Jesus told the disciples that in two days the Passover will come, and He will be delivered up and crucified. The chief priests, scribes and elders gathered at the palace of the high priest and planned to capture Jesus by trickery and kill Him. They decided not to take Him during the Passover feast to avoid a riot.
Mat 26:1 And it came to pass, when Jesus finished all these words, he said to his disciples,
[1]
Mat 26:2 `Ye have known that after two days the passover cometh, and the Son of Man is delivered up to be crucified.'
Mat 26:3 Then were gathered together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, to the court of the chief priest who was called Caiaphas;
Mat 26:4 and they consulted together that they might take Jesus by guile, and kill [him],
Mat 26:5 and they said, `Not in the feast, that there may not be a tumult among the people.'
The feast of the Passover, or the paschal feast, was the celebration of the Jews deliverance from Egypt. It was traditionally recognized by the sacrifice and eating of the paschal lamb. Strongs Concordance tells us that the Passover was celebrated:
in memory of the day on which their fathers, preparing to depart from Egypt, were bidden by God to slay and eat a lamb, and to sprinkle their door posts with its blood, that the destroying angel, seeing the blood, might pass over their dwellings; Christ crucified is likened to the slain paschal lamb
Christ was likened to the slain paschal lamb by the Apostle Paul, who wrote:
1 Corinthians 5:7 For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us.[2]
The account of the woman with the ointment is told in all four canonical gospels, but only John identified the woman as Mary Magdalene. In the house of Simon the leper in Bethany, a woman brought precious ointment
[3] to Jesus and poured it on His head as He sat at the table. The disciples scolded her waste, saying she could have sold the ointment and given to the poor. Jesus told them not to bother her, for she has done a good deed for Him. The poor will always be with them, but they will not always have Him, for she put ointment on Him for His burial. Wherever the good news is proclaimed in the world, what she did will be spoken of in her memory.
Mat 26:6 And Jesus having been in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper,
[4]
Mat 26:7 there came to him a woman having an alabaster box of ointment, very precious, and she poured on his head as he is reclining (at meat).
Mat 26:8 And having seen [it], his disciples were much displeased, saying, `To what purpose [is] this waste?
Mat 26:9 for this ointment could have been sold for much, and given to the poor.'
Mat 26:10 And Jesus having known, said to them, `Why do ye give trouble to the woman? for a good work she wrought for me;
Mat 26:11 for the poor always ye have with you, and me ye have not always;
Mat 26:12 for she having put this ointment on my body -- for my burial she did [it].
Mat 26:13 Verily I say to you, Wherever this good news may be proclaimed in the whole world, what this [one] did shall also be spoken of -- for a memorial of her.'
The Greek
apoleia, translated
waste in verse 8, is translated in other verses as
destruction, perdition
, perish and
damnation. A few examples:
Matthew 7:13 RSV Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction (apoleia)
, and those who enter by it are many.
2 Peter 2:3 KJV And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation (apoleia)
slumbereth not.
The waste of precious oil illustrates the error in interpreting apoleia as a reference to eternal tormentcertainly none would suggest that the
oil is tortured forever in hell. This Greek noun refers to waste, loss and spoilage, physical Earthly loss but not eternal torments. The same is true of its verb form
apollumi, which is similarly translated in various verses. Both are used in John 17:12 in reference to Judas.
John 17:12 NKJV While I was with them in the world, I kept them in Your name. Those whom You gave Me I have kept; and none of them is lost (apollumi)
except the son of perdition (apoleia)
, that the Scripture might be fulfilled.
The
son of perditionis translated
son of destruction in YLT. None of the twelve but Judas had been lost as a disciple. They were not
wastedthey would continue the good work of His ministry, many of them sacrificing their lives for this cause.
This is not to say that words such as destruction and condemnation are
mistranslations, but that subtle shades of meaning are lost in interpretation. Even in modern English, these words do not imply eternal torment. We can condemn a person to death. We can destroy objects and even our own lives. This may suggest
waste in each case, but certainly not eternal torment. The reference to the ointment here highlights the meaning of apoleia as
waste and the absurdity of the suggestion that the
word apoleia
itself implies eternal torture in an unlimited hell.
Jesus reaction to the womans kind act reinforced the importance of being generous in serving others and truly giving our all, as with the repeated theme,
Whoever wishes to be great must be a servant. The woman humbled herself and gave her precious ointment freely to anoint Him before His burial. The disciples sharply criticized what they saw as waste, but Jesus praised her loving act and assured that her kindness would be spoken of in her memory wherever in the world the good news is proclaimed.
Judas Iscariot went to the chief priests who gave him thirty pieces of silver or turning over Christ. From then on Judas sought an opportunity to betray Him.
Mat 26:14 Then one of the twelve, who is called Judas Iscariot, having gone unto the chief priests, said,
[5]
Mat 26:15 `What are ye willing to give me, and I will deliver him up to you?' and they weighed out to him thirty silverlings,
Mat 26:16 and from that time he was seeking a convenient season to deliver him up.
Thirty pieces of silver was not a large sum of money. If greed was Judas primary motivation, it is strange that he did not bargain for a larger fee. Exodus 21:32 quotes this as the price paid to a slave owner if his slave is injured by an ox.
If the ox gores a slave, male or female, the owner shall give to their master thirty shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned.
The thirty pieces of silver will be discussed further in the next chapter.
The disciples prepared for the Passover. As evening came and they sat down to eat, Jesus told the twelve that one of them will betray Him. They all were deeply saddened, and each began to ask, Is it I?
