His Word Today

²⁶ Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” ²⁷ And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, ²⁸ for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. ²⁹ I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.” (Matthew 26:26–29 ESV)

²² And as they were eating, he took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to them, and said, “Take; this is my body.” ²³ And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, and they all drank of it. ²⁴ And he said to them, “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many. ²⁵ Truly, I say to you, I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.” (Mark 14:22–25 ESV)

¹⁸ For I tell you that from now on I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” ¹⁹ And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” ²⁰ And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.” (Luke 22:18–20 ESV)

²³ For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, ²⁴ and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” ²⁵ In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” (1 Corinthians 11:23–25 ESV)

Were the bread and the wine Jesus blessed and gave thanks for His actual body and blood? Some church traditions, and theologians, advocate this view, or a moderate interpretation of the same. What is the biblical understanding of what Jesus meant and how does it apply to the church today when she observes the Lord’s Supper or Communion.

As we consider the various views concerning the Lord’ Supper, one thing is not debated. Jesus commanded His disciples to commemorate and remember, this ordinance. Why is it important to regularly remember Jesus’ death, burial and resurrection? It is because people forget its significance; even believers in Christ.

“Celebrating the Lord’s Supper is one way in which we recall God’s sacrifice of His Son. The bread and wine visibly depict the broken body and shed blood of Christ Jesus and help us remember His death, although the remembering of His death is not all that happens at His table. Nevertheless, the Lord’s Supper is tied inextricably to the past, orienting us to the death of Christ for His people, the single greatest event in world history,” states one commentator.

“To this day, some believers hold that the Lord’s Supper is merely past-oriented, only an opportunity to remember Christ’s death. Those theological traditions with the most adherents, however, all believe that Jesus is uniquely present in time and in space when the Lord’s Supper is celebrated,” comments Dr. R. C. Sproul.

However, there are other denominations which take the presence of the Lord Jesus at Lord’s Supper a step further. This debate centers on four perspectives. While we will define these four views, time and space limit an expanded discussion and examination.

First, the view of transubstantiation articulated by the Roman Catholic communion. The Roman Catholic Church advocates the miracle of the Mass. This means the substance of the bread and wine used in the Lord’s Supper is miraculously changed into the actual body and blood of Christ. Therefore, if you were to ask a Roman Catholic if they have received Christ, they would perhaps respond they have; during the celebration of the Mass.

Second, the doctrine of consubstantiation articulated by the Lutheran community. The term means that Christ is substantively present within the bread and wine. Attending a Lutheran church as a child, this was the view taught in confirmation classes I attended. “We must note, however, that the word consubstantiation, though it is used widely in theological circles to describe the Lutheran view, is not a term that the Lutherans tend to embrace,” explains Dr. Sproul.

Third, the Reformed and Anglican affirmation of the real presence of Christ in the Lord’s Supper. John Calvin used the word “substance” as a synonym for “real” or “true.” He taught the divine nature of Christ is present at the Lord’s Supper as He is everywhere.

Fourth, the memorial-sign view of the sacrament espoused by Ulrich Zwingli and by the majority of those in the Baptist churches and denominations. This view articulates the Lord’s Supper is strictly a memorial, with the bread and wine representative, or symbolic, of Christ’s body and blood.

“The debate goes on, as the church tries to plumb the depths and the riches of this sacrament that was instituted by Jesus and practiced on a regular basis in the primitive Christian church, and this debate has survived even to our day,” concludes Dr. Sproul.

Soli deo Gloria!                                                                                    

.

²⁶ Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” ²⁷ And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, ²⁸ for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. ²⁹ I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.” (Matthew 26:26–29 ESV)

²² And as they were eating, he took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to them, and said, “Take; this is my body.” ²³ And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, and they all drank of it. ²⁴ And he said to them, “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many. ²⁵ Truly, I say to you, I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.” (Mark 14:22–25 ESV)

¹⁸ For I tell you that from now on I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” ¹⁹ And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” ²⁰ And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.” (Luke 22:18–20 ESV)

²³ For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, ²⁴ and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” ²⁵ In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” (1 Corinthians 11:23–25 ESV)

As the last week of the Lord Jesus Christ is studied, it is important to compare the New Testament Gospels and Epistles, their particular narratives and themes pertaining to the death, burial and resurrection of the Lord. Today’s focus concerns the celebration of the Passover Meal and the institution of what is referred to as The Lord’s Supper or Communion. This particular observance would symbolize the historical death, burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is one of two ordinances in the church. The other is Believer’s Baptism.

