John 12 commentary

JOHN 12 COMMENTARY
Jesus Anointed at Bethany
1 Six days before the Passover, Jesus came to
Bethany, where Lazarus lived, whom Jesus had
raised from the dead.
BARNES, "Then Jesus came to Bethany - This was near to Jerusalem, and it
was from this place that he made his triumphant entry into the city. See the notes at
Mat_21:1.
CLARKE, "Six days before the Passover - Reckoning the day of the Passover
to be the last of the six. Our Lord came on our Sabbath, the first day of the Jewish
week, to Bethany, where he supped; and on the next day he made his public entry
into Jerusalem: Joh_12:12. Calmet thinks that this was about two months after the
resurrection of Lazarus, on the 9th of Nisan, (March 29), in the thirty-sixth year of
our Lord’s age. It has been observed before - that Calmet adds three years to the
common account.
GILL, "Then Jesus, six days before the passover,.... Or "before the six days of
the passover"; not as designing the days of that feast, for they were seven; but as
reckoning so many days back from it, that is, before the sixth day from the ensuing
passover: if there were six complete days between this and the passover, as this way
of speaking seems to imply; then this must be the day before the Jewish sabbath, and
this is more likely, than that Christ should travel on the sabbath day: but if this was
the sixth day before it, it was their sabbath day, and so at the going out of it in the
evening, a supper was made for him, which with the Jews on that night, was a
plentiful one; for they remembered the sabbath in its going out, as well as in its
coming in (e), and this was to prevent grief at the going out of it: so some days before
the passover, the lamb was separated from the flock, and kept up till the fourteenth
day, Exo_12:3 particularly it may be observed, that seven days before the day of
atonement, the high priest was separated from his own house, and had to the
chamber Palhedrin (f); and much such a space of time there was, between the day of
the great atonement by Christ, and his unction by Mary; which is said to be against
the day of his burial, which being the same day with his sufferings, was the great day
of atonement: at this time Jesus
came to Bethany, where Lazarus was, which had been dead; the last clause
1

is left out in the Syriac, Persic, and Ethiopic versions:
whom he raised from the dead; that is, "Jesus", as the Alexandrian copy, the
Vulgate Latin, and all the Oriental versions express; and the Ethiopic version adds,
"in Bethany". This was the town of Lazarus; here he lived, and here he died, and here
he was raised from the dead; and here he continued and dwelt, after his resurrection;
and hither Christ came to see him, and the rest of the family, though he knew he
exposed himself to danger in so doing.
HENRY, "In these verses we have,
I. The kind visit our Lord Jesus paid to his friends at Bethany, Joh_12:1. He came
up out of the country, six days before the passover, and took up at Bethany, a town
which, according to the computation of our metropolis, lay so near Jerusalem as to
be within the bills of mortality. He lodged here with his friend Lazarus, whom he had
lately raised from the dead. His coming to Bethany now may be considered,
1. As a preface to the passover he intended to celebrate, to which reference is made
in assigning the date of his coming: Six days before the passover. Devout men set
time apart before, to prepare themselves for that solemnity, and thus it became our
Lord Jesus to fulfil all righteousness. Thus he has set us an example of solemn self-
sequestration, before the solemnities of the gospel passover; let us hear the voice
crying, Prepare ye the way of the Lord.
2. As a voluntary exposing of himself to the fury of his enemies; now that his hour
was at hand he came within their reach, and freely offered himself to them, though
he had shown them how easily he could evade all their snares. Note, (1.) Our Lord
Jesus was voluntary in his sufferings; his life was not forced from him, but resigned:
Lo, I come. As the strength of his persecutors could not overpower him, so their
subtlety could not surprise him, but he died because he would. (2.) As there is a time
when we are allowed to shift for our own preservation, so there is a time when we are
called to hazard our lives in the cause of God, as St. Paul, when he went bound in the
Spirit to Jerusalem.
3. As an instance of his kindness to his friends at Bethany, whom he loved, and
from whom he was shortly to be taken away. This was a farewell visit; he came to take
leave of them, and to leave with them words of comfort against the day of trial that
was approaching. Note, Though Christ depart for a time from his people, he will give
them intimations that he departs in love, and not in anger. Bethany is here described
to be the town where Lazarus was, whom he raised from the dead. The miracle
wrought here put a new honour upon the place, and made it remarkable. Christ came
hither to observe what improvement was made of this miracle; for where Christ
works wonders, and shows signal favours, he looks after them, to see whether the
intention of them be answered. Where he has sown plentifully, he observes whether
it comes up again.
JAMISON, "Joh_12:1-11. The anointing at Bethany.
(See Mat_26:6-13).
six days before the passover — that is, on the sixth day before it; probably
after sunset on Friday evening, or the commencement of the Jewish sabbath
preceding the Passover.
CALVIN, "1.Jesus came to Bethany. We see that they judged too rashly who
thought that Christ would not come to the feast, (2) (John 11:56;) and this,
2

reminds us that we ought not to be so hasty as not to wait patiently and quietly,
till the season arrive, which is unknown to us. Now Jesus came first to Bethany,
that thence he might go three days afterwards to Jerusalem. Meanwhile, he
intended to give Judas a fit time and place for betraying him, that he might
present himself, ready to be sacrificed, at the appointed time; for he is not
ignorant of what is to take place, but willingly comes forward to be sacrificed.
Having come to Bethany six days before the passover, he remained there four
days; which may easily be inferred from Matthew and Mark. On what day the
banquet was made for him, at which he was anointed by Mary, John does not
state; but it seems probable that it took place not long after he had arrived.
There are some who think that, the anointing mentioned by Matthew (Matthew
26:7) and Mark (Mark 14:3) is different from what is mentioned here; but they
are mistaken. They have been led to adopt this view by a calculation of time,
because the two Evangelists, (Matthew 26:2; Mark 14:1,) before relating that
Christ was anointed, speak of two days as having elapsed. But the solution is
easy, and may be given in two ways. For John does not say that Christ was
anointed on the first day after his arrival; so that this might happen even when
he was preparing to depart. Yet, as I have already said, there is another
conjecture which is more probable, that he was anointed one day, at least, or two
days, before his departure; for it is certain that Judas had made a bargain with
the priests, before Christ sent two of his disciples to make ready the passover. (3)
Now, at the very least, one day must have intervened. The Evangelists add, that
he
sought a convenient opportunity for betraying Christ,
(Matthew 26:16,)
after having received the bribe. When, therefore, after mentioning two days, they
add the history of the anointing, they place last in the narrative what happened
first. And the reason is, that after having related the words of Christ,
You know that after two days the Son of man shall be betrayed,
(Matthew 26:2,)
they now add — what had been formerly omitted — in what manner and on
what occasion he was betrayed by his disciple. There is thus a perfect agreement
in the account of his having been anointed at Bethany.
BARCLAY, "LOVE'S EXTRAVAGANCE (John 12:1-8)
12:1-8 Now six days before the Passover Jesus went to Bethany, where Lazarus
was whom he raised from the dead. So they made him a meal there, and Martha
was serving while Lazarus was one of those who reclined at table with him. Now
Mary took a pound of very precious genuine spikenard ointment, and anointed
Jesus' feet, and wiped his feet with her hair; and the house was filled with the
perfume of the ointment. But Judas Iscariot, one of his disciples, the one who was
going to betray him, said: "Why was this ointment not sold for ten pounds, and
the proceeds given to the poor?" He said this, not that he cared for the poor, but
because he was a thief and had charge of the money-box, and pilfered from what
3

was put into it. So Jesus said: "Let her observe it now against the day of my
burial. The poor you have always with you, but me you have not always."
We have seen on other occasions that many scholars believe that certain parts of
John's gospel have become displaced. Some suspect a dislocation here. Moffatt,
for instance, prints it in the order John 12:19-29; John 12:1-18 and John 12:30;
John 12:31-42. We have retained the order of the King James Version (and the
Revised Standard Version) for our studies, but if the reader will read the chapter
in the rearranged order he will see the connection of events and thought more
clearly.
It was coming very near the end for Jesus. To come to Jerusalem for the
Passover was an act of the highest courage, for the authorities had made him in
effect an outlaw (John 11:57). So great were the crowds who came to the
Passover that they could not all possibly obtain lodging within the city itself, and
Bethany was one of the places outside the city boundaries which the law laid
down as a place for the overflow of the pilgrims to stay.
When Jesus came to Bethany they made him a meal. It must have been in the
house of Martha and Mary and Lazarus, for where else would Martha be
serving but in her own house? It was then that Mary's heart ran over in love. She
had a pound of very precious spikenard ointment. Both John and Mark describe
it by the adjective pistikos (Greek #4101) (Mark 14:3). Oddly enough, no one
really knows what that word means. There are four possibilities. It may come
from the adjective pistos (Greek #4103) which means faithful or reliable, and so
may mean genuine. It may come from the verb pinein (Greek #4095) which
means to drink, and so may mean liquid. It may be a kind of trade name, and
may have to be translated simply pistic nard (Greek #3487). It may come from a
word meaning the pistachio nut, and be a special kind of essence extracted from
it. In any event it was a specially valuable kind of perfume. With this perfume
Mary anointed Jesus' feet. Judas ungraciously questioned her action as sheer
waste. Jesus silenced him by saying that money could be given to the poor at any
time, but a kindness done to him must be done now, for soon the chance would
be gone for ever.
There is a whole series of little character sketches here.
(i) There is the character of Martha. She was serving at table. She loved Jesus;
she was a practical woman; and the only way in which she could show her love
was by the work of her hands. Martha always gave what she could. Many and
many a great man has been what he was only because of someone's loving care
for his creature comforts in his home. It is just as possible to serve Jesus in the
kitchen as on the public platform or in a career lived in the eyes of men.
(ii) There is the character of Mary. Mary was the one who above all loved Jesus;
and here in her action we see three things about love.
(a) We see love's extravagance. Mary took the most precious thing she possessed
and spent it all on Jesus. Love is not love if it nicely calculates the cost. It gives its
4

