How Much Do Regard or Disregard Jesus?

Notes for the Ekklesia Meeting
Sundays @ 10:00 a.m. Info: (651) 283-0568 Discipleship Training Ministries, Inc www.dtminc.org Today’s Date: May 7, 2006

How Much Do You Regard or Disregard Jesus?
by Dan Trygg

"When Jesus had finished all these sayings, He said to His disciples, 2 ‘You know that after two days the Passover is coming, and the Son of Man will be delivered up to be crucified.’ 3 Then the chief priests and the elders of the people gathered in the palace of the high priest, whose name was Caiaphas, 4 and plotted together in order to arrest Jesus by stealth and kill Him. 5 But they said, ‘Not during the feast, lest there be an uproar among the people.’ 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. 8 And when the disciples saw it, they were indignant, saying, ‘Why this waste?’" Matthew 26:1-8

"But those who desire to be rich fall into temptation, and a snare, and many undiscerning and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction." I Timothy 6:9

Chapter 24 and 25 of Matthew were Jesus’ teaching about His coming and the close of the age. Most of what He talked about in this discourse was about events very distant in the future. This chapter begins with a reality check. After concluding His prophetic sermon on the future, Jesus reminds His disciples, "You know that after two days the Passover is coming, and the Son of Man is to be delivered up to be crucified." This serves as a reality check for the reader, as well, as the apostle uses these words to pull our focus back to the main core of the gospel story, Jesus’ sacrificial death on our behalf. Jesus did not let the apostles linger long over future dreams of glory. He brought them right back to the present, because there was much to be done.

The information about His future coming is not to be a focus of our thinking, either. It is meant to keep us on task, to remind us that we will have to give an account to Him when He returns. Now, lest the apostles get caught up in fruitless discussion about things over which they have no control, the Lord brings them immediately back to the present, so their focus would be on what is taking place around them. (Note that He did the same thing after His resurrection. In Acts 1, they ask Him, "Lord, is it at this time You are restoring the kingdom to Israel?" His response? "It is not for you to know times or epochs which the Father has fixed by His own authority; rather, you shall take power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses… to the remotest parts of the earth" [Acts 1:7,8].)

Matthew uses another literary device to pull us back into the storyline. Verse 3 begins with "then". The Greek word underlying that translation means "at that time", so what Matthew does is place verses 3-5 alongside of Jesus’ conversation with His disciples. In other words, at the very time Jesus was pulling His disciples’ attention back to the reality of His impending crucifixion, the chief priests and elders were gathered in the court of the high priest, Caiaphas, counseling together to seize Jesus by treachery and kill Him. Both groups, though separated geographically, were simultaneously discussing His demise. What a dramatic way to pull us back into the larger story! Note that the gathering at the high priest’s house included not only the chief priests, but also the elders of the people. The outcome of their discussion was that they did not want to arrest Him during the feast (of unleavened bread), so that they might avoid a riot among the people. They needed to arrest Him secretly, when there were no crowds.

There is some debate about how verses 6-16 fit into the sequence of events. Some see a discrepancy between the synoptic gospel accounts and the gospel of John. On the surface it appears that the anointing of Jesus at Bethany occurs on Tuesday evening in the first two gospels, while John records it as having taken place before the triumphal entry on Palm Sunday, probably late on Saturday evening. (This would have been a perfect time for Jesus to travel into the vicinity of Jerusalem without being detected. Most people, having stayed home for the Sabbath, would not have ventured out after sundown. If Jesus and His disciples had lodged a short distance outside of the Jerusalem area, they could have packed up and come to Bethany after sundown.) It is important to remember that John wrote his account much later than the other three gospel accounts. On numerous occasions, he supplies information not included in the earlier gospels, often expanding on, or clarifying, events briefly summarized or abridged by the other writers. This is an example of such an occasion. A closer look at the Greek structure in Matthew and Mark reveals that their accounts of the anointing at Bethany could be flashbacks to what had happened earlier, not a continuation of the storyline. In other words, they offer a further explanation for the gathering of the chief priests and elders, and are to be understood as background information.

From John’s account, we find out that the unnamed woman was actually Mary of Bethany, sister of Martha and Lazarus (Jn. 11:1-12:11; cf. Lk. 10:38-42). From these passages we learn that Mary and her family had a long standing relationship with Jesus. The Lord had considered Lazarus one of His special friends. Furthermore, Mary had been a devoted follower of His teachings for some time. Jesus had encouraged this by allowing her to sit at His feet as did the other disciples, a practice which most rabbis of the day would not have permitted. It may also be that their home served as a base of operation, a place where Jesus could safely stay on His visits to Jerusalem (cf. Mk. 11:1,11,12,19,20,27; 14:3; Mt. 21:17). At feast times the population of Jerusalem could easily triple in size. Finding desirable places to lodge or camp close in to the city could be a challenge. Having friends offer their home would simplify things greatly, and would have been appreciated. From all these factors, it is clear that there was a well-founded basis for her respect and admiration of Him. The immediate reason for her lavish display of devotion is also quite understandable. Jesus had recently raised her brother from the dead. To say she was grateful is a gross understatement.