“After predicting Judas’ betrayal (Matt. 26:20–25), Jesus and His disciples proceed with the Passover meal. It is a special moment indeed, for only close friends eat together in first-century Jewish culture. The forces conspiring against the Lord (vv. 1–5, 14–16) no doubt cast a pall over an otherwise delightful occasion, but the light of the resurrection will reveal even the bitter events to come as integral to the joy of final redemption they will help produce,” explains Dr. R. C. Sproul.

It is most likely Judas departed prior to the institution of the Lord’s Supper (John 13:31). From Matthew’s account, it was during the eating of the Passover Meal when Jesus took bread, blessed it, broke it and gave each disciple a portion of it. Jesus said, ““Take, eat; this is my body.” He then took a common cup filled with wine, gave thanks and said, ““Drink of it, all of you, ²⁸ for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”

“At this point Passover passes over into the Lord’s Supper; for it was while, toward the close of the Passover meal, the men were all eating freely (see on verse 21) that Jesus instituted the new sacrament that was to replace the old. A few more hours and the old symbol, being bloody—for it required the slaying of the lamb—will have served its purpose forever, having reached its fulfilment in the blood shed on Calvary. It was time, therefore, that a new and unbloody symbol replace the old. Nevertheless, by historically linking Passover and Lord’s Supper so closely together Jesus also made clear that what was essential in the first was not lost in the second. Both point to him, the only and all-sufficient sacrifice for the sins of his people. Passover pointed forward to this; the Lord’s Supper points back to it,” states Dr. William Hendriksen.

Were the bread and the wine Jesus blessed and gave thanks for His actual body and blood? Some church traditions, and theologians, advocate this view, or a moderate interpretation of the same. In the days ahead, we will seek to come to a biblical understanding of what Jesus meant and how it applies to the church today when she observes the Lord’s Supper or Communion.

Soli deo Gloria!

.

²⁰ When it was evening, he reclined at table with the twelve. ²¹ And as they were eating, he said, “Truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me.” ²² And they were very sorrowful and began to say to him one after another, “Is it I, Lord?” ²³ He answered, “He who has dipped his hand in the dish with me will betray me. ²⁴ The Son of Man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been better for that man if he had not been born.” ²⁵ Judas, who would betray him, answered, “Is it I, Rabbi?” He said to him, “You have said so.” (Matthew 26:20–25 (ESV)

¹⁷ And when it was evening, he came with the twelve. ¹⁸ And as they were reclining at table and eating, Jesus said, “Truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me, one who is eating with me.” ¹⁹ They began to be sorrowful and to say to him one after another, “Is it I?” ²⁰ He said to them, “It is one of the twelve, one who is dipping bread into the dish with me. ²¹ For the Son of Man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been better for that man if he had not been born.” (Mark 14:17–21 (ESV)

 ^“And when the hour came, he reclined at table, and the apostles with him.” (Luke 22:14 (ESV)

²¹ After saying these things, Jesus was troubled in his spirit, and testified, “Truly, truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me.” ²² The disciples looked at one another, uncertain of whom he spoke. ²³ One of his disciples, whom Jesus loved, was reclining at table at Jesus’ side, ²⁴ so Simon Peter motioned to him to ask Jesus of whom he was speaking. ²⁵ So that disciple, leaning back against Jesus, said to him, “Lord, who is it?” ²⁶ Jesus answered, “It is he to whom I will give this morsel of bread when I have dipped it.” So when he had dipped the morsel, he gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot.” (John 13:21–26 (ESV)

As the last week of the Lord Jesus Christ is studied, it is important to compare all four Gospels, their particular narratives and themes pertaining to the death, burial and resurrection of the Lord. Today’s focus concerns the celebration of the Passover Meal. This particular feast would picture, and immediately precede, the historical death, burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ.

“Per the custom of their day, Jesus and His disciples recline at the Passover, lying on cushions arranged like a horseshoe around the table (Matt. 26:20). Some commentators believe that the room in which they are commemorating the exodus belongs to John Mark, an associate of Barnabas and Paul (Acts 15:36–41) and probable author of the second book of the New Testament. Whether or not this is the case, we do know that Jesus sees this Passover as the beginning of events absolutely critical to His work,” explains one commentator.