all and its only regret is that it has not still more to give. O. Henry, the master of
the short story, has a moving story called The Gift of the Magi. A young
American couple, Della and Jim, were very poor but very much in love. Each
had one unique possession. Della's hair was her glory. When she let it down it
almost served as a robe. Jim bad a gold watch which had come to him from his
father and was his pride. It was the day before Christmas, and Della had exactly
one dollar eighty-seven cents to buy Jim a present. She went out and sold her
hair for twenty dollars; and with the proceeds bought a platinum fob for Jim's
precious watch. When Jim came home at night and saw Della's shorn head, he
stopped as if stupefied. It was not that he did not like it or love her any less; for
she was lovelier than ever. Slowly he handed her his gift; it was a set of expensive
tortoise-shell combs with jewelled edges for her lovely hair--and he had sold his
gold watch to buy them. Each had given the other all there was to give. Real love
cannot think of any other way to give.
(b) We see love's humility. It was a sign of honour to anoint a person's head.
"Thou anointest my head with oil," says the psalmist (Psalms 23:5). But Mary
would not look so high as the head of Jesus; she anointed his feet. The last thing
Mary thought of was to confer an honour upon Jesus; she never dreamed she
was good enough for that.
(c) We see love's unselfconsciousness. Mary wiped Jesus' feet with the hair of her
head. In Palestine no respectable woman would ever appear in public with her
hair unbound. On the day a girl was married her hair was bound up, and never
again would she be seen in public with her long tresses flowing loose. That was
the sign of an immoral woman. But Mary never even thought of that. When two
people really love each other they live in a world of their own. They will wander
slowly down a crowded street hand in hand heedless of what other people think.
Many are self-conscious about showing their Christianity, concerned always
about what others are thinking about them. Mary loved Jesus so much that it
was nothing to her what others thought.
But there is something else about love here. John has the sentence: "The house
was filled with the fragrance of the ointment." We have seen that so many of
John's statements have two meanings, one which lies on the surface and one
which is underneath. Many fathers of the Church and many scholars have seen a
double meaning here. They have taken it to mean that the whole Church was
filled with the sweet memory of Mary's action. A lovely deed becomes the
possession of the whole world and adds to the beauty of life in general, something
which time cannot ever take away.
LOVE'S EXTRAVAGANCE (John 12:1-8 continued)
(iii) There is the character of Judas. There are three things here about him.
(a) We see Jesus' trust in Judas. As far back as John 6:70-71, John shows us
Jesus well aware that there was a traitor within the ranks. It may well be that he
tried to touch Judas' heart by making him the treasurer of the apostolic
company. It may well be that he tried to appeal to his sense of honour. It may
well be that he was saying in effect to him: "Judas, here's something that you can
5

do for me. Here is proof that I need you and want you." That appeal failed with
Judas, but the fact remains that often the best way to reclaim someone who is on
the wrong path is to treat him not with suspicion but with trust; not as if we
expected the worst, but as if we expected the best.
(b) We see one of the laws of temptation. Jesus would not have put Judas in
charge of the money-box unless he had some capabilities in that direction.
Westcott in his commentary said: "Temptation commonly comes through that
for which we are naturally fitted." If a man is fitted to handle money, his
temptation may be to regard money as the most important thing in the world. If
a man is fitted to occupy a place of prominence, his temptation may be to think
first and foremost of reputation. If a man has a particular gift, his temptation
may be to become conceited about that gift. Judas had a gift for handling money
and became so fond of it that he became first a thief and then a traitor for its
sake. The King James Version says that he bare the bag. The verb is bastazein
(Greek #941); bastazein does not mean to bear, or carry, or lift. But in colloquial
English to lift a thing can also mean to steal it. We talk, for instance, of a shop-
lifter. And Judas did not only carry the bag; he pilfered from it. Temptation
struck him at the point of his special gift.
(c) We see how a man's view can be warped. Judas had just seen an action of
surpassing loveliness; and he called it extravagant waste. He was an embittered
man and he took an embittered view of things. A man's sight depends on what is
inside him. He sees only what he is fit and able to see. If we like a person, he can
do little wrong. If we dislike him, we may misinterpret his finest action. A
warped mind brings a warped view of things; and, if we find ourselves becoming
very critical of others and imputing unworthy motives to them, we should, for a
moment, stop examining them and start examining ourselves.
Lastly, there is here one great truth about life. Some things we can do almost any
time, but some things we will never do, unless we grasp the chance when it
comes. We are seized with the desire to do something fine and generous arid big-
hearted. But we put it off--we will do it tomorrow; and the fine impulse goes, and
the thing is never done. Life is an uncertain thing. We think to utter some word
of thanks or praise or love but we put it off; and often the word is never spoken.
Here is one tragic instance of how a man realized too late the things he had never
said and done. Thomas Carlyle loved Jane Welsh Carlyle, but he was a cross-
grained, irritable creature and he never made life happy for her. Unexpectedly
she died. J. A. Froude tells us of Carlyle's feelings when he lost her. "He was
looking through her papers, her notebooks and journals; and old scenes came
mercilessly back to him in the vistas of mournful memory. In his long sleepless
nights, he recognized too late what she had felt and suffered under his childish
irritabilities. His faults rose up in remorseless judgment, and as he had thought
too little of them before, so now he exaggerated them to himself in his helpless
repentance . . . 'Oh!' he cried again and again, 'if I could see her but once more,
were it but for five minutes, to let her know that I always loved her through all
that. She never did know it, never.'" There is a time for doing and for saying
things; and, when it is past, they may never be said and never be done.
6

It was Judas' ill-natured complaint that the money which that ointment could
have raised should have been given to the poor. But as scripture said: "The poor
will never cease out of the land; therefore I command thee saying, You shall open
wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in the land"
(Deuteronomy 15:11). To help the poor was something that could be done any
time. To show the heart's devotion to Jesus had to be done before the Cross on
Calvary took him to its cruel arms. Let us remember to do things now, for the
chance so often never comes again, and the failure to do them, especially the
failure to express love brings bitter remorse.
PINK 1-11, "Below is an Analysis of the passage which we are about to study:—
1. Jesus at Bethany again, verse 1.
2. The supper, verse 2.
3. Mary’s devotion, verse 3.
4. Judas’ criticism, verses 4-6.
5. Christ’s vindication of Mary, verses 7, 8.
6. The curiosity of the crowd, verse 9.
7. The enmity of the priests, verses 10, 11.
What is recorded in John 12 occurred during the last week before our Lord’s
death. In it are gathered up what men would term the "results" of His public
ministry. For three years the unvarying and manifold perfections of His blessed
Person had been manifested both in public and in private. Two things are here
emphasized: there was a deepening appreciation on the part of His own; but a
steady hardening of unbelief and increasing hostility in His enemies. Three most
striking incidents in the chapter illustrate the former: first, Christ is seen in the
midst of a circle of His most intimate friends in whose love He was permanently
embalmed; second, we behold how that a striking, if transient, effect, had been
made on the popular mind: the multitude hailed Him as "king"; third, a hint is
given of the wider influence He was yet to wield, even then at work, beyond the
bounds of Judaism: illustrated by the "Greeks" coming and saying, "We would
see Jesus." But on the other hand, we also behold in this same chapter the
workings of that awful enmity which would not be appeased until He had been
put to death. The hatred of Christ’s enemies had even penetrated the inner circle
of His chosen apostles, for one of them was so utterly lacking in appreciation of
His person that he openly expressed his resentment against the attribute of love
which Mary paid to his Master. And at the close of the first section of this
chapter we are told, "But the chief priests consulted that they might put Lazarus
also to death." "In this hour there meet a ripeness of love which Jesus has won
for Himself in the hearts of men, and a maturity of alienation which forebodes
that His end cannot be far distant" (Dr. Dods).
In a most remarkable way and in numerous details John 12 abounds in
contrasts. What could be more exquisitely blessed than its opening scene: Love
preparing a feast for its Beloved; Martha serving, now in His presence; Lazarus
seated with perfect composure and in joyous fellowship with the One who had
called him out of the grave; Mary freely pouring out her affection by anointing
with costly spikenard Him at whose feet she had learned so much. And yet what
can be more solemn than the death-shades which fall across this very scene: the
Lord Himself saying, "Against the day of my burying hath she kept this,’ so soon
7