John supplies us with further details regarding the vial of ointment which Mary used. According to his record, it was not just "very costly", as Matthew puts it, …it was worth more that 300 day’s wages! It was nearly twelve ounces of pure spikenard, a very rare spice imported from the Himalayan region. This was truly a gift fit for a king. For this family to even have such a treasure in their possession indicates that they must have once had much wealth. The fact that the sisters were serving, however, indicates that they were now too poor to afford to hire domestic help, which was very inexpensive and commonly employed in that day. How do we account for this disparity? Matthew and Mark refer to the house as the "home of Simon the leper". We know nothing more than this detail. He probably was the father of these three siblings. Whether he was still alive is never revealed, but his malady could easily have been the cause of the family misfortunes of recent years. So in the midst of their current relative poverty, the family still had a treasure left over from better times, …probably kept against the day that it might need to be sold, but representing the prosperous time in which these siblings grew up. It was more than a possession. It represented the former pride and glory of their family’s past. Yet now Mary, probably in agreement with her brother and sister, approaches Jesus while He was reclining at the table, breaks the alabaster vial, and anoints His head and feet, wiping the excess off His feet with her hair. Instantly, the house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume.

Note that in the reaction of the disciples there is no sense of impropriety or sexual innuendo. What Mary did was in no way inappropriate. To anoint the head and wash the feet of guests was a common practice of hospitality. She took the place of the lowliest of servants to do this, but transformed this menial task into a precious act of honor and devotion by giving of her very best, the vial of ointment. By wiping His feet with her hair, she identified herself with the fragrance which He now carried. The disciples’ only objection was the waste of the expensive perfume.

We find out from John that it was Judas who initiated this protest (12:4). John also reveals that Judas had a selfish interest, in that he had been embezzling funds from the ministry collection box. He was offended because he wanted the money for himself. His concern was not to honor Jesus for Jesus’ sake, but to get wealth and honor for himself. Following Jesus was a means to an end. For Judas, the end was his own personal gain and glory. Mary’s action cut against any self gain, so he objected that it was "waste". When Jesus defended Mary’s action, even commending her, that seems to have been the last straw for Judas. He left the company (The word translated as "then" is the same as in vs. 3, usually referring to action at that time.) in Bethany and proceeded into the city to visit the chief priests to find out how much they would pay him to deliver Jesus up to them. The thirty pieces of silver which they offered was the price of a common slave (Ex. 21:32), an amount probably equivalent to 120 day’s wages, or a little more than a third of the value of the ointment which Mary had just "wasted" upon Jesus. The chief priests’ offer was no great reward. It was more of an insult, and reveals how little they thought of Jesus (cf. Zech. 11:12). He didn’t even haggle with the priests for more. Judas betrayed Jesus more out of spite than money.

Having made arrangements with Judas, the chief priests called together the council of priests and elders to prepare them for the possibility of Jesus’ arrest. If Judas succeeded in delivering Jesus over to them in secret, they would have to act fast to get everything accomplished according to law, and still keep the crowds of people unaware of what was happening. The council agreed that Jesus must not be arrested publicly. How much the chief priests actually revealed to them is unknown, but they agreed on this point. Thus, the wheels were set in motion.

I Tim. 6:9 very poignantly states the principle operative in Judas’ life, which was in such direct contrast to Mary’s heart and actions. Paul writes, "The ones wanting to be rich fall into a test and a snare and many undiscerning and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction." The word translated as "destruction" is the same as the word for "waste" in Matt. 26:8. Mary freely gave her best to Jesus. In Judas’ eyes she had "wasted" her treasure on Him. She could have made better use of it, in his mind. Jesus, however, commended her for her act of devotion. Judas’ desire for gain, however, led him down a reckless path. He was tested by this incident, and chose to go after self-interest. In the end, he was led by his undiscerning passion for more, and was caught in a trap that brought him to ruin and waste. Instead of "wasting" something, his entire life ended as a tragic waste. How about you? Are you living to regard Jesus highly, by freely giving your devotion and obedience to Him, or are you disregarding Him, by being stingy with time, money and your attention. Those who honor Him, He will honor. The lives of those who disregard Him will end up as "waste", because they lived only for the here and now.