Six days before the Passover, Jesus returned to Bethany. It is important to keep in mind that the author thought it was important to precisely log the day of Jesus return. Our senses should be alerted to a definite timeline, a definite series of events leading up to the arrest, trial, and crucifixion of Jesus. The events of that sixth day run from verse one to verse eleven. There was a meal in which Lazarus sat at the table with Jesus. Martha served the meal and Mary is not mentioned here. The disciples are present in the house but only Judas Iscariot is mentioned. As the author is believed to be the young John, we may assume the references to Judas' intentions come as much from the actual experience of the event as they do from hindsight. This leads us to the ointment episode.
Mary had been absent while Martha served Jesus and Lazarus the meal. It is as if Mary went somewhere. She returned with a pound of expensive spikenard ointment. She had it saved back. Altogether, Jesus was anointed four times in the four gospels. He was twice anointed on the head and twice anointed on the feet. Ointment and perfume seem to be interchangeable. In all four accounts, it was a woman who anointed Jesus. There is debate about the location and event as some consider there to be two separate anointings. Some think the first occurred up north around Nain and Capernaum with either a leper named Simon or a Pharisee named Simon. The other location is Bethany with either a leper or Pharisee named Simon or Lazarus. The woman is variously named as the sister of Lazarus, a sinful woman, an unnamed woman, and Mary Magdalene (although, the Magdalene ascription is more of an assumption than a written name.)
Wikipedia says this about spikenard: Spikenard, also called nard, nardin, and muskroot, is a class of aromatic amber-colored essential oil derived from Nardostachys jatamansi, a flowering plant of the valerian family which grows in the Himalayas of Nepal, China, and India. The oil has been used for centuries as a perfume, a traditional medicine, or in religious ceremonies across a wide territory from India to Europe.
We all have heard the complaint that it is expensive and could have been sold to help the poor. But, for a moment, I would like for us to consider the most likely people to possess such a rare and costly essential oil. I would like for us to think in broad terms and not dismiss things out of hand. A poor nameless woman and a sinful woman are less likely candidates than a Mary Magdalene or a sister of Lazarus. The fact that so many Jews were attempting to comfort the Lazarus sisters should be seen as a clue to the prominence of the Lazarus family. Were they a merchant family with connections in the Himalayan spice trade? The gospels purport that Magdalene was a supporter of the Jesus movement from the beginning of his ministry. This should be seen as a clue that Magdalene was a woman of considerable resources.
Finally, and the point I am getting to is that Jesus, himself, is considered, in some schools of thought, to have studied in India, as it is said that his teachings show an influence that points in that direction. Although such thoughts are not supported by scripture, the possibility of the missing years having a connection to that locale suggests the further possibility that Jesus could have brought back spikenard from the area and placed it in someone's care. Deposits of alabaster are found in many countries of the world such as England, Belgium, India, Turkey, Cyprus, United States of America, Italy, and Spain.
Let us consider for a moment that Jesus brought back an alabaster box of spikenard from India and placed it in the care of the Lazarus family, more specifically, in the care of Mary. This could make sense of the response Jesus gave to Judas in verse seven, “Let her alone: against the day of my burying hath she kept this.” Take special note of the word “kept.” Mary had been hanging onto the ointment for a while. Moreover, she had been keeping it with a particular purpose in mind. We do not find such a purpose mentioned in other gospels. Even though it was said of the other three women that it was for a preparation and that they would be remembered and memorialized each time the story was told, what of the women? They just ran out and either bought or stole an expensive perfume?
On the other hand, the John version gives me a sense of authenticity. Mary had been guarding this ointment with the purpose of bringing it out at a given time. Also, I want to add that the detail of wiping feet with her hair is an extremely personal detail. Cloth fabrics abounded. People wore clothing and there were textiles kept for the very purpose of being used as towels. When Jesus washed the feet of his disciples, he grabbed a towel. And, by the way, washing and anointing the feet was more of a thing than washing and anointing the head.