to be followed by those heart-moving words, Now is my soul troubled" (John
12:27). His own death was now in full view, present, no doubt, to His heart as He
had walked with Mary to the tomb of Lazarus. As we have seen in John 11, He
felt deeply the groaning and travailing of that creation which once had come so
fair from His own hands. It was sin which had brought in desolation and death,
and soon He was to be "made sin" and endure in infinite depths of anguish the
judgment of God which was due it. He was about to yield Himself up to death for
the glory of God (John 12:27, 28), for only in the Cross could be laid that
foundation for the accomplishment of God’s eternal counsels.
Christ had ever been the Object of the Father’s complacency. "When he
appointed the foundations of the earth: then I was by him, as one brought up
with him and I was daily his delight" (Prov. 8:29, 30). So too at the beginning of
His public ministry, the Father had declared, "This is my beloved Son, in whom
I am well pleased"
(Matthew 3:17). But now He was about to give the Father new ground for
delight: "Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I
might take it again" (John 10:17). Here then was the deepest character of His
glory, and the Father saw to it that a fitting testimony should be borne to this
very fact. His grace prepared one to enter, in some measure at least, into what
was on the eve of transpiring. Mary’s heart anticipated what lay deepest in His,
even before it found expression in words (John 13:31). She not only knew that
He would die, but she apprehended the infinite preciousness and value of that
death. And how more fittingly could she have expressed this than by anointing
His body "to the burying" (Mark 14:8)!
The link between John 11 and 12 is very precious. There we have, in figure, one
of God’s elect passing from death unto life; here we are shown that into which
the new birth introduces us: Lazarus sitting at meat with the Lord Jesus. "But
now, in Christ Jesus, ye who some times were far off, are made nigh by the blood
of Christ" (Eph. 2:13). This is the marvel of grace. Redemption brings the sinner
into the presence of the Lord, not as a trembling culprit, but as one who is at
perfect ease in that Presence, yea, as a joyful worshipper. It is this which Lazarus
sitting at "the table" with Christ so sweetly speaks of. And yet the opening scene
of John 12 looks forward to that which is still more blessed.
The opening verses of John 12 give us the sequel to what is central in the
preceding chapter. Here we are upon resurrection ground. That which is
foreshadowed in this happy gathering at Bethany is what awaits believers in the
Glory. It is that which shall follow the complete manifestation of Christ as the
resurrection and the life. Three aspects of our glorified state and our future
activities in Heaven are here made known. First, in Lazarus seated at the table
with Christ we learn of both our future position and portion. To be where Christ
is, will be the place we shall occupy: "That where I am, there ye may be also"
(John 14:3). To share with Christ His inherited reward will be our portion. And
how blessedly this comes out here: "They made him a supper... Lazarus was one
of them that sat at the table with him." This will find its realization when Christ
shall say, "The glory which thou gavest me I have given them" (John 17:22)!
"And Martha served." As to our future occupation in the endless ages yet to
come Scripture says very little, yet this we do know, "his servants shall serve
him" (Rev. 22:4). Finally, in Mary’s loving devotion, we behold the unstinted
worship which we shall then render unto Him who sought and bought and
8

brought us to Himself.
"Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was
which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead" (John 12:1). This verse
has long presented a difficulty to the commentators. A few have demurred, but
by far the greater number in each age have considered that Matthew (Matthew
26) and Mark (Mark 14) record the same incident that is found in John 12. But
both Matthew and Mark introduce the anointing at Bethany by a brief mention
of that which occurred only "two days" before the passover; whereas John tells
us it transpired "six days" before the passover (see Matthew 26:2; Mark 14:1;
John 12:1). But the difficulty is self created, and there is no need whatever to
imagine, as a few have done, that Christ was anointed twice at Bethany, with
costly ointment, by a different woman during His last week. The fact is, that,
excepting the order of events, there is nothing whatever in the Synoptists which
in any wise conflicts with what John tells us. How could there be when the Holy
Spirit inspired every word in each narrative? Both Matthew and Mark begin by
telling us of the decision of the Sanhedrin to have Christ put to death, and then
follows the account of His anointing at Bethany. But it is to be carefully noted
that after recording the decision of the Council "two days" before the passover,
Matthew does not use his characteristic term and say "Then when Jesus was in
Bethany, he was anointed"; nor does Mark employ his customary word and say,
"And immediately" or "straightway Jesus was anointed." But how are we to
explain Matthew’s and Mark’s description of the "anointing" out of its
chronological order?
We believe the answer is as follows: The conspiracy of Israel’s leaders to seize
the Lord Jesus is followed by a retrospective glance at the "anointing" because
what happened at Bethany provided them with an instrument which thus
enabled them to carry out their vile desires. The plot of the priests was successful
through the instrumentality of Judas, and that which followed Mary’s
expression of love shows us what immediately occasioned the treachery of the
betrayer. Judas protested against Mary’s extravagance, and the Lord rebuked
him, and it was immediately afterward that the traitor went and made his awful
pact with the priests. Both Matthew and Mark are very definite on this point.
The one tells us that immediately following the Lord’s reply "Then one of the
twelve called Judas Iscariot, went unto the chief priests" (Matthew 26:14); Mark
linking together without a break, the rebuke of Christ and the betrayer’s act by
the word "and" (Mark 14:10). John mentions the "supper" at Bethany in its
historical order, Matthew and Mark treat of the events rising out of the supper,
bringing it in to show us that the rebuke of Christ rankled in the mind of Judas
and caused him to go at once and bargain with the priests.
But how are we to explain the discrepancies in the different accounts? We
answer, There are none. Variations there are, but nothing is inconsistent. The
one supplements the other, not contradicts. When John describes any event
recorded in the Synoptists, he rarely repeats all the circumstances and details
specified by his predecessors, rather does he dwell upon other features not
mentioned by them. Much has been made of the fact that both Matthew and
Mark tell us that the anointing took place in the house of Simon the leper,
whereas John is silent on the point. To this it is sufficient to reply, the fact that
the supper was in Simon’s house explains why Jesus tells us Lazarus "sat at the
table with him": if the supper had been in Lazarus’ house, such a notice would
9

have been superfluous. Admire then the silent harmony of the Gospel
narratives.[1]
"Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany" (John 12:1). The
R.V. more correctly renders this, "Jesus therefore six days before the passover
came to Bethany." But what is the force of the "therefore"? with what in the
context is it connected? We believe the answer is found in John 11:51: Caiaphas
"prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation" etc.—"Jesus therefore six
days before the passover came to Bethany." He was the true paschal Lamb that
was to be sacrificed for His people, therefore did He come to Bethany, which was
within easy walking distance of Jerusalem, where He was to be slain. It is very
striking to note that the very ones who thirsted so greedily for His blood said,
"Not on the feast day, lest there be an uproar among the people" (Matthew
26:5—repeated by Mark 14:2). But God’s counsels could not be thwarted, and at
the very hour the lambs were being slain, the true passover was sacrificed. But
why "six days before the passover"? Perhaps God designed that in this interval
man should fully show forth what he was.
"Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany." The memories of
Bethany cannot fail to touch a chord in the heart of any one who loves the Lord
Jesus. His blood-bought people delight to dwell upon anything which is
associated with His blessed name. But what makes Bethany so attractive is that
He seemed to find in the little company there a resting-place in His toilsome path.
It is blessed to know that there was one oasis in the desert, one little spot where
He who "endured the contradiction of sinners against himself" could retire from
the hatred and antagonism of His enemies. There was one sheltered nook where
He could find those who, although they knew but little, were truly attracted to
Him. It was to this "Elim" in the wilderness (Ex. 15:27) that the Savior now
turned on His last journey to Jerusalem.
"Where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead."
This is very blessed as an introduction to what follows. The Lord Jesus
interpreted the devotion of Mary as "against the day of my burying hath she
kept this" (John 12:7). The Father ordered it that His beloved Son should be
"anointed" here in this home at Bethany in the presence of Lazarus whom
Christ had raised from the dead: it attested the power of His own resurrection!
"There they made him a supper" (John 12:2). This evening meal took place not
at the home of Martha, but, as we learn from the other Evangelists, in the house
of Simon, who also dwelt at Bethany. He is called "the leper" (as Matthew is still
named the "tax-gatherer" after Christ had called him) in remembrance of that
fearful disease from which the Lord, most probably, had healed him. It is quite
likely that he was a relative or an intimate friend of Martha and Mary, for the
elder sister is here seen ministering to his guests as her own, superintending the
entertainment, doing the honors, for so the original word may here imply—
compare the conduct of the mother of Jesus at the marriage in Cana: John 2. It is
blessed to observe that this "supper" was made for Christ, not in honor of
Lazarus!
"There they made him a supper." Note the use of the plural pronoun. Though
this supper was held in the house of "Simon the leper" it is evident that Martha
and Mary had no small part in the arranging of it. This, together with the whole
context, leads us to the conclusion that a feast was here made as an expression of
deep gratitude and praise for the raising of Lazarus. Christ was there to share
10

their happiness. In the previous chapter we have seen Him weeping with those
who wept, here we behold Him rejoicing with those who rejoice! When He
restored to life the daughter of Jairus, He gave the child to her parents and then
withdrew. When He raised the widow’s son at Nain, He restored him to his
mother and then retired. And why? because so far as the record informs us He
was a stranger to them. But here, after He had raised Lazarus, He returned to
Bethany and partook of their loving hospitality. It was His joy to behold their
joy, and share in the delight which His restoration of the link which death had
severed, had naturally produced. That is His "recompense": to rejoice in the joy
of His people. Mark another contrast: when He raised Jairus’ daughter He said
"Give her to eat"; here after the raising of Lazarus, they gave Him to eat!
"There they made him a supper." This points another of the numerous contrasts
in which our passage abounds. Almost at the very beginning of His ministry, just
before He performed His first public "sign," we see the Lord Jesus invited to a
marriage-feast; here, almost at the very close of His public ministry, just after
His last public "sign," a supper is made for Him. But how marked the antithesis!
At Cana He turned the water into wine-emblem of the joy of life; here at Bethany
He is anointed in view of His own burial!
"And Martha served." This is most blessed. This was her characteristic method
of showing her affection. On a former occasion the Lord had gently reproved her
for being "cumbered with much serving," and because she was anxious and
troubled about many things. But she did not peevishly leave off serving
altogether. No; she still served: served not the less attentively, but more wisely.
Love is unselfish. We are not to feast on our own blessings in the midst of a
groaning creation, rather are we to be channels of blessing to those around: John
7:38, 39. But mark here that Martha’s service is connected with the Lord: "They
made him a supper and Martha served." This alone is true service. We must not
seek to imitate others, still less, work for the sake of building up a reputation for
zeal. It must be done to and for Christ: "Always abounding in the work of the
Lord"
(1 Cor. 15:58).
"And Martha served": no longer outside the presence of Christ, as on a former
occasion—note her "serve alone" in Luke 10:40. "In Martha’s ‘serving’ now we
do not find her being ‘cumbered’, but something that is acceptable, as in the joy
of resurrection, the new life, unto Him who has given it. Service is in its true
place when we have first received all from Him, and the joy of it as begotten by
Himself sweetly ministers to Him" (Malachi Taylor).
"But Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him" (John 12:2). This
illustrated the true Christian position. Lazarus had been dead, but now alive
from the dead, he is seated in the company of the Savior. So it is (positionally)
with the believer: "when we are dead in sins, hath quickened us together with
Christ... And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in the
heavenlies in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 2:5, 6). We have been "made meet to be
partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light" (Col. 1:12). Such is our perfect
standing before God, and there can be no lasting peace of heart until it be
apprehended by faith.
"But Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him." This supplies
more than a vague hint of our condition in the resurrected state. In this age of
rationalism the vaguest views are entertained on this subject. Many seem to
11

