Mark 14:1-11 | Session 53 | Mark Rightly Divided
Download an outline here: https://humble-sidecar-837.notion.site/Mark-14-1-11-Session-53-Mark-Rightly-Divided-10cb35a87d63804a9460d81e4e527456?pvs=4
Conspiracy and Anointing | Mark 14:1-11
Deceitful Desire | Mark 14:1-2
Verse 1 -
Mark states, "After two days was the feast of the passover," using a Greek preposition that indicates the Passover would take place "two days later." We should be careful not to interpret this as "two days after chapter 13," but rather as "two days before the Passover."
The text refers to Passover and Unleavened Bread as one and the same, a common verbal practice in the first century. In the Hebrew Scriptures, Passover fell on the 14th of Nisan, while Unleavened Bread began on the 15th and lasted seven days. This habit of combining the full eight days of the holiday into one verbal unit is evident in Luke 22:1, which states: "Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover." In modern terms, it's similar to how we use "Christmas" to refer not only to December 25th but often to the entire season from Thanksgiving through New Year's Day.
As Passover approached, the chief priests and scribes realized their time was short. They began plotting "how they might take him by craft, and put him to death." This grim scenario reveals that even the most outwardly pious can act unethically when their interests are threatened. In this case, religious authority intertwined with political power, and Jesus posed a significant threat to their established order. Consequently, they schemed to eliminate him "by craft."
The word translated as "craft" in this verse comes from the Greek word δόλος (dolos). The use of dolos here emphasizes the deceptive nature of their intent. Rather than arresting Jesus on legitimate grounds, they sought to trap Him or find a underhanded way to arrest Him without causing a disturbance.
Verse 2 -
The religious leadership's deceitful desire was to be rid of Jesus before "the feast" (the collective term) to prevent "an uproar of the people." This underscores the immense popularity Jesus enjoyed among the people. His widespread support was so significant that it forced the religious leaders to resort to clandestine tactics, revealing not only the extent of Jesus' influence but also the leadership's morally bankrupt nature.
Prophetic Perfume | Mark 14:3-9
Verse 3 -
Simon the Leper is only mentioned in relation to this event. However, his hosting of a supper in his home implies that he was previously healed of his leprosy, as according to Leviticus 13:46, he would have had to live outside the "camp" if still afflicted.
This familiar account is often confused with the time when Mary Magdalene poured spikenard on Jesus' feet, as recorded in John 12:3. Furthermore, Luke 7:37-38 describes a much earlier, similar occasion. I believe it's best to understand the Mark event as the same as Matthew 26:7, while both Luke 7 and John 12 recount different events. The Luke event occurs early in Jesus' ministry, and the John 12 event takes place during the final week of Jesus' life, but it's not the same event as described in Mark.
This raises a question: Why was anointing with expensive perfume, performed by a woman on a man, such a common event that it happened three times to Jesus, even twice in the same week? We're dealing with a cultural difference that's almost impossible for us to comprehend. Firstly, we wouldn't even consider this act, let alone deem it appropriate. Moreover, in our modern society, we rarely think about anointing in any context. We must acknowledge that "we don't understand anointing," and without extensive cultural study and insight, we probably never will. However, we can appreciate the love and devotion this woman displays.
Spikenard, an aromatic oil extracted from a plant native to the Himalayas, was highly valued in the ancient world for its exquisite fragrance and purported medicinal qualities. This rare and expensive substance was considered a luxury item. The spikenard was stored in an alabaster box. Alabaster, a translucent mineral, was often used for decorative and artistic pieces. It was prized for its durability and beauty.
Verses 4-5 —
We are now introduced to "some" who were "indignant within themselves," but their indignation was known because they verbalized their feelings, wondering, "Why was this waste of the ointment made?" (v. 4). At the previous event in John 12, which took place six days before Passover (Jn. 12:1), it was Judas Iscariot who complained that Mary's ointment, poured on Jesus' feet, could have been sold to help the poor. It's possible that Judas had stirred up discontent over this issue. It's not until after this second anointing that Judas departs to consult with the chief priests for his own 30 pieces of silver.
I suspect that the crowd was not genuinely interested in helping the poor, nor would they have actually voted to sell the spikenard and donate the funds. This was likely a diversionary tactic to add a veneer of moral virtue to their anti-Jesus stance. Their verbal indignation was mere virtue signaling, not true virtue. It's noteworthy that "they murmured against her" (v. 5) and not against Jesus. Again, I suspect their ultimate disdain was directed more at Jesus than at the woman, but it was easier to be publicly critical of the woman than of Jesus.
Verse 6 -
Jesus defends the woman against the crowd, asserting that she had performed a good work. This commendation is further elaborated in verse 8, which explains the significance of her actions.
Verse 7 -
This famous phrase about always having the poor is often misquoted with the more rhythmic wording, "the poor ye have with you always" (though it's never phrased that way in the Bible). People rarely continue the quote: "whensoever ye will ye may do them good." The statement, overall, is a rebuke to the indignant crowd. It carries an unspoken implication: if they haven't helped the poor before, why would they start now?
Jesus adds something He had spoken before more specifically, reminding them that they will not always have Him. He will become more specific in the next verse.
Verse 8 -
Jesus commends the woman's act, explaining that it served as an anointing of His body before burial. Spikenard, known for its aromatic and antiseptic properties, was commonly used to anoint the dead for burial, among other purposes.
Anointing of the body was not done prior to burial, so Jesus was using this experience to alert His audience to His impending death. It's highly unlikely that the crowd fully grasped what was about to happen, and this phrase probably didn't sink in at the time.
Verse 9 -
The narrow lens that the word gospel is often viewed with is detrimental to a literal interpretation of the scripture. The way the Bible uses gospel is much broader and open to interpretation.
The gospel mentioned here specifically refers to "this gospel," which I believe can only be the story of the anointing itself. It's not referring to the kingdom gospel, the gospel of Jesus as Messiah (the Gospel of Christ), or the grace Gospel later preached by the Apostle Paul. Interpreting it as any of these other gospels would make Jesus' statement patently untrue. Peter frequently preached the gospel of the kingdom, but there's no evidence he ever mentioned this woman's act. Paul preached both the gospel of Christ (i.e., Jesus' identity as Messiah) and the grace gospel, yet never mentions this woman. What Jesus is really saying is this: "This woman has done a good thing, and when this good deed is proclaimed throughout the world, that proclamation will forever stand as a memorial to her good work."
By interpreting this woman's story as part of the larger saving Gospel, we have done a disservice to the accuracy of the Word of God. This misinterpretation hinders understanding of the text, leads people to make applications that aren't actually present, and ultimately sends them on a "wild goose chase."
Planned Betrayal | Mark 14:10-11
Verse 10 -
The reference to Judas as "one of the twelve" may serve as a literary device to emphasize the heinous nature of his act. We already know from previous passages that he was one of the twelve (Mark 3:19), so this designation isn't strictly necessary.
This literary device might help the reader connect this account to Psalm 41:9, "Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me."
Verse 11 -
The chief priests welcomed Judas's offer of assistance. They even "promised to give him money," which was likely an unexpected bonus for Judas. His primary motivation seemed to be his antagonism toward Jesus rather than financial gain. Judas then began seeking an opportune moment to betray Jesus. The word translated as "conveniently" comes from the Greek εὐκαιρία [eukairia], which literally means "a good season." The word καιρός [kairos] refers to a "time period" or "season," as opposed to χρόνος [chronos], which denotes a specific point in time.