Jesus told them that he who dipped the hand in the dish with Him will deliver Him up. The Son of man will go as it is written, but woe to the man who will deliver Him up! It is better for him if he were never born!
Judas asked, Is it I, Rabbi?
Jesus replied, You have said it.
Mat 26:17 And on the first [day] of the unleavened food came the disciples near to Jesus, saying to him, `Where wilt thou [that] we may prepare for thee to eat the passover?'
[6]
Mat 26:18 and he said, `Go away to the city, unto such a one, and say to him, The Teacher saith, My time is nigh; near thee I keep the passover, with my disciples;'
Mat 26:19 and the disciples did as Jesus appointed them, and prepared the passover.
Mat 26:20 And evening having come, he was reclining (at meat) with the twelve,
[7]
Mat 26:21 and while they are eating, he said, `Verily I say to you, that one of you shall deliver me up.'
Mat 26:22 And being grieved exceedingly, they began to say to him, each of them, `Is it I, Sir?'
Mat 26:23 And he answering said, `He who did dip with me the hand in the dish, he will deliver me up;
Mat 26:24 the Son of Man doth indeed go, as it hath been written concerning him, but wo to that man through whom the Son of Man is delivered up! good it were for him if that man had not been born.'
Mat 26:25 And Judas -- he who delivered him up -- answering said, `Is it I, Rabbi?' He saith to him, `Thou hast said.'
The fate of Judas has been used as an argument against universal salvation. After all, Jesus said that it would have been better for him if he were never born. At least, so it appears in many translations, including the KJV. In other translations, him is ambiguous, or appears to say that it would have been better for Jesus if Judas was never born. In An
Analytical Study of Words,Louis Abbott wrote:
Advocates of everlasting punishment quote the KJV, Mark 14:21, "The Son of Man indeed goeth, as it is written of him : but woe to that man by whom the son of Man is betrayed! Good were it for that man if he had never been born." The first question which must be settled is whether Jesus uttered these words as translated in the KJV. As the last clause in this verse is used in opposition to Universal Reconciliation, let us look carefully at the Greek text: kalon ên auto eiouk egennêthê ho anthropos ekeinos, "Ideal were it for Him if that man were not born" or "It were ideal for Him if that man was not born." The question is asked, Who is the Him? The answer is in the preceding clause. There we have the pronoun autou, "Him," and anthropo ekeino, "that man," both referred to in such a way that we cannot mistake them. "The Son of Man indeed goeth as it is written of Him; but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed!" "Him" is the Son of Man, "that man" is Judas. The Him cannot refer to Judas, therefore the text can be paraphrased as, "Ideal were it for Him (the Son of Man) if that man (Judas) were not born." Notice how the following versions translates this clause: The ASV, 1901 margin, "Good were it for him if that man had not been born;" Rotherham's version, "Well for him if that man had not been born;" Murphy's edition of the Douay Version and the New Testament translated from the Latin Vulgate, 1898, "It were better for him, if that man had not been born;" (the following three versions are quoted in the original spelling) Wiclif, 1380, "It were good to hym if thilke man hadde not been borun;" Tyndale, 1534, "Good were it for him if that man had never bene borne;" Rheims, 1582, "it vvere good for him, if that man had not been borne." Therefore, Mark 14:21 does not contradict Col. 1:15-20; 1 Tim. 4:9-11; Rom. 5:18, 19; etc., all teaching the ultimate salvation of Judas. John Albert Bengel in his New Testament Word Studies, vol. 1, p. 290, says about this clause, "This phrase does not necessarily imply the interminable eternal of perdition." Dr. Bengal was a German Lutheran theologian.[8]
There are other considerations besides the translation issue. Even if we were to accept the King James rendition of this verse, the verse does not necessarily imply that Judas is destined to face eternal suffering in hell. Jesus may easily have been using a figure of speech to illustrate the great, though temporal, anguish Judas would feel, that he would wish he were never born. It may have been similar to these passages.
Job 3:3 "Cursed be the day of my birth, and cursed be the night when I was conceived.
Ecclesiastes 6:3 A man might have a hundred children and live to be very old. But if he finds no satisfaction in life and in the end does not even get a decent burial, I say he would have been better off born dead.
According to the commentator Kenrick:
"'It had been good for him, if he had never been born,' is a proverbial phrase, and not to be understood literally; for it is not consistent with our ideas of the divine goodness to make the existence of any being a curse to him, or to cause him to suffer more, upon the whole, than he enjoys happiness. Rather than do this, God would not have created him at all. But as it is usual to say of men who are to endure some grievous punishment or dreadful calamity, that it would have been better for them never to have been born, Christ, foreseeing what Judas would bring upon himself, by delivering up his Master into the hands of his enemies, applies this language to him."[9]
While they were eating, Jesus took the bread, blessed and broke it, giving it to His disciples and saying, Take, eat, this is my body,
He took the cup, and gave thanks, giving it to them said, Drink all of it, this is the blood of the new covenant, poured out for many for the remission of sins. I will not drink the wine again until I drink it with you in Gods kingdom.
Mat 26:26 And while they were eating, Jesus having taken the bread, and having blessed, did brake, and was giving to the disciples, and said, `Take, eat, this is my body;'
[10]
Mat 26:27 and having taken the cup, and having given thanks, he gave to them, saying, `Drink ye of it -- all;
Mat 26:28 for this is my blood of the new covenant, that for many is being poured out -- to remission of sins;
Mat 26:29 and I say to you, that I may not drink henceforth on this produce of the vine, till that day when I may drink it with you new in the reign of my Father.'
continued