imagine that Christians will be little better than disembodied ghosts throughout
eternity. Much is made of the fact that Scripture tells us "flesh and blood shall
not inherit the kingdom of God," and the expression "spiritual body" is
regarded as little more than a phantasm. While no doubt the Scriptures leave
much unsaid on the subject, yet they reveal not a little about the nature of our
future bodies. The body of the saint will be "fashioned like unto" the glorious
body of the resurrected Christ (Phil. 3:21). It will therefore be a glorified body,
yet not a non-material one. There was no blood in Christ’s body after He rose
from the dead, but He had "flesh and bones" (Luke 24:39). True, our bodies will
not be subject to their present limitations: sown in weakness, they shall be
"raised in power.’’ A "spiritual body" we understand (in part) to signify a body
controlled by the spirit—the highest part of our beings. In our glorified bodies
we shall eat. The daughter of Jairus needed food after she was restored to life.
Lazarus is here seen at the table. The Lord Jesus ate food after He had risen
from the dead.
"But Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him." "A happy
company it must have been. For if Simon was healed by the Lord at some
previous time, as has been supposed, full to overflowing must his heart have been
for the mercy vouchsafed. And Lazarus, there raised from the dead, what proofs
were two of that company of the Lord’s power and goodness! God only could
heal the leper; God only could raise the dead. A leper healed, a dead man raised,
and the Son of God who had healed the one, and had raised the other, here also
at the table—never before we may say without fear of contradiction had a
supper taken place under such circumstances" (C. E. Stuart).
"Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointed
the feet of Jesus" (John 12:3). Mary had often heard the gracious words which
proceeded out of His mouth: the Lord of glory had sat at their humble board in
Bethany, and she had sat at His feet to be instructed. In the hour of her deep
sorrow He had wept with her, and then had He delivered her brother from the
dead, crowning them with lovingkindness and tender mercy. And how could she
show some token of her love to Him who had first loved her? She had by her a
cruse of precious ointment, too costly for her own use, but not too costly for Him.
She took and broke it and poured it on Him as a testimony of her deep affection,
her unutterable attachment, her worshipful devotion. We learn from John 12:5
that the value of her ointment was the equivalent of a whole year’s wages of a
laboring man (cf. Matthew 20:2)! And let it be carefully noted, this devotion of
Mary was prompted by no sudden impulse: "against the day of my burying hath
she kept this" (John 12:7)—the word means "diligently preserved," used in John
17:12, 15!
the feet of Jesus." Mary’s act occupies the central place in this happy scene. The
ointment was "very costly," but not too costly to lavish upon the Son of God. Not
only did Mary here express her own love, but she bore witness to the inestimable
value of the person of Christ. She entered into what was about to be done to and
by Him: she anointed Him for burial. He was despised and rejected of men, and
they were about to put Him to a most ignominious death. But before any enemy’s
hand is laid upon Him, love’s hands first anoint Him! Thus another striking and
beautiful contrast is here suggested.
12

the feet of Jesus." Mark tells us she "broke the box" before she poured it on the
Savior. This, in figure, spoke of the breaking of His body, of which the broken
bread in the Lord’s Supper is the lasting memorial. Both Matthew and Mark tell
us that she anointed the head of Christ. This is no discrepancy. Evidently, Mary
anointed both His head and feet, but most appropriately was John led to notice
only the latter, for as the Son of God it was fitting that this disciple should take
her place in the dust before Him!
"And wiped his feet with her hair" (John 12:3). How the Holy Spirit delights in
recording that which is done out of love to and for the glory of Christ! How
many little details has He preserved for us in connection with Mary’s devotion.
He has told us of the kind of ointment it was, the box in which it was contained,
the weight of it, and its value; and now He tells us something which brings out,
most blessedly, Mary’s discernment of the glory of Christ. She recognized
something of what was due Him, therefore after anointing Him she wiped His
feet with her "hair"—her "glory" (1 Cor. 11:15)! Her silent act spread around
the savor of Christ as One infinitely precious. Before the treachery of Judas,
Christ receives the testimony of Mary’s affection. It was the Father putting this
seal of deepest devotion upon the One who was about to be betrayed.
"And the house was filled with the odour of the ointment" (John 12:3). This is
most significant, a detail not supplied in the Synoptics, but most appropriate
here. Matthew and Mark tell us how Christ gave orders that "Wheresoever this
gospel shall be preached throughout the whole world, this also that she hath
done shall be spoken of for a memorial of her" (Mark 14:9). This John omits. In
its place he tells us, "And the house was filled with the odour of the ointment."
In the other Gospels the "memorial" goes forth: here the fragrance of Christ’s
person abides in "the house." There is much suggested here: not simply the
"room" but "the house" was filled with the sweet fragrance of the person of
Christ anointed by the spikenard. Sooner or later, all would know what had been
done to the Lord. The people on the housetop would perceive that something
sweet had been offered below. And do not the angels above know what we below
are now rendering unto Christ (cf. 1 Corinthians 11:10, etc.)!
"Mary came not to hear a sermon, although the first of Teachers was there; to sit
at His feet and hear His word, was not now her purpose, blessed as that was in
its proper place. She came not to make known her requests to Him. Time was
when in deepest submission to His will she had fallen at His feet, saying, ‘Lord, if
thou hadst been here, my brother had not died’; but to pour out her
supplications to Him as her only resource was not now her thought, for her
brother was seated at the table. She came not to meet the saints, though precious
saints were there, for it says ‘Jesus loved Martha and Mary and Lazarus.’
Fellowship with them was blessed likewise and doubtless of frequent occurrence;
but fellowship was not her object now. She came not after the weariness and toil
of a week’s battling with the world, to be refreshed from Him, though surely she,
like every saint, had learned the trials of the wilderness; and none more than she,
probably, knew the blessed springs of refreshment that were in Him. But she
came, and that too at the moment when the world was expressing its deepest
hatred of Him, to pour out what she had long treasured up (John 12:7), that
which was most valuable to her, all she had upon earth, upon the person of the
One who had made her heart captive, and absorbed her affections. She thought
not of Simon the leper—she passed the disciples by—her brother and her sister
13

in the flesh and in the Lord engaged not her attention then—‘Jesus only’ filled
her soul—her eyes were upon Him. Adoration, homage, worship, blessing, was
her one thought, and that in honor of the One who was ‘all in all’ to her, and
surely such worship was most refreshing to Him" (Simple Testimony).
"Then saith one of His disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, which should
betray him, Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given
to the poor?" (John 12:4, 5). What a contrast was this from the affectionate
homage of Mary! But how could he who had no heart for Christ appreciate her
devotion! There is a most striking series of contrasts here between these two
characters. She gave freely what was worth three hundred pence; right
afterwards Judas sold Christ for thirty pieces of silver. She was in a "Simon’s"
house; He was a "Simon’s son." Her "box" (Mark 14:3); his "bag" (John 12:6).
She a worshipper; he a thief. Mary drew the attention of all to the Lord; Judas
would turn away the thoughts of all from Christ to "the poor." At the very time
Satan was goading on the heart of Judas to do the worst against Christ, the Holy
Spirit mightily moved the heart of Mary to pour out her love for Him. Mary’s
devotion has given her a place in the hearts of all who have received the Gospel;
Judas by his act of perfidy went to "his own place"—the Pit!
Everything is traced to its source in this Gospel. Matthew 26:8 tells us that
"When his disciples saw it [Mary’s tribute of love], they had indignation, saying,
To what purpose is this waste?" But John shows us who was the one that had
injected the poison into their minds. Judas was the original protester, and his evil
example affected the other apostles. What a solemn case is this of evil
communications corrupting good manners (1 Cor. 15:33)! Everything comes out
into the light here. Just as John is the only one who gives us the name of the
woman who anointed the Lord, so he alone tells us who it was that started the
criticizing of Mary.
In John 12:3 we have witnessed the devotedness of faith and love never
surpassed in a believer. But behind the rosebush lurked the serpent. It reminds
us very much of Psalm 23:5: "Thou preparest a table before me in the presence
of mine enemies: thou anointest my head with oil"! The murmuring of Judas
right after the worship of Mary is most solemnly significant. True valuation of
Christ always brings out the hatred of those who are of Satan. No sooner was He
worshiped as an infant by the wise men from the East, then Herod sought to slay
Him. Immediately after the Father proclaimed Him as His "beloved Son," the
Devil assailed Him for forty days. The apostles were seized and thrown into
prison because the leaders of Israel were incensed that they "taught the people
and preached through Jesus the resurrection from the dead" (Acts 4:2, 3). So in
a coming day many will be beheaded "for the testimony of Jesus" (Rev. 20:4).
"Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the
poor?" (John 12:5). This was the criticism of a covetous soul. How petty his
range of vision! How sordid his conception! He argued that the precious unguent
which had been lavished upon Christ ought to have been sold. He considered it
had been wasted (Mark 14:4). His notion of "waste" was crude and material in
the extreme. Love is never "wasted." Generosity is never "wasted." Sacrifice is
never "wasted." Love grudges nothing to the Lord of love! Love esteems its
costliest nard all inferior to His worth. Love cannot give Him too much. And
where it is given out of love to Christ we cannot give too much for His servants
and His people. How beautifully this is expressed in Philippians 4:18: "having
14