And what about Judas? Let us consider the fact that Judas was with Jesus and the other disciples in the town of Ephraim for all those many weeks leading up to his return. Did Jesus fail to teach his disciples while he was there with them? I think not. What did he speak of? Was it new material or an elaboration on matters already covered? I think it was the latter. Jesus spoke on topics he had already opened. Those would have been topics such as the capture and death of Jesus. He predicted his death three times in the gospel of Mark. In the gospel of Matthew, Jesus "began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed …" From Matthew 20: seventeen through nineteen: “Now as Jesus was going up to Jerusalem, he took the twelve disciples aside and said to them, We are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be betrayed to the chief priests and the teachers of the law. They will condemn him to death and will turn him over to the Gentiles to be mocked and flogged and crucified. On the third day, he will be raised to life!”Judas was always a part of those conversations.
Lastly, many of the locals, having heard of the return of Jesus, traveled to and gathered around the home of the Lazarus family. They not only wanted to see Jesus but Lazarus, the man who had been raised from the dead. It is clear that the chief priests and Pharisees were aware of his return also. At that time, they did not make an open move. Rather, they gathered to plot the death of Jesus and even the death of Lazarus, whose resurrection was perceived as a threat.
Five days before the Passover, we find Jesus still on the Mount of Olives and, possibly, departing from the town of Bethany where his friend Lazarus lived. We read that many of the people who had come to the feast and had heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, gathered palm branches. Let's stop here and think things through. Was this a second in-gathering of people? Recall that on the day before, people had gathered. Are we to think, then, that these people went all the way back to Jerusalem to spread the news and then came back? Likely, some did just that. It is also likely that most of the people who came first also stayed put.
How did any of them hear the news? Did servants of the Lazarus household leak the news? Did the disciples leak the news? Was it a deliberate campaign on the part of Jesus? At any rate, five days before the Passover, Jesus steps out of the house to head for Jerusalem. There is a crowd there who have camped out overnight. They have gathered palm branches. Imagine a small crowd of people with each of them brandishing one or more palm branches. There were obviously a lot of palm trees. The importance of the date palm cannot be dismissed and was likely cultivated in the area for dates, wine, baskets, and wood for construction.
There was a handy foal of a donkey for Jesus to ride. Many people knew the significance of that. Daily life was steeped in anticipation of the coming Messiah. There was a lot of talk going around. It is not that one day, out of the blue, the crowds jump up with their palm leaves waving. It had been in the works for a while and this event was the culmination of plans and hopes. People had been thinking about it and talking about it for a long long time.
Verse sixteen brings up the disciples and their ignorance of what was going on. Yet, it was, supposedly, one of the disciples that wrote the gospel. So, was it all hindsight, or could it have been the opinion of certain disciples that certain other disciples just didn't get it? The crowd, accredited as bearing record to the miraculous raising of Lazarus from the dead, are shown to be more in the know than Jesus' own disciples. That is unless you consider that the author included himself among those who were with Jesus for that miracle. We recall those who attended that event. Jesus was there with his disciples, the Jews were there, the sisters were there, the servants were there. There was no mention of the general public or local residents being in attendance.
The general public waved palm branches and hailed Jesus as the King of Israel. For the people to come to such a consensus, what must have occurred? Was it just the Lazarus miracle? Had an active campaign been launched from the city of Ephraim? How does one, without predication, arrive at the point where he hails another as king? Does that not come from much thought and conversation? One must first hear that Jesus is king, then one must discuss the concept, then one must be in concert with others on the matter.
While all of this was coming to a head in the thoughts of the people, the Jews, on the other hand, had been coming to other conclusions. Now, they felt certain and justified in their thoughts. The whole world seemed to be running after Jesus and nothing they had done was of any effect. They felt threatened. Rome would certainly conclude that they were ineffectual and as a result of Jesus' popularity and the acclaim of the people, the Jews feared they would be put out of their place. They feared that the nation they shepherded would not survive.
Philip and the Greeks: Verse twenty states, “And there were certain Greeks among them.” Who were they 'among' and at what point in the trip to Jerusalem? Were they part of the march from Bethany to Jerusalem or were they present only after Jerusalem had been reached? Were they just Greeks? If they came all the way to Jerusalem from Greece to worship at the Passover – well, they must have been of the same religion and or ethnicity.