Jesus ate the meal with the Twelve Apostles, including Judas Iscariot. It was during the feast when Jesus announced one of the twelve would betray Him. The response by the eleven was a mixture of sorrow and uncertainty. Judas did not respond. He knew what he was going to do and why he would do it; he would betray Jesus for money.

The eleven began asking Jesus if any one of them was the betrayer. Jesus responded in the follow manner.  ““He who has dipped his hand in the dish with me will betray me.” ““It is one of the twelve, one who is dipping bread into the dish with me.” ““It is he to whom I will give this morsel of bread when I have dipped it.” ” So when he had dipped the morsel, he gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot.”

Judas played along with the rest of the disciples by asking if he was the betrayer. Matthew records Jesus’ response to Judas’ question. Judas, who would betray him, answered, “Is it I, Rabbi?” He said to him, “You have said so.”

“Such knowledge of the future is also shown when Jesus reveals that He will be handed over to sinners (vv. 20–21). This betrayal fulfills Scripture (v. 24), but how? First, the Messiah must feel the punishment His sinful people have earned and Judas’ betrayal may be one way the Father metes out His wrath. Israel pledged to follow God and then betrayed Him, breaking His Law (Hos. 8); now Jesus — the true Israel — endures in the place of His people the same betrayal they deserve for double-crossing the covenant Lord. In Christ, God repays Israel in kind. Moreover, though the Psalms belong to the entire covenant community, the Psalter is uniquely the king’s song book. David’s greatest son can only sing the Psalms if He feels a friend’s betrayal (see Ps. 55),” states Dr. R. C. Sproul.

Judas did not operate independently of God’s providence. As with Joseph’s brothers, what Judas intended for evil God meant for good (Gen. 50:20). God was in complete and providential control.

“Judas does not operate independently of the Almighty’s sovereign decree (Matt. 26:24–25). But Judas’ evil purpose makes him no less guilty for bringing about what God has ordained,” concludes Dr. Sproul.

John Calvin comments, “Men can do nothing but what God has appointed, still this does not free them from condemnation, when they are led by a wicked desire to sin. For though God directs them, by an unseen bridle, to an end which is unknown to them, nothing is farther from their intention than to obey his decrees.”

Christ’s betrayal results both from divine providence and human sin. However, the LORD mysteriously remains unstained by evil in the process. This demonstrates the doctrine of providence; God’s purposeful sovereignty.

Soli deo Gloria!

¹⁷ “Now on the first day of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying, “Where will you have us prepare for you to eat the Passover?” ¹⁸ He said, “Go into the city to a certain man and say to him, ‘The Teacher says, My time is at hand. I will keep the Passover at your house with my disciples.’ ” ¹⁹ And the disciples did as Jesus had directed them, and they prepared the Passover.” Matthew 26:17–19 (ESV)

¹² “And on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they sacrificed the Passover lamb, his disciples said to him, “Where will you have us go and prepare for you to eat the Passover?” ¹³ And he sent two of his disciples and said to them, “Go into the city, and a man carrying a jar of water will meet you. Follow him, ¹⁴ and wherever he enters, say to the master of the house, ‘The Teacher says, Where is my guest room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?’ ¹⁵ And he will show you a large upper room furnished and ready; there prepare for us.” ¹⁶ And the disciples set out and went to the city and found it just as he had told them, and they prepared the Passover.” (Mark 14:12–16 (ESV)

⁷ “Then came the day of Unleavened Bread, on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed. ⁸ So Jesus sent Peter and John, saying, “Go and prepare the Passover for us, that we may eat it.” ⁹ They said to him, “Where will you have us prepare it?” ¹⁰ He said to them, “Behold, when you have entered the city, a man carrying a jar of water will meet you. Follow him into the house that he enters ¹¹ and tell the master of the house, ‘The Teacher says to you, Where is the guest room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?’ ¹² And he will show you a large upper room furnished; prepare it there.” ¹³ And they went and found it just as he had told them, and they prepared the Passover.” (Luke 22:7–13 (ESV)

“Now before the Feast of the Passover, when Jesus knew that his hour had come to depart out of this world to the Father, having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them to the end.” (John 13:1 (ESV)

As the last week of the Lord Jesus Christ is studied, it is important to compare all four Gospels, their particular narratives and themes pertaining to the death, burial and resurrection of the Lord. Today’s focus concerns the preparation for the Passover Feast. This particular feast would picture, and immediately precede, the historical death, burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ.