received of Epaphroditus the things which were sent from you, an odour of a
sweet smelt, a sacrifice acceptable, well-pleasing to God."
Judas had no love for Christ, hence it was impossible that he should appreciate
what had been done for Him. Very solemn is this: he had been in the closest
contact with the redeemed for three years, and yet the love of money still ruled
his heart. Cold-heartedness toward Christ and stinginess toward His cause
always go together. "To whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little" (Luke
7:47). There are many professing Christians today infested with a Judas-like
spirit. They are quite unable to understand true zeal and devotedness to the
Lord. They look upon it all as fanaticism. Worst of all, such people seek to cloak
their miserliness in giving to Christian objects by a pretended love for the poor:
‘charity begins at home’ expresses the same spirit. The truth is, and it had been
abundantly demonstrated all through these centuries, that those who do the most
for the poor are the very ones who are most liberal in supporting the cause of
Christ. Let not Christians be moved from a patient continuance in well doing by
harsh criticisms from those who understand not. We must not expect professors
to do anything for Christ when they have no sense of indebtedness to Christ.
"Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence and given to the
poor?" These are the first words of Judas recorded in the Gospels; and how they
reveal his heart! He sought to conceal his base covetousness under the guise of
benevolence. He posed as a friend of the poor, when in reality his soul was
dominated by cupidity. It reminds us of his hypocritical "kiss." It is solemn to
contrast his last words, "I have betrayed innocent blood" (Matthew 27:4).
"This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had
the bag, and bare what was put therein" (John 12:6). It is good to care for the
root, but at that moment the whole mind of God was centered on the Person and
work of His Son, evidenced by His moving Mary to anoint the Savior for His
burial. Opportunities for relieving the poor they always had, and it was right to
do so. But to put them in comparison with the Lord Jesus at such a time, was to
put them out of their place, and to lose sight of Him who was supremely precious
to God.
Judas evidently acted as treasurer for the apostolic company (cf. John 13:29),
having charge of the gifts which the Lord and His disciples received: Luke 8:2, 3.
But the Holy Spirit here tells us that he was a "thief." We believe this intimates
that the "field" (or "estate") which he purchased (Acts 1:18) "with the reward of
iniquity" (or, "price of wrong doing") had been obtained by the money which he
pilfered from the same "bag." Usually this "field" is confounded with the "field"
that was bought with the thirty pieces of silver which he received for the betrayal
of His Master. But that money he returned to the chief priests and elders
(Matthew 27:3, 5), and with it they bought "the potter’s field to bury strangers
in" (Matthew 27:7).
"Then said Jesus, Let her alone" (John 12:7). How blessed! Christ is ever ready
to defend His own! It was the Good Shepherd protecting His sheep from the
wolf. Judas condemned Mary, and others of the apostles echoed his criticism.
But the Lord approved of her gift. Probably others of the guests misunderstood
her action: it would seem an extravagance, and a neglect of duty towards the
needy. But Christ knew her motive and commended her deed. So in a coming
day He will reward even a cup of water which has been given in His name. "Let
her alone": did not this foreshadow His work on high as our Advocate repelling
15

the attacks of the enemy, who accuses the brethren before God day and night
(Rev. 12:10)!
"Against the day of my burying hath she kept this" (John 12:7). This points still
another contrast. Other women "brought sweet spices, that they might come and
anoint him" (Mark 16:1), after He was dead; Mary anointed Him "for his
burial" (Matthew 26:12) six days before He died! Her faith had laid hold of the
fact that He was going to die—the apostles did not believe this (see Luke 24:21
etc.). She had learned much at His feet! How much we miss through our failure
at this point!
Matthew and Mark add a word here which is appropriately omitted by John.
"Verily I say unto you, Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached throughout
the whole world, this also that she hath done shall be spoken of for a memorial of
her" (Mark 14:9). He whose Name is "as ointment poured forth" (Song 1:3),
commended her who, all unconsciously, fulfilled the prophecy, "While the king
sitteth at his table my spikenard sendeth forth the sweet smell thereof" (Song
1:12). In embalming Him, she embalmed herself: her love being the marble on
which her name and deed were sculptured. Note another contrast: Mary gave
Christ a momentary embalming; He embalmed her memory forever in the sweet
incense of His praise. What a witness is this that Christ will never forget that
deed, however small, which is done wholeheartedly in His name and for Himself!
"Hereupon we would further remark that while this can not diminish the sin of
Judas, by making his covetousness any thing but covetousness, yet but for his
mean remonstrance, we might not have known the prodigality of her love. But
for the objection of Judas, we might not have had the commendation of Mary.
But for his evil eve, we should have been without the full instruction of her lavish
hand. Surely ‘The wrath of man shall praise thee’!" (Dr. John Brown).
"For the poor always ye have with you: but me ye have not always" (verse 8).
There is a little point here in the Greek which is most significant, bringing out, as
it does, the minute accuracy of Scripture. In the previous verse "Let alone
(aphes) her" is in the singular number, whereas, "The poor always ye have
(exete) with you" is in the plural number. Let her alone was Christ’s rebuke to
Judas, who was the first to condemn Mary; here in verse 8 the Lord addresses
Himself to the Twelve, a number of whom had been influenced by the traitor’s
words. Remarkably does this show the entire consistency and supplementary
character of the several narratives of this incident. Let us admire the silent
harmonies of Scripture!
"For the poor always ye have with you: but me ye have not always" (John 12:8).
There is a very searching message for our hearts in these words. Mary had
fellowship with His sufferings, and her opportunity for this was brief and soon
passed. If Mary had failed to seize her chance to render love’s adoring testimony
to the preciousness of Christ’s person at that time, she could never have recalled
it throughout eternity. How exquisitely suited to the moment was her witness to
the fragrance of Christ’s death before God, when men deemed Him worthy only
of a malefactor’s cross. She came beforehand to anoint Him "for his burial." But
how soon would such an opportunity pass! In like manner we are privileged
today to render a testimony to Him in this scene of His rejection. We too are
permitted to have fellowship with His sufferings. But soon this opportunity will
pass from us forever! There is a real sense in which these words of Christ to
Mary, "me ye have not always" apply to us. Soon shall we enter into the
16

fellowship of His glory. O that we may be constrained by His love to deeper
devotedness, a more faithful testimony to His infinite worth, and a fuller entering
into His sufferings in the present hour of His rejection by the world.
"For the poor always ye have with you: but me ye have not always." One other
thought on this verse before we leave it. These words of our Lord’s "me ye have
not always" completely overthrow the Papist figment of transubstantiation. If
language means anything, this explicit statement of Christ’s positively repudiates
the dogma of His "real presence," under the forms of bread and wine at the
Lord’s Supper. It is impossible to harmonize that blasphemous Romish doctrine
with this clear-cut utterance of the Savior. The "poor always ye have with you"
in like manner disposes of an idle dream of Socialism.
"Much people of the Jews therefore knew that he was there; and they came not
for Jesus’ sake only, but that they might see Lazarus also, whom he had raised
from the dead" (John 12:9). "This sentence is a genuine exhibition of human
nature. Curiosity is one of the most common and powerful motives in man. The
love of seeing something sensational and out of the ordinary is almost universal.
When people could see at once both the subject of the miracle and Him that
worked the miracle we need not wonder that they resorted in crowds to
Bethany" (Bishop Ryle).
"But the chief priests consulted that they might put Lazarus also to death;
because that by reason of him many of the Jews went away, and believed on
Jesus" (John 12:10, 11). "Lazarus is mentioned throughout this incident as
forming an element in the unfolding of the hatred of the Jews which issued in the
Lord’s death: notice the climax, from the mere connecting mention in verse 1,
then nearer connection in verse 2,—to his being the cause of the Jews flocking to
Bethany in verse 9,—and the joint object with Jesus of the enmity of the chief
priests in verse 10" (Alford). Mark it was not the Pharisees but the "chief
priests," who were Sadducees, (cf. Acts 5:17), that "consulted that they might
also put Lazarus to death": They would, if possible, kill him, because he was a
striking witness against them, denying as they did the truth of resurrection. But
how fearful the state of their hearts: they had rather commit murder than
acknowledge they were wrong
COFFMAN,"Jesus' public ministry was concluded between the events of the last
chapter and the Passover which comes into view in this. A number of important
things in the life of Christ took place between John 11:54 and John 11:55.
According to Robertson, these were:
He started the last journey to Jerusalem, via Samaria and Galilee. healing ten
lepers en route (Luke 17:11-37).
He gave two parables on prayers, those of the importunate widow and the
Pharisee and the publican (Luke 18:1-14).
He gave his teaching on divorce (Mark 10:1-12; Matthew 19:1-12).
He received little children (Mark 10:13-16, etc.).
He spoke with the rich young ruler and gave the parable of the laborers in the
vineyard (Mark 10:17-31, and parallel accounts).
17

He gave the third prophecy of his death and resurrection and rebuked ambition
of Zebedee's sons (Mark 10:32-45, etc.).
He healed Bartimaeus and a companion at Jericho (Mark 10:46-52, and parallel
accounts).
He visited Zacchaeus, gave the parable of the pounds, and went on up to
Jerusalem (Luke 19:142:8).[1]SIZE>
All the above events were in the Galilean and later Perean ministry, thus
accounting for their omission by John, who recorded, for the most part, events in
Judaea and Jerusalem. It is not known why John omitted so much of what the
synoptics recorded nor why they omitted so much of what John recorded. The
speculations of radical critics have shed nothing but darkness on the question by
their contradictory and unreasonable hypotheses. For example:
Gardner-Smith's investigations have led him to the startling conclusion that the
Fourth Evangelist had not read any of the Synoptic Gospels.[2]
Alan Richardson thought the apostle had read all three accounts, in fact,
scrambling them in the instance of the anointing mentioned in this chapter! His
words are: "St. John has fumbled in making her wipe off the ointment!"[3]
SIZE>
The destructive critics are like the Pharisees of the last chapter who denied the
miracle of the blind man's healing, but then quickly admitted it and made it the
basis of a slander of Jesus for not preventing the death of Lazarus.
The twelfth chapter falls into four divisions: (1) the supper for Jesus and
Lazarus (John 12:1-11); (2) the triumphal entry (John 12:12-20); (3) coming of
the Greeks, and the voice from heaven (John 12:21-36); and (4) Jesus sums up
his claims (John 12:37-50).
Jesus therefore six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus
was, whom Jesus raised from the dead. (John 12:1)
For purposes of this study, the date here is construed as Friday night, after
Robertson, Hovey, and many others. Regarding the questions that inevitably
surface with reference to this, and as to the day of the week upon which the Lord
suffered, see under John 19:31.
[1] A. T. Robertson, Harmony of the Gospels (New York: Harper and Brothers,
1922), pp. 139ff.
[2] W. F. Howard, Christianity according to St. John (London: Duckworth Press,
1965), p. 17.
[3] Alan Richardson, The Gospel according to St. John (London: SCM Press,
1959), p. 147.
18

