JehovahsWitness wrote: The identifying of “the betrayer” was when they were reclined at the table (and there was evidently enough food left on the table for some to be used), so what relevance that Jesus at some point washed feet?
According to Luke, the identification of the betrayer was after supper. This agrees with the chronology of the fourth gospel.
Luk 22:20-21 KJV – Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup [is] the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you. But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me [is] with me on the table.
However, here is an example of inconsistencies of the evening accounts. In Matthew and Mark, the betrayer is identified during supper.
Mar 14:18 KJV – And as they sat and did eat, Jesus said, Verily I say unto you, One of you which eateth with me shall betray me.
Mat 26:21 KJV – And as they did eat, he said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.
It is unlikely that they reclined to eat with unwashed feet but even if they did, I fail to se why this would signal a thirteenth disciple ?
If they had their feet washed before supper, then it was some unnamed servant that did it. So, this would indicate at least one other person with them.
But, most likely their feet were unwashed during supper. During supper, they were all wondering who was going to wash their feet. None of them certainly was going to do it since they were all arguing which of them was the greatest.
Luk 22:24 KJV – And there was also a strife among them, which of them should be accounted the greatest.
Jesus knew all this, so he washed their feet.
… are you suggesting that Jesus hadn’t washed their feet before eating but when a new arrival came this arrival that prompted him to get up and wash everyone’s feet?
Yes, it’s my theory.
Is it logical that they all ate the meal with unwashed feet ?
If their feet were washed before supper, who did it then?
Or are you suggesting Jesus washed their feet twice?
He did it once and it was after the meal.
Or that he got up and washed only the new arrivals then lay back down to handle the food that remained?
According to the fourth gospel, the only food mentioned after the meal is a sop. And it was only used to signal who would betray him.
Jhn 13:26 KJV – Jesus answered, He it is, to whom I shall give a sop, when I have dipped [it]. And when he had dipped the sop, he gave [it] to Judas Iscariot, [the son] of Simon.
Can you see that what I am saying that anything is possible but since there is no real scriptural basis for that “anything” we don’t introduce it.
The entire Lazarus argument is cumulative, it is not just based on the timing of events during the final night. It is the narrative of Lazarus and how he fits into the entire accounts of the gospels.
Anyway, I believe a reading that reflects confidence in the author not neglecting such a significant detail lends to a a contextual coherence and narrows down the beloved disciple to one of the twelve. Perhaps we will have to agree to disagree on this.
Which apostle do you believe to be the beloved disciple?
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=959164#p959164