All four narratives document the initial preparation for the Passover. The
Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) also refer to the day of Unleavened Bread. What is the significance of this distinction? Both titles refer to the same Spring seasonal celebration of the Lord’s deliverance of Israel from Egypt (Ex. 12:1-28). Both titles were used interchangeably. It would be comparable to our expressions of Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays and Seasons Greetings, in which all refer to the observance of the Lord’s incarnation to a greater, or lesser, extent.

“The Passover lambs were killed (Mark 14:12) on 14 Nisan (March/April). That evening, the Passover meal was eaten. The Feast of Unleavened Bread followed immediately after Passover, from 15–21 Nisan. The entire time was often referred to either as “Passover” (Luke 22:1), or as the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Therefore the first day refers to 14 Nisan,” explains Dr. John MacArthur.  

All four accounts reveal the sovereign authority of the Lord Jesus. He knows what is going to occur in the ensuing hours and He diligently seeks the fulfillment of Scripture and His atoning mission. This includes the Passover, for He is the fulfillment of the Passover Lamb (John 1:29-35; I Cor. 5:6-8). Each Gospel provides a unique perspective on the events. However, none are contradictory to each other.

“Nothing is said about the purchase of a lamb. We may probably assume that this had been attended to a few days earlier. See Exod. 12:3. Further preparations had to be made however,” explains Dr. William Hendriksen.

“During the afternoon the lamb must be killed in the forecourt of the temple (cf. Exod. 12:6). A room of sufficient size must be obtained, and everything in connection with this room and its furniture must be arranged. Besides, purchases must be made: of unleavened bread, bitter herbs, wine, etc. The lamb must be made ready for use, the sauce must be prepared. Since it was now Thursday morning, there can be no delay.”

“With the Passover at hand, the disciples come to Jesus to inquire of the place where the meal is to be eaten (Matt. 26:17). This festival, one of the most important feast days on the Jewish calendar, has to be celebrated within Jerusalem proper, and so our Lord and His followers must find a place to eat the Passover meal within the city, for they have been staying in Bethany (v. 6). Christ is able to direct His disciples on how they may find a room in which to eat the Passover, and they then go forth to follow His instructions (vv. 18–19),” states Dr. R. C. Sproul.

Matthew, Mark and Luke all conclude their narratives with these words referring to the disciples; “They prepared the Passover.”

“Some preachers and scholars have long portrayed Jesus as a helpless victim of events, one who is caught off-guard by His arrest and crucifixion. Today’s passage, among many others, indicates that this view is mistaken. Our Savior’s death is no accident of history, it occurred according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God and of His Christ. He is the sovereign Lord of history who controls all things even until this very day,” concludes Dr. Sproul.

Soli deo Gloria!

¹⁴ “Then one of the twelve, whose name was Judas Iscariot, went to the chief priests ¹⁵ and said, “What will you give me if I deliver him over to you?” And they paid him thirty pieces of silver. ¹⁶ And from that moment he sought an opportunity to betray him.” (Matthew 26:14–16 ESV)

¹⁰ “Then Judas Iscariot, who was one of the twelve, went to the chief priests in order to betray him to them. ¹¹ And when they heard it, they were glad and promised to give him money. And he sought an opportunity to betray him.” (Mark 14:10–11 (ESV)

³ “Then Satan entered into Judas called Iscariot, who was of the number of the twelve. ⁴ He went away and conferred with the chief priests and officers how he might betray him to them. ⁵ And they were glad, and agreed to give him money. ⁶ So he consented and sought an opportunity to betray him to them in the absence of a crowd.” (Luke 22:3–6 ESV)

As the last week of the Lord Jesus Christ is studied, it is important to compare all four Gospels, their particular narratives and themes pertaining to the death, burial and resurrection of the Lord. Today’s focus concerns Judas Iscariot and his plans to betray Jesus into the hands of His enemies.

As Mary initiated her act of selfless devotion to the Lord in anointing Him, Judas initiated his contact with the chief priests in order to acquire money by betrayal. Luke reveals the actions by Judas were perpetrated by Satan’s internal influence upon the disciple. However, Judas willingly sought to betray the Lord.

What a comparison between Mary and Judas. Mary gave while Judas pursued every opportunity to get. Mary was public in her adoration of Jesus. Judas was private in his effort to betray Jesus. Mary’s object of worship was the Lord. Judas’ object of worship was money. Mary’s legacy is one of loving adoration. Judas’ legacy is heartless betrayal of the Master who loved him. Mary is famous. Judas is infamous.