EBC, "THE ANOINTING OF JESUS.
"Jesus therefore six days before the Passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was,
whom Jesus raised from the dead. So they made Him a supper there: and Martha
served; but Lazarus was one of them that sat at meat with Him. Mary therefore took
a pound of ointment of spikenard, very precious, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and
wiped His feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment.
But Judas Iscariot, one of His disciples, which should betray Him, saith, Why was
not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor? Now this he
said, not because he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and having the
bag took away what was put therein. Jesus therefore said, Suffer her to keep it
against the day of My burying. For the poor ye have always with you; but Me ye have
not always. The common people therefore of the Jews learned that He was there: and
they came, not for Jesus’ sake only, but that they might see Lazarus also, whom He
had raised from the dead. But the chief priests took counsel that they might put
Lazarus also to death; because that by reason of him many of the Jews went away,
and believed on Jesus."-- Joh_12:1-11.
This twelfth chapter is the watershed of the Gospel. The self-manifestation of Jesus
to the world is now ended; and from this point onwards to the close we have to do
with the results of that manifestation. He hides Himself from the unbelieving, and
allows their unbelief full scope; while He makes further disclosures to the faithful
few. The whole Gospel is a systematic and wonderfully artistic exhibition of the
manner in which the deeds, words, and claims of Jesus produced,--on the one hand,
a growing belief and enthusiasm; on the other, a steadily hardening unbelief and
hostility. In this chapter the culmination of these processes is carefully illustrated by
three incidents. In the first of these incidents evidence is given that there was an
intimate circle of friends in whose love Jesus was embalmed, and His work and
memory insured against decay; while the very deed which had riveted the faith and
affection of this intimate circle is shown to have brought the antagonism of His
enemies to a head. In the second incident the writer shows that on the whole popular
mind Jesus had made a profound impression, and that the instincts of the Jewish
people acknowledged Him as King. In the third incident the influence He was
destined to have and was already to some extent exerting beyond the bounds of
Judaism is illustrated by the request of the Greeks that they might see Jesus.
In this first incident, then, is disclosed a devotedness of faith which cannot be
surpassed, an attachment which is absolute; but here also we see that the hostility of
avowed enemies has penetrated even the inner circle of the personal followers of
Jesus, and that one of the chosen Twelve has so little faith or love that he can see no
beauty and find no pleasure in any tribute paid to his Master. In this hour there meet
a ripeness of love which suddenly reveals the permanent place which Jesus has won
for Himself in the hearts of men, and a maturity of alienation which forebodes that
His end cannot be far distant. In this beautiful incident, therefore, we turn a page in
the gospel and come suddenly into the presence of Christ’s death. To this death He
Himself freely alludes, because He sees that things are now ripe for it, that nothing
short of His death will satisfy His enemies, while no further manifestation can give
Him a more abiding place in the love of His friends. The chill, damp odour of the
tomb first strikes upon the sense, mingling with and absorbed in the perfume of
Mary’s ointment. If Jesus dies, He cannot be forgotten. He is embalmed in the love of
such disciples.
On His way to Jerusalem for the last time Jesus reached Bethany "six days before the
Passover"--that is to say, in all probability[1] on the Friday evening previous to His
19

death. It was natural that He should wish to spend His last Sabbath in the congenial
and strengthening society of a family whose welcome and whose affection He could
rely upon. In the little town of Bethany He had become popular, and since the raising
of Lazarus He was regarded with marked veneration. Accordingly they made Him a
feast, which, as Mark informs us, was given in the house of Simon the leper. Any
gathering of His friends in Bethany must have been incomplete without Lazarus and
his sisters. Each is present, and each contributes an appropriate addition to the feast.
Martha serves; Lazarus, mute as he is throughout the whole story, bears witness by
his presence as a living guest to the worthiness of Jesus; while Mary makes the day
memorable by a characteristic action. Coming in, apparently after the guests had
reclined at table, she broke an alabaster of very costly spikenard[2] and anointed the
feet of Jesus and wiped His feet with her hair.
This token of affection took the company by surprise. Lazarus and his sisters may
have been in sufficiently good circumstances to admit of their making a substantial
acknowledgment of their indebtedness to Jesus; and although this alabaster of
ointment had cost as much as would keep a labouring man’s family for a year, this
could not seem an excessive return to make for service so valuable as Jesus had
rendered. It was the manner of the acknowledgment which took the company by
surprise. Jesus was a poor man, and His very appearance may have suggested that
there were other things He needed more urgently than such a gift as this. Had the
family provided a home for Him or given Him the price of this ointment, no one
would have uttered a remark. But this was the kind of demonstration reserved for
princes or persons of great distinction; and when paid to One so conspicuously
humble in His dress and habits, there seemed to the uninstructed eye something
incongruous and bordering on the grotesque. When the fragrance of the ointment
disclosed its value, there was therefore an instantaneous exclamation of surprise, and
at any rate in one instance of blunt disapproval. Judas, instinctively putting a money
value on this display of affection, roundly and with coarse indelicacy declared it had
better have been sold and given to the poor.
Jesus viewed the act with very different feelings. The rulers were determining to put
Him out of the way, as not only worthless but dangerous; the very man who objected
to this present expenditure was making up his mind to sell Him for a small part of
the sum; the people were scrutinising His conduct, criticising Him;--in the midst of
all this hatred, suspicion, treachery, coldness, and hesitation comes this woman and
puts aside all this would-be wisdom and caution, and for herself pronounces that no
tribute is rich enough to pay to Him. It is the rarity of such action, not the rarity of
the nard, that strikes Jesus. This, He says, is a noble deed she has done, far rarer, far
more difficult to produce, far more penetrating, and lasting in its fragrance than the
richest perfume that man has compounded. Mary has the experience that all those
have who for Christ’s sake expose themselves to the misunderstanding and abuse of
vulgar and unsympathetic minds; she receives from Himself more explicit assurance
that her offering has given pleasure to Him and is gratefully accepted. We may
sometimes find ourselves obliged to do what we perfectly well know will be
misunderstood and censured; we may be compelled to adopt a line of conduct which
seems to convict us of heedlessness and of the neglect of duties we owe to others; we
may be driven to action which lays us open to the charge of being romantic and
extravagant; but of one thing we may be perfectly sure--that however our motives are
mis-read and condemned by those who first make their voices heard, He for whose
sake we do these things will not disparage our action nor misunderstand our motives.
The way to a fuller intimacy with Christ often lies through passages in life we must
traverse alone.
But we are probably more likely to misunderstand than to be misunderstood. We are
20

so limited in our sympathies, so scantily furnished with knowledge, and have so slack
a hold upon great principles, that for the most part we can understand only those
who are like ourselves. When a woman comes in with her effusiveness, we are put out
and irritated; when a man whose mind is wholly uneducated utters his feelings by
shouting hymns and dancing on the street, we think him a semi-lunatic; when a
member of our family spends an hour or two a day in devotional exercises, we
condemn it as waste of time which might be better spent on practical charities or
household duties.
Most liable of all to this vice of misjudging the actions of others, and indeed of
misapprehending generally wherein the real value of life consists, are those who, like
Judas, measure all things by a utilitarian, if not a money, standard. Actions which
have no immediate results are pronounced by such persons to be mere sentiment and
waste, while in fact they redeem human nature and make life seem worth living. The
charge of the Light Brigade at Balaclava served none of the immediate purposes of
the battle, and was indeed a blunder and waste from that point of view; yet are not
our annals enriched by it as they have been by few victories? On the Parthenon there
were figures placed with their backs hard against the wall of the pediment; these
backs were never seen and were not intended to be seen, but yet were carved with the
same care as was spent upon the front of the figures. Was that care waste? There are
thousands of persons in our own society who think it essential to teach their children
arithmetic, but pernicious to instil into their minds a love of poetry or art. They judge
of education by the test, Will it pay? can this attainment be turned into money? The
other question, Will it enrich the nature of the child and of the man? is not asked.
They proceed as if they believed that the man is made for business, not business for
the man; and thus it comes to pass that everywhere among us men are found
sacrificed to business, stunted in their moral development, shut off from the deeper
things of life. The pursuits which such persons condemn are the very things which lift
life out of the low level of commonplace buying and selling, and invite us to
remember that man liveth not by bread alone, but by high thoughts, by noble
sacrifice, by devoted love and all that love dictates, by the powers of the unseen,
mightier by far than all that we see.
In the face, then, of so much that runs counter to such demonstrations as Mary’s and
condemns them as extravagance, it is important to note the principles upon which
our Lord proceeds in His justification of her action.
1. First, He says, this is an occasional, exceptional tribute. "The poor always ye have
with you, but me ye have not always." Charity to the poor you may continue from day
to day all your life long: whatever you spend on me is spent once for all. You need not
think the poor defrauded by this expenditure. Within a few days I shall be beyond all
such tokens of regard, and the poor will still claim your sympathy. This principle
solves for us some social and domestic problems. Of many expenses common in
society, and especially of expenses connected with scenes such as this festive
gathering at Bethany, the question always arises, Is this expenditure justifiable?
When present at an entertainment costing as much and doing as little material good
as the spikenard whose perfume had died before the guests separated, we cannot but
ask, Is not this, after all, mere waste? had it not been better to have given the value to
the poor? The hunger-bitten faces, the poverty-stricken outcasts, we have seen
during the day are suggested to us by the superabundance now before us. The effort
to spend most where least is needed suggests to us, as to these guests at Bethany,
gaunt, pinched, sickly faces, bare rooms, cold grates, feeble, dull-eyed children--in a
word, starving families who might be kept for weeks together on what is here spent in
a few minutes; and the question is inevitable, Is this right? Can it be right to spend a
man’s ransom on a mere good smell, while at the end of the street a widow is pining
21