I take this from Wikipedia: Philip the Apostle was one of the Twelve Apostles of Jesus. Later Christian traditions describe Philip as the apostle who preached in Greece, Syria, and Phrygia. He appears as a link to the Greek community. Philip bore a Greek name, may have spoken Greek, and may have been known to the Greek pilgrims in Jerusalem.
It is here that the timeline breaks down. When we began this twelfth chapter of John, the Passover was a full six days away. When Jesus made his triumphal entry, there were still five full days until the feast. Philip, and then Andrew, with the Greeks in tow, came to Jesus and Jesus began to speak. There is an exchange that includes Jesus, his disciples, the people who came with him from Bethany, the people who stood by, and the people who responded to his words. This may still have been on the 'next day.' It is uncertain, however, since there appear to be four missing days between the triumphal entry and the night of the last supper. One thought is that the last supper was not eaten during the Passover but in the week before it began.
Thunder: It was right after Philip and Andrew brought the Greeks to Jesus that the voice from heaven, which some thought to be thunder, was heard. Here is a question. The fact that Philip went to Andrew rather than directly to Jesus – does that indicate a hierarchy among the apostles? Was Andrew acting as a bodyguard to hold back the crowd? While some people thought what they heard was thunder, and while others thought they heard the voice but attributed it to an Angel, it is important to recognize that Jesus called it a voice. In verse thirty, Jesus said, “This voice came not because of me, but for your sakes.”
Is it at all important at what point in Jesus' monologue that the voice from heaven comes up? The voice, in response to the words, “Father, glorify thy name,” answered, “I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again.” But, what had Jesus been saying just prior to this? Between the time that Andrew came to Jesus with Philip and the Greeks and the time that people standing near thought they heard thunder, Jesus spoke these words in verses twenty-three through twenty-seven, “The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified. Very truly I tell you, unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many seeds. Anyone who loves their life will lose it, while anyone who hates their life in this world will keep it for eternal life. Whoever serves me must follow me; and where I am, my servant also will be. My Father will honor the one who serves me. Now my soul is troubled, and what shall I say? ‘Father, save me from this hour’? No, it was for this very reason I came to this hour.” (NIV)
Jesus was telling them that the point of it all was that he must die. He told them why he must die. He told them that he and his servants had to be on the same page. On another level, being where Jesus is includes both his death in the world and his life in heaven.
The belief/unbelief of the people is bodied forth. The believers who had hailed Jesus as King of Israel only believed in a Messiah born of their hope to be free from Rome. They could not believe in a Messiah that did not “abideth for ever.” In their minds, they sort of connected the concept of Christ with the Son of man concept but the added element of being “lifted up” confused them and troubled their faith in Christ. Was he or was he not the one they wanted? On the other hand, it is mentioned that many of the chief rulers who also believed in him as a Messiah drew the line at public confession. They feared losing their place in the synagogue.
It was the author's opinion that the chief rulers, who were not Pharisees per se but feared the Pharisees, loved the advantages of their positions. The Pharisees are shown to have power and authority over the chief rulers. Who were the chief rulers exactly? The Sadducees were just as powerful and influential as the Pharisees. They had little reason to fear the Pharisees. The Essenes were basically outsiders. Out of disgust with the other two powers, the Essenes moved away from Jerusalem to live a monastic and communal lifestyle in the wilderness. That pretty much leaves the lower levels of religious authority, that is to say, the Rabbis and rulers of the synagogues.
From verse forty-four to fifty, Jesus is seen to make a public address. “Jesus cried and said . . . ” What this means is that Jesus spoke loudly so that many people could hear his words. This monologue indicates a public setting so large that Jesus had to raise his voice. Again, this occurrence may have been just after his triumphal entry or it could have been on a following day. There are gaps in the story of Jesus – his so-called missing years, his month in the city of Ephraim. It is no stretch to believe that the author simply jumped to the following week and the Passover feast. Yet, realizing that the Pharisees sought to protect their leadership in an orderly image before the scrutiny of the Romans, I have no difficulty in seeing their actions take place in the four days just prior to the feast.
No comments:
Post a Comment