“Commentators on Matthew 26 point out the contrast between Mary’s act of love in verses 6–13 (see John 12:1–8) and Judas’ evil in today’s passage. Judas is treacherously secretive, betraying the Lord behind His back (Matt. 26:14–15), but Mary publicly pours oil upon His head (vv. 6–13). Mary is selfless; she gives something up to bless her Savior (vv. 7, 10). Judas is selfish; he looks to profit by helping to bring the curse of death upon Jesus (v. 15). Finally, Judas sells out Jesus for a relatively small amount of money, but Mary honors Christ with a large amount of her resources — a year’s worth of wages (v. 9; John 12:5),” explains Dr. R. C. Sproul.

“Standing in sharp contrast to the love and devotion of Mary was the hatred and treachery of Judas. This disciple, who is understandably referred to last in the lists of the Twelve, was the son of Simon, who was also called “Iscariot.” The name “Iscariot” means “man of Kerioth,” which was a small town in Judea about 23 miles south of Jerusalem (cf. 3:19). Thus Judas was not a Galilean like the other disciples,” states Dr. John MacArthur.

“It is clear that Judas never had any spiritual interest in Jesus—he was attracted to him because he expected Jesus to become a powerful religious and political leader. He saw great potential for power, wealth, and prestige through his association with him. But Jesus knew what Judas was like from the start, and that is why he chose him as one of the Twelve. He was the one who would betray him so that the Scripture and God’s plan of salvation would be fulfilled (Ps. 41:9; 55:12–15, 20–21; Zech. 11:12–13; John 6:64, 70–71; 13:18; 17:12).”

Are you more like Mary or Judas? This is a provocative question but a necessary one. How we answer reveals our true nature and eternal destiny.

“Judas’ betrayal of the Savior is the most wicked deed ever committed. It warns us to be careful lest sin take hold of our hearts and make us turn our backs on Christ. Those who truly know Jesus will not finally betray Him, but it is possible even for Christians to become disenchanted with the way God works out His plan and fall into transgression. Let us take care to remember that we have no right to call the Lord’s way of doing things into question,” concludes Dr. Sproul.

Soli deo Gloria!

¹⁰ But Jesus, aware of this, said to them, “Why do you trouble the woman? For she has done a beautiful thing to me. ¹¹ For you always have the poor with you, but you will not always have me. ¹² In pouring this ointment on my body, she has done it to prepare me for burial. ¹³ Truly, I say to you, wherever this gospel is proclaimed in the whole world, what she has done will also be told in memory of her.” (Matthew 26:10–13 (ESV)

⁶ But Jesus said, “Leave her alone. Why do you trouble her? She has done a beautiful thing to me. ⁷ For you always have the poor with you, and whenever you want, you can do good for them. But you will not always have me. ⁸ She has done what she could; she has anointed my body beforehand for burial. ⁹ And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is proclaimed in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her.” (Mark 14:6–9 (ESV)

⁷ Jesus said, “Leave her alone, so that she may keep it for the day of my burial. ⁸ For the poor you always have with you, but you do not always have me.” (John 12:7–8 (ESV)

One of the principles of proper biblical interpretation is Scripture interprets Scripture. This means the Bible is its own interpreter and never contradicts itself. An example of this interpretative principle is found in the story of Jesus’ anointing at Bethany. Jesus’ response to Mary, and the disciples’ response to her, are recorded not only in Matthew’s Gospel but also in Mark 14:6-9 and John 12:7-8.  

Mary’s extravagant act of worship by anointing Jesus with expensive perfume (Matt. 26:6-7; Mark 14:3; John 12:1-3) was contrasted by the disciples’ indignant response against her act of worship and love for Jesus (Matt. 26:8-9; Mark 14:4-5; John 12:4-6). What then was Jesus’ response, not only to Mary but also to the disciples?

In all three text, Jesus firmly reprimands the disciples, and not Mary. In Matthew and Mark’s account, Jesus posed a rhetorical question to the men; ““Why do you trouble the woman” In Mark and John’s Gospel, He also issued a command; “Leave her alone.” He then commended Mary for what she had done calling it “a beautiful thing.”

He understood, even though the disciples did not, the significance of what Mary had done. She prepared Jesus for what would befall Him in the next several days: His substitutionary death, burial and subsequent resurrection.” He selfless acts pointed to the saving Gospel.