with hunger? Our Lord replies that so long as one is day by day considering the poor
and relieving their necessities, he need not grudge an occasional outlay to manifest
his regard for his friends. The poor of Bethany would probably appeal to Mary much
more hopefully than to Judas, and they would appeal all the more successfully
because her heart had been allowed to utter itself thus to Jesus. There is, of course,
an expenditure for display under the guise of friendship. Such expenditure finds no
justification here or anywhere else. But those who in a practical way acknowledge the
perpetual presence of the poor are justified in the occasional outlay demanded by
friendship.
2. But our Lord’s defence of Mary is of wider range. "Let her alone," He says, "against
the day of my burying hath she kept this." It was not only occasional, exceptional
tribute she had paid Him; it was solitary, never to be repeated. Against my burial she
has kept this unguent; for me ye have not always. Would you blame Mary for
spending this, were I lying in my tomb? Would you call it too costly a tribute, were it
the last? Well, it is the last.[3] Such is our Lord’s justification of her action. Was
Mary herself conscious that this was a parting tribute? It is possible that her love and
womanly instinct had revealed to her the nearness of that death of which Jesus
Himself so often spoke, but which the disciples refused to think of. She may have felt
that this was the last time she would have an opportunity of expressing her devotion.
Drawn to Him with unutterable tenderness, with admiration, gratitude, anxiety
mingling in her heart, she hastens to spend upon Him her costliest. Passing away
from her world she knows He is; buried so far as she was concerned she knew Him to
be if He was to keep the Passover at Jerusalem in the midst of His enemies. Had the
others felt with her, none could have grudged her the last consolation of this
utterance of her love, or have grudged Him the consolation of receiving it. For this
made Him strong to die, this among other motives--the knowledge that His love and
sacrifice were not in vain, that He had won human hearts, and that in their affection
He would survive. This is His true embalming. This it is that forbids that His flesh
see corruption, that His earthly manifestation die out and be forgotten. To die before
He had attached to Himself friends as passionate in their devotion as Mary would
have been premature. The recollection of His work might have been lost. But when
He had won men like John and women like Mary, He could die assured that His
name would never be lost from earth. The breaking of the alabaster box, the pouring
out of Mary’s soul in adoration of her Lord--this was the signal that all was ripe for
His departure, this the proof that His manifestation had done its work. The love of
His own had come to maturity and burst thus into flower. Jesus therefore recognises
in this act His true embalming.
And it is probably from this point of view that we may most readily see the
appropriateness of that singular commendation and promise which our Lord,
according to the other gospels, added: "Verily I say unto you, wherever this gospel
shall be preached throughout the whole world, this also that she hath done shall be
spoken for a memorial of her."
At first sight the encomium might seem as extravagant as the action. Was there, a
Judas might ask, anything deserving of immortality in the sacrifice of a few pounds?
But no such measurements are admissible here. The encomium was deserved
because the act was the irrepressible utterance of all-absorbing love--of a love so full,
so rich, so rare that even the ordinary disciples of Christ were at first not in perfect
sympathy with it. The absolute devotedness of her love found a fit symbol in the
alabaster box or vase which she had to break that the ointment might flow out. It was
not a bottle out of which she might take the stopper and let a carefully measured
quantity dribble out, reserving the rest for other and perhaps very different uses--fit
symbol of our love to Christ; but it was a hermetically sealed casket or flask, out of
22

which, if she let one drop fall, the whole must go. It had to be broken; it had to be
devoted to one sole use. It could not be in part reserved or in part diverted to other
uses. Where you have such love as this, have you not the highest thing humanity can
produce? Where is it now to be had on earth, where are we to look for this all-
devoting, unreserving love, which gathers up all its possessions and pours them out
at Christ’s feet, saying, "Take all, would it were more"?
The encomium, therefore, was deserved and appropriate. In her love the Lord would
ever live: so long as she existed the remembrance of Him could not die. No death
could touch her heart with his chilly hand and freeze the warmth of her devotion.
Christ was immortal in her, and she was therefore immortal in Him. Her love was a
bond that could not be broken, the truest spiritual union. In embalming Him,
therefore, she unconsciously embalmed herself. Her love was the amber in which He
was to be preserved, and she became inviolable as He. Her love was the marble on
which His name and worth were engraven, on which His image was deeply
sculptured, and they were to live and last together. Christ "prolongs His days" in the
love of His people. In every generation there arise those who will not let His
remembrance die out, and who to their own necessities call out the living energy of
Christ. In so doing they unwittingly make themselves undying as He; their love of
Him is the little spark of immortality in their soul. It is that which indissolubly and
by the only genuine spiritual affinity links them to what is eternal. To all who thus
love Him Christ cannot but say, "Because I live, ye shall live also."
Another point in our Lord’s defence of Mary’s conduct, though it is not explicitly
asserted, plainly is, that tributes of affection paid directly to Himself are of value to
Him. Judas might with some plausibility have quoted against our Lord His own
teaching that an act of kindness done to the poor was kindness to Him. It might be
said that, on our Lord’s own showing, what He desires is, not homage paid to
Himself personally, but loving and merciful conduct. And certainly any homage paid
to Himself which is not accompanied by such conduct is of no value at all. But as love
to Him is the spring and regulator of all right conduct, it is necessary that we should
cultivate this love; and because He delights in our well-being and in ourselves, and
does not look upon us merely as so much material in which He may exhibit His
healing powers, He necessarily rejoices in every expression of true devotedness that
is paid to Him by any of us.
And on our side wherever there is true and ardent love it must crave direct
expression. "If ye love me," says our Lord, "keep my commandments"; and obedience
certainly is the normal test and exhibition of love. But there is that in our nature
which refuses to be satisfied with obedience, which craves fellowship with what we
love, which carries us out of ourselves and compels us to express our feeling directly.
And that soul is not fully developed whose pent-up gratitude, cherished admiration,
and warm affection do not from time to time break away from all ordinary modes of
expressing devotion and choose some such direct method as Mary chose, or some
such straightforward utterance as Peter’s: "Lord, Thou knowest all things, Thou
knowest that I love Thee."
It may, indeed, occur to us, as we read of Mary’s tribute to her Lord, that the very
words in which He justified her action forbid our supposing that any so grateful
tribute can be paid Him by us. "Me ye have not always" may seem to warn us against
expecting that so direct and satisfying an intercourse can be maintained now, when
we no longer have Him. And no doubt this is one of the standing difficulties of
Christian experience. We can love those who live with us, whose eye we can meet,
whose voice we know, whose expression of face we can read. We feel it easy to fix our
affections on one and another of those who are alive contemporaneously with
ourselves. But with Christ it is different: we miss those sensible impressions made
23

upon us by the living bodily presence; we find it difficult to retain in the mind a
settled idea of the feeling He has towards us. It is an effort to accomplish by faith
what sight without any effort effectually accomplishes. We do not see that He loves
us; the looks and tones that chiefly reveal human love are absent; we are not from
hour to hour confronted, whether we will or no, with one evidence or other of love.
Were the life of a Christian nowadays no more difficult than it was to Mary, were it
brightened with Christ’s presence as a household friend, were the whole sum and
substance of it merely a giving way to the love He kindled by palpable favours and
measurable friendship, then surely the Christian life would be a very simple, very
easy, very happy course.
But the connection between ourselves and Christ is not of the body that passes, but of
the spirit which endures. It is spiritual, and such a connection may be seriously
perverted by the interference of sense and of bodily sensations. To measure the love
of Christ by His expression of face and by His tone of voice is legitimate, but it is not
the truest measurement: to be drawn to Him by the accidental kindnesses our
present difficulties must provoke is to be drawn by something short of perfect
spiritual affinity. And, on the whole, it is well that our spirit should be allowed to
choose its eternal friendship and alliance by what is specially and exclusively its own,
so that its choice cannot be mistaken, as the choice sometimes is when there is a
mixture of physical and spiritual attractiveness. So much are we guided in youth and
in the whole of our life by what is material, so freely do we allow our tastes to be
determined and our character to be formed by our connection with what is material,
that the whole man gets blunted in his spiritual perceptions and incapable of
appreciating what is not seen. And the great part of our education in this life is to lift
the spirit to its true place and to its appropriate company, to teach it to measure its
gains apart from material prosperity, and to train it to love with ardour what cannot
be seen.
Besides, it cannot be doubted that this incident itself very plainly teaches that Christ
came into this world to win our love and to turn all duty into a personal acting
towards Him; to make the whole of life like those parts of it which are now its bright
exceptional holiday times; to make all of it a pleasure by making all of it and not
merely parts of it the utterance of love. Even a little love in our life is the sunshine
that quickens and warms and brightens the whole. There seems at length to be a
reason and a satisfaction in life when love animates us. It is easy to act well to those
whom we really love, and Christ has come for the express purpose of bringing our
whole life within this charmed circle. He has come not to bring constraint and gloom
into our lives, but to let us out into the full liberty and joy of the life that God Himself
lives and judges to be the only life worthy of His bestowal upon us.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] It is uncertain whether the "six days" are inclusive or exclusive of the day of
arrival and of the first day of the Feast. It is also uncertain on what day of the week
the Crucifixion happened.
[2] In The Classical Review for July 1890 Mr. Bennett suggests that the difficult
word pistikis should be written pistakis, and that it refers to the Pistacia terebinthus,
which grows in Cyprus and Judæa, and yields a very fragrant and very costly
unguent.
[3] So Stier.
MACLAREN, "LOVE'S PRODIGALITY CENSURED AND VINDICATED
24

