It is a little difficult to understand what provoked the disciples into competing with one another for being the greatest disciple. Some scholars believe it was a struggle over the seating arrangements, each wanting to sit closest to Jesus (cf. Mark 10:37). In the first century the person to the right of the host was considered to be the most honorable position, and the second most honorable position was immediately to the host’s left. The third most important was to the host’s second right and the forth to the host’s second left, and so on until the positions at the table were full. Therefore, some scholars believe this is the context of the disciples’ quarrel. However, unless Luke’s record[1] is out of chronological order at this point, the text seems to conclude the disciples were already seated when the quarrel occurred (Luke 22:14). So, what can be said of these things?
Indeed, there was strife among the Apostles, and it concerned which of them was the greatest (Luke 22:24). In Luke 22:21-22 Jesus announced for a second time during the meal that one of the Twelve (cf. Mark 14:18) would betray him, and the disciples discussed among themselves who that might be (Luke 22:23; cf. Mark 14:20). The strife (Luke 22:24),therefore, probably arose out of their wondering which one of them would do such a thing. As one would be accused, undoubtedly that one would deny the accusation and boast of his loyalty to Jesus. One thing led to another, and all were boasting who was most loyal.
As thing seemed to be getting out of control, Jesus pointed out that, if they address him as Master (cf. John 13:13), and since he has condescended to serve them (Luke 22:27; cf. John 13:14), then it would be ridiculous for them to quarrel over which of them (the servants) is greater than the others. If their Master was willing to serve his servants, then his servants, if they wish to be perfect, need to behave as their Master (Luke 6:40). Therefore, their striving among themselves was shown to be ludicrous. If their Master doesn’t stand on the formality of his position among them, his servants, why should his servants assume the formality of greatness since the point is now moot?
In the world of the gentiles authority is expressed with power over others, the stronger over the weaker. The world’s method of expressing authority could be characterized by intimidation, and they claim such titles as benefactor that contradict the method used to attain such authority. In other words, no matter how they attain their power, they claim their rule is for the good of their subjects (Luke 22:25), which is ludicrous, because who among their subjects would welcome being made to kneel before another? For this very reason several rebellious groups among the Jews sought to strengthen themselves among the people, in an effort to one day break the chains with which Rome had subjugated the Jews.
Nevertheless, among Jesus’ disciples, authority would not be expressed through strength over weakness, Intimidation would simply not be used among Jesus’ disciples against one another. Rather, authority would be expressed through service. If one is devoted to serving others, that one would be great in the Kingdom of God (Luke 22:26), and the logic of Jesus’ argument is expressed in the example of his life. (Luke 22:27; cf. Acts 10:38). When the text says all things were given into his hands (power – John 13:3), Jesus got up from the table, set aside his festive garments and girded himself with a towel and proceeded to wash the disciples feet (John 13:3-5). Who in all the world would do such a thing, knowing that all authority was placed into his hands? This is what stopped the strife of the Apostles, because such a scene was so out of place in their worldview.
_______________________________________
[1] Luke is the only Gospel narrator who makes a point of mentioning this quarrel at the evening meal on Jesus final Passover day.
Smoodock's Blog 