“It was not that the Master was unconcerned about the needs, both physical and spiritual, of those to whom help and mercy should be shown. Far from it, as the following passages indicate: Matt. 5:7; 6:2–4; 12:7; 19:21; Luke 6:20, 36–38; 21:1–4; John 13:29. On this subject, as well as on all others, his teaching was in line with the rest of special revelation (Exod. 23:10, 11; Lev. 19:10; Deut. 15:7–11—was he not in a sense quoting Deut. 15:11?—Ps. 41:1; Prov. 14:21b, 31; 19:17; Isa. 58:7; Jer. 22:16; Dan. 4:27; Amos 2:6, 7; and for the New Testament see 2 Cor. 8:1–9; Gal. 6:2, 9, 10; 2 Thess. 3:13; James 5:1–6),” explains Dr. William Hendriksen.

“But there would be many more opportunities to attend to the cause of Christian charity or benevolence. On the contrary, the opportunity to show love and honor to Jesus in the state of humiliation had almost vanished. Gethsemane, Gabbatha, and Golgotha were just around the corner. What Mary had done was therefore right, beautiful even, for it was prompted by thankfulness of heart. It was also unique in the thoughtfulness it revealed. Moreover, it was regal in its lavishness. Last but not least, it was marvelous in its timeliness.”

What may initially appear to be most important, often is the less important. The meeting of physical needs of the moment can never be equal with the eternal significance of the Gospel, and those who proclaim it. Mary’s act pointed the eternal love of God, displayed on the cross. While meeting the social, and material needs of the poor is a good and blessed thing to do, the heralding of the Gospel is far greater and lasts longer (John 4).

What legacy are you living and leaving? Is it the materialism of the moment, or the ministry of a lifetime?

Soli deo Gloria!  

⁸ And when the disciples saw it, they were indignant, saying, “Why this waste? ⁹ For this could have been sold for a large sum and given to the poor.”  (Matthew 26:8–9 (ESV)

⁴ There were some who said to themselves indignantly, “Why was the ointment wasted like that? ⁵ For this ointment could have been sold for more than three hundred denarii and given to the poor.” And they scolded her.” (Mark 14:4–5 (ESV)

⁴ But Judas Iscariot, one of his disciples (he who was about to betray him), said, ⁵ “Why was this ointment not sold for three hundred denarii and given to the poor?” ⁶ He said this, not because he cared about the poor, but because he was a thief, and having charge of the moneybag he used to help himself to what was put into it.” (John 12:4–6 (ESV)

One of the principles of proper biblical interpretation is Scripture interprets Scripture. This means the Bible is its own interpreter and never contradicts itself. An example of this interpretative principle is found in the story of Jesus’ anointing at Bethany. Mark 14:4-5 and John 12:4-6 are a parallel accounts of Matthew’s text. All three Gospels chronicle the event occurred in the village of Bethany (Matt. 26:6; Mark 14:3; John 12:1).

Mary’s extravagant act of worship by anointing Jesus with expensive perfume (Matt. 26:6-7; Mark 14L3; John 12:1-3) was contrasted by the disciples’ indignant response. To be indignant (ἀγανακτέω; aganakteo) means to be angry and to judge something, or someone, as being wrong. It is to be irritated, provoked and upset towards someone or some situation. The disciples were indignant at Mary.

Some of the disciples expressed this anger only to themselves. Other spoke publically. They objected to such waste. They reasoned the nard, or expensive perfume, could have been sold and the proceeds given to the poor. They estimated the value to be in excess of three hundred denarius. A denarius was a day’s wage for a common laborer, it represented a year’s work.

Mark recorded the disciples scolded Mary (Mark 14:5). To scold (ἐμβριμάομαι; embrimaomai means to harshly denounce, and to exhibit irritation, or even anger, in expressing reproof. Mary was not shy in her worship towards the Lord. The disciples were not shy in their denouncement of Mary.

John adds this indignant response was not completely altruistic, unselfish and humane. He commented about Judas Iscariot’s true perspective towards Mary’s actions and the worth of the perfume. Judas was not concerned about the poor. He was concerned about himself. He was a thief, in charge of the moneybag and stole what was in it. This is a preview of Judas betrayal to come in the ensuing days.