Jesus came from Jericho, where He had left Zacchaeus rejoicing in the salvation that
had come to his house, and whence Bartimaeus, rejoicing in His new power of vision,
seems to have followed Him. A few hours brought Him to Bethany, and we know
from other Evangelists what a tension of purpose marked Him, and awed the
disciples, as He pressed on before them up the rocky way. His mind was full of the
struggle and death which were so near. The modest village feast in the house of
Simon the leper comes in strangely amid the gathering gloom; but, no doubt, Jesus
accepted it, as He did everything, and entered into the spirit of the hour. He would
not pain His hosts by self-absorbed aloofness at the table. The reason for the feast is
obviously the raising of Lazarus, as is suggested by his being twice mentioned in
Joh_12:1-2.
Our Lord had withdrawn to Ephraim so immediately after the miracle that the
opportunity of honouring Him had not occurred. It was a brave tribute to pay Him in
the face of the Sanhedrim’s commandment (Joh_11:57). This incident sets in
sharpest contrast the two figures of Mary, the type of love which delights to give its
best, and Judas, the type of selfishness which is only eager to get; and it shows us
Jesus casting His shield over the uncalculating giver, and putting meaning into her
deed.
I. In Eastern fashion, the guests seem to have all been males, no doubt
the magnates of the village, and Jesus with His disciples.
The former would have become accustomed to seeing Lazarus, but Christ’s
immediate followers would gaze curiously on him. And how he would gaze on Jesus,
whom he had probably not seen since the napkin had been taken from his face. The
two sisters were true to their respective characters. The bustling, practical Martha
had perhaps not very fine or quickly moved emotions. She could not say graceful
things to their benefactor, and probably she did not care to sit at His feet and drink in
His teaching; but she loved Him with all her heart all the same, and showed it by
serving. No doubt, she took care that the best dishes were carried to Jesus first, and,
no doubt, as is the custom in those lands, she plied Him with invitations to partake.
We do Martha less than justice if we do not honour her, and recognise that her kind
of service is true service. She has many successors among Christ’s true followers, who
cannot ‘gush’ nor rise to the heights of His loftiest teaching, but who have taken Him
for their Lord, and can, at any rate, do humble, practical service in kitchen or
workshop. Their more ‘intellectual’ or poetically emotional brethren are tempted to
look down on them, but Jesus is as ready to defend Martha against Mary, if she
depreciates her, as He is to vindicate Mary’s right to her kind of expression of love, if
Martha should seek to force her own kind on her sister. ‘There are differences of
ministries, but the same Lord.’
Mary was one of the unpractical sort, whom Martha is very apt to consider supremely
useless, and often to lose patience with. Could she not find something useful to do in
all the bustle of the feast? Had she no hands that could carry a dish, and no common
sense that could help things on? Apparently not. Every one else was occupied, and
how should she show the love that welled up in her heart as she looked at Lazarus
sitting there beside Jesus? She had one costly possession, the pound of perfume.
Clearly it was her own, for she would not have taken it if Lazarus and Mary had been
joint owners. So, without thinking of anything but the great burden of love which she
blessedly bore, she ‘poured it on His head’ (Mark) and on His feet, which the fashion
of reclining at meals made accessible to her, standing behind Him, True love is
profuse, not to say prodigal. It knows no better use for its best than to lavish it on the
beloved, and can have no higher joy than that. It does not stay to calculate utility as
seen by colder eyes. It has even a subtle delight in the very absence of practical
results, for the expression of itself is the purer thereby. A basin of water and a towel
25

would have done as well or better for washing Christ’s feet, but not for relieving
Mary’s full heart. Do we know anything of that omnipotent impulse? Can we
complacently set our givings beside Mary’s?
II. Judas is the foil to Mary.
His sullen, black selfishness, stretching out hands like talons in eagerness to get,
makes more radiant, and is itself made darker by, her shining deed of love. Goodness
always rouses evil to self-assertion, and the other Evangelists connect Mary’s action
with Judas’s final treachery as part of its impelling cause. They also show that his
specious objection, by its apparent common sense and charitableness, found assent
in the disciples. Three hundred pence worth of good ointment wasted which might
have helped so many poor! Yes, and how much poorer the world would have been if
it had not had this story! Mary was more utilitarian than her censors. She served the
highest good of all generations by her uncalculating profusion, by which the poor
have gained more than some few of them might have lost.
Judas’s criticism is still repeated. The world does not understand Christian self-
sacrifice, for ends which seem to it shadowy as compared with the solid realities of
helping material progress or satisfying material wants. A hundred critics, who do not
do much for the poor themselves, will descant on the waste of money in religious
enterprises, and smile condescendingly at the enthusiasts who are so unpractical. But
love knows its own meaning, and need not be abashed by the censure of the unloving.
John flashes out into a moment’s indignation at the greed of Judas, which was
masquerading as benevolence. His scathing laying bare of Judas’s mean and thievish
motive is no mere suspicion, but he must have known instances of dishonesty. When
a man has gone so far in selfish greed that he has left common honesty behind him,
no wonder if the sight of utterly self-surrendering love looks to him folly. The world
has no instruments by which it can measure the elevation of the godly life. Mary
would not be Mary if Judas approved of her or understood her.
III. Jesus vindicates the act of His censured servant.
His words fall into two parts, of which the former puts a meaning into Mary’s act, of
which she probably had not been aware, while the latter meets the carping criticism
of Judas. That Jesus should see in the anointing a reference to His burying,
pathetically indicates how that near end filled His thoughts, even while sharing in the
simple feast. The clear vision of the Cross so close did not so absorb Him as to make
Him indifferent either to Mary’s love or to the villagers’ humble festivity. However
weighed upon, His heart was always sufficiently at leisure from itself to care for His
friends and to defend them. He accepts every offering that love brings, and, in
accepting, gives it a significance beyond the offerer’s thought. We know not what use
He may make of our poor service; but we may be sure that, if that which we can see
to is right-namely, its motive,-He will take care of what we cannot see to-namely, its
effect,-and will find noble use for the sacrifices which unloving critics pronounce
useless waste.
‘The poor always ye have with you.’ Opportunities for the exercise of brotherly
liberality are ever present, and therefore the obligation to it is constant. But these
permanent duties do not preclude the opportunities for such special forms of
expressing special love to Jesus as Mary had shown, and as must soon end. The same
sense of approaching separation as in the former clause gives pathos to that
restrained ‘not always.’ The fact of His being just about to leave them warranted
extraordinary tokens of love, as all loving hearts know but too well. But, over and
above the immediate reference of the words, they carry the wider lesson that, besides
the customary duties of generous giving laid on us by the presence of ordinary
26

poverty and distresses, there is room in Christian experience for extraordinary
outflows from the fountain of a heart filled with love to Christ. The world may mock
at it as useless prodigality, but Jesus sees that it is done for Him, and therefore He
accepts it, and breathes meaning into it.
‘Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, there shall also this,
that this woman hath done, be told for a memorial of her.’ The Evangelist who
records that promise does not mention Mary’s name; John, who does mention the
name, does not record the promise. It matters little whether our names are
remembered, so long as Jesus beam them graven on His heart.
BI 1-16, "Then Jesus six days before the Passover.
The following calendar of the Passover week is taken from Lightfoot (2.586):
NISAN IX; The Sabbath. Six days before the Passover, Jesus sups with Lazarus at
the going out of the Sabbath, when according to the custom of that country their
suppers were more liberal.
NISAN X; Sunday. Five days before the Passover, Jesus goes to Jerusalem on an
ass, and in the evening returns to Bethany (Mar_11:11). On this day the lamb was
taken, and kept till the Passover (Exo_12:1-51), on which day this Lamb of God
presented Himself, who was the Antitype of that ride.
NISAN XI; Monday. Four days before the Passover, He goes to Jerusalem again;
curseth the unfruitful fig tree (Mat_21:18; Mar_11:12); in the evening He returns
again to Bethany (Mar_6:19).
NISAN XII; Tuesday. Three days before the Passover, He goes again to
Jerusalem; His disciples observe how the fig tree was withered (Mar_11:20). In
the evening going back to Bethany, and sitting on the Mount of Olives, He
foretelleth the destruction of the Temple and city (Mat_24:1-51), and discourses
those things which are contained in Mat_25:1-46.
NISAN XIII; Wednesday. This day He passeth away in Bethany. At the coming in
of this night, the whole nation apply themselves to put away all leaven.
NISAN XIV; Thursday. He sends two of His disciples to get ready the Passover.
He Himself enters Jerusalem in the afternoon. In the evening eats the Passover,
institutes the Eucharist: is taken, and almost all the night had before the Courts
of Judicature.
NISAN XV; Friday. Afternoon, He is crucified.
NISAN XVI; Saturday. He keeps the Sabbath in the grave.
NISAN XVII; The Lord’s Day. He riseth again.
Came to Bethany
The arrival of the Passover caravan
Coming into Bethany, the nearest point of the great road to Galilaeans’ Hill, the
caravan broke up; the company dispersed to the south and north, some seeking for
houses in which they could lodge, others fixing on the ground where they meant to
encamp. Those marched round Olivet to the south, following the great road, crossing
the Cedron by a bridge, and entering the Holy City by the Sheep Gate, near Antonio;
these mounted by the short path to the top of Olivet, glancing at the flowers and
herbage, and plucking twigs and branches as they climbed. Some families, having
brought their tents with them from Galilee, could at once proceed to stake the
27

John 12 commentary

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (19)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (11)

Similar to John 12 commentary

Similar to John 12 commentary (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

John 12 commentary