and to encourage dependent fellow-citizens to reform.], if you love one another.” [I don’t know but think this might be the verse on which LSU Professor Sam Adams weighed my opinion “heresy”. He would not tell me when I asked. I don’t think Sam ever confronted the-ineluctable-truth. I prefer appreciation to love, which is often confusing, even inappropriate. I’ve never observed or experienced appreciation that was not welcomed. I have witnessed Baptist helping Baptist with abject chagrin over scriptural coercion.]

³⁶ Simon Peter asked him, “Lord, where are you going?”

Jesus replied, “Where I am going, you cannot follow now, but you will follow later.” [A Muslim friend tells me, “Phil, you are a seeker. Sooner or later you will submit to Allah.” I smile, thinking he refers to my death. I’m glad he and his are my neighbors.]

³⁷ Peter asked, “Lord, why can’t I follow you now? I will lay down my life for you.” [This idea is a form of dependency. It’s counter to Genesis 1:28, which states that a human being has powers like the-God and therefore can& may choose the-good; can& may aid safety& security one earth; can& may reject infidelity.] [Incidentally, only this month have I stopped writing that Genesis 1:28 assigns to humankind the responsibility to provide peace on earth. This week’s Nomads lesson helps me consider that Genesis 1:28 reserves peace as an ultimate goal, expressing only that order& prosperity to self& posterity and the lesser species is humankind’s immediate responsibility.]

³⁸ Then Jesus answered, “Will you really lay down your life for me? Very truly I tell you, before the rooster crows, you will disown me three times! [I think relinquishing religion in order to practice, facilitate and encourage responsible-human-independent living is more valuable than foregoing life. What value is life lived without civic-integrity? A person can& may accept salvation and develop civic-integrity. Consider it this way: Greater appreciation has no person than this: To admit to self and announce to fellow-humans “I don’t know” when that is so. By all evidence, I do not know the-ineluctable-truth.]

[Epilogue

Of course, I don’t know the-ineluctable-truth: the unavoidable, unchangeable, irresistible truth. However, I intend neither 1) to deny my responsibility to aid safety& security on earth nor 2) to entreat the-God to usurp my Genesis 1:28 duty. I work to affirm Genesis 1:28 in kindness and intention to learn from fellow-citizens.

The book of Genesis, beyond Genesis 1 through 2:3’s matter-of-fact God of creation, presents Israel’s “the Lord God” who communicates with elites. The Lord God competes with a more crafty being; molds the woman subservient to the man rather than in the-God’s image; and imposes sin on Adam’s descendants. The rest of the Old Testament disputes the character of the-God and predicts a messiah: Israel’s king.

The New Testament argues that the kingdom belongs to people the Lord God chooses to believe Jesus is the messiah.

The OT v NT squabble, written in the 1,000 years between 3,022 years ago and 2,022 years ago, hides the lessons learned before 3,022 years ago.

To review discovery through 2022, homo sapiens has been the dominant human-being for 300,000 years, excluding prior-mutation-mixes during the past 10,000 years. Ending 4,000 years ago, Sumer political philosophy worshiped their Gods yet took responsibility for safety& security on earth through codes of law and discovery. Perhaps erroneously, 4,000 years ago monotheism began to dominate political philosophy. About 3,022 years ago, Israel proffered a personal-God that accommodated the devil imposing sin on Israel and promising a messiah to establish a kingdom on earth to descendants who observed the Lord God’s laws. About 2022 years ago, Christianity argued that the messiah was for the portion of descendants and non-descendants whom the-God chose to believe Jesus. Some descendants claim the authority to kill infidels. Jesus’ promise is peace. Peace is a utopia wherein no fellow-citizen accuses another of infidelity to mystery. Safety& security on earth seems practicable.

Are Nomads willing to wait indefinitely for safety& security “to ourselves and our Posterity”? 

It seems time to happily accept the-God’s salvation, appreciating the-God’s opinion, unknown as it is, in order to pay attention to the political philosophy that preceded Israel: the individual human if not the-civic-collective among humankind is responsible for safety& security on earth.

At this pivotal time, UBC can inspire& motivate this reform to the U.S. – establish the civic-integrity to pursue safety& security even when salvation is secured.]

Copyright©2022 by Phillip R. Beaver. All rights reserved. Permission is hereby granted for the publication of all or portions of this paper as long as this complete copyright notice is included.