“It is almost beyond belief that the disciples should, by implication, mark as lacking in sufficient sympathy for the poor a most generous hostess; in fact one who together with her sister was in the habit of showing hospitality to them and to their Master whenever these poor people (Matt. 8:20), in need of constant help (27:55, 56), were in the neighborhood. It is even more amazing when one considers that at this very hour these adverse critics, the disciples, were being entertained at the home of one of Mary’s friends,” explains Dr. William Hendriksen.

“He is ungrateful who denies that he has received a kindness which has been bestowed upon him; he is ungrateful who conceals it; he is ungrateful who makes no return for it; most ungrateful of all is he who forgets it.” — Seneca, De Beneficiis III.1.

What will be the response by the Lord to not only Mary, but also to His disciples? More to follow. May we quick to listen and slow to speak.

Soli deo Gloria!

⁶ Now when Jesus was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, ⁷ a woman came up to him with an alabaster flask of very expensive ointment, and she poured it on his head as he reclined at table. Matthew 26:6–7 ESV)

³ And while he was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, as he was reclining at table, a woman came with an alabaster flask of ointment of pure nard, very costly, and she broke the flask and poured it over his head.” (Mark 14:3 ESV)

“Six days before the Passover, Jesus therefore came to Bethany, where Lazarus was, whom Jesus had raised from the dead. ² So they gave a dinner for him there. Martha served, and Lazarus was one of those reclining with him at table. ³ Mary therefore took a pound of expensive ointment made from pure nard, and anointed the feet of Jesus and wiped his feet with her hair. The house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume.” (John 12:1–3 ESV)

One of the principles of proper biblical interpretation is Scripture interprets Scripture. This means the Bible is its own interpreter and never contradicts itself. An example of this interpretative principle is found in the story of Jesus’ anointing at Bethany. Mark 14:3 and John 12:1-8 are a parallel account of Matthew’s text. All three Gospels chronicle the event occurred in the village of Bethany (Matt. 26:6; Mark 14:3; John 12:1).

“There is no conflict between this account (Matt. 26:6) and John 12:1, “Now six days before the Passover Jesus came to Bethany.…” The time indication in Matt. 26:2, “after two days” does not apply to the anointing at Bethany (verses 6–13). At verse 6 Matthew begins to tell a new story. To do so he must go back a few days, to the preceding Saturday evening, when a supper was given at Bethany in honor of Jesus,” explains Dr. William Hendriksen.

“Each night during the last week of His life Jesus is staying in Bethany, a village about an hour’s walk from Jerusalem (Matt. 21:17), probably because the Holy City, filled to the brim with Passover pilgrims, has few vacancies,” explains Dr. R. C. Sproul.

Matthew and Mark record Jesus’ anointing took place at the home of Simon the Leper (Matt. 26:6; Mark 14:3), during a dinner (John 12:1). Mary, Martha and Lazarus were also in attendance (John 12:2-3). Some commentators speculate Simon may have been the father of the three siblings, but we cannot say for certain.

Martha served while Lazarus reclined at table, presumably as an honored guest (John 12:2-3). This was because the dinner was given in Jesus’ honor following the events of John 11 when Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead. John reveals the woman who anointed Jesus was none other than Mary (Matt. 26:7; John 12:3).

“Present at this supper were at least fifteen men: Jesus, The Twelve, Lazarus (John 12:2), and a certain Simon, mentioned only here (Matt. 26:6) and in Mark 14:3. The idea readily suggests itself that the supper (or “dinner” if one prefers) was prompted by love for the Lord, specifically by gratitude for the raising of Lazarus and for the healing of Simon, the man who had been a leper, is still called “Simon the leper,” but had presumably been healed by Jesus. It was at the home of this Simon that the dinner was given,” states Dr. Hendriksen. .

Matthew and Mark indicate Mary had an alabaster flask containing expensive ointment (Matthew 26:7a; Mark 14:3). The flask was perhaps made from pure gypsum. John says the ointment was made from pure nard and measured a pound. Mary was extravagant, not only when she broke the beautiful flask but also when she poured its contents on Jesus’ head (Matt.26:7; Mark 14:3). There was so much ointment remaining that she also anointed the feet of Jesus and wiped His feet with her hair (John 12:3).

Mary’s act was one of unbounded devotion for the Lord. It will be contrasted by the indignity of the disciples. May we choose to live in such a way that our actions, speech and attitudes reflect an utmost devotion for the Lord Jesus Christ.

Soli deo Gloria!