Matthew 26: The Plot Thickens

Introduction

As we come towards the end of Matthew’s Gospel we encounter a shift. The Lord has just finished his “end of the world” sermon, and now Matthew frames this up as the “end of the teaching ministry”. From here on out, the Gospel will focus on the last few days of the Lord’s life, including his betrayal, death, and resurrection.

Matthew for his part will give a truncated version of events, choosing to tell the story thematically as we go. The first part of the story then will focus on the ‘preparation’ of the Lord’s death.

26:1-5: Behind closed doors

After finishing his teachings, Jesus makes a final prediction about his death. This is now the fourth time he has predicted his death according to Matthew.

Unlike the previous times, the prediction is now extremely specific: it’s only two days away!

Whatever the disciples had thought about the previous predictions, this one had to have made them incredibly anxious and probably explains their behavior over the next few days.

Chronologically this probably means that Jesus is saying this on Tuesday evening, with the Passover being on Thursday of that week (it is always on Nisan 15 of the Jewish calendar). The year could have either been AD 30 or 33.

Based on the following accounts, Matthew does not record any events that occurred on Wednesday of that week.

Speaking of being delivered up....Matthew now tells us about the planning that was taking place behind the scenes to fulfil the Lord’s prophecy.

The chief priests and the elders gathered together. This is two of the three groups that Jesus predicted would be involved in his arrest in Matthew 16:21 “From that time 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, and on the third day be raised.”

In Mark’s account, he adds that the Scribes were present, too.

Most translations say they met in the “palace” of the high priest. This is a bit of a glorified translation. It’s the same word that is later translated as “courtyard”. The high priest probably had a nice home, but calling it a palace is a little excessive.

This “high priest” was less than the Old Testament High Priest, and more of a “chief of the chief priests” - and he was installed by the Romans! In this case, his name was Caiaphas, and he had actually been in charge for quite some time (probably being put in power around 18 AD, and he would rule until 36 AD.)

His father-in-law Annas is often mentioned in conjunction with him, and it seems like they were interchangeably in charge.

All of these men got together and plotted to arrest Jesus in secret and kill him. However, they are very conscious of when to do this. They don’t want to do it during the festival, because that could cause a riot. However, Judas suddenly showing up offering to betray Jesus seems to expedite their plans.

This fear of causing an uproar seems to be at the heart of why these men are plotting the demise of Jesus. We know this because John elaborates on the conversation that they have in John 11:47–53 “So the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered the council and said, “What are we to do? For this man performs many signs. If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation.” But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all. Nor do you understand that it is better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish.” He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. So from that day on they made plans to put him to death.”

From this perspective, it seems like the leaders, and Caiaphas in general, may have actually had genuine concern for the people and fearing for their safety as justification for killing Jesus.

However, their fear of Rome outweighed their fear of God. And this would ultimately be their undoing.

Whatever the motivation, I think we see Matthew describes this scene as an echo of Psalm 2:2 “The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord and against his Anointed,”

6-13: Preparing for death

The scene now shifts to the home of Simon the leper, who lived in Bethany. Bethany was also the home of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus and where Jesus and the disciples had been staying for most of the week.

It isn’t clear who this Simon was, but it can be assumed that he was healed, otherwise he wouldn’t have had a home!

Perhaps he was related to the sisters in some way, but that’s mere speculation. However...

Matthew says that a woman entered with an alabaster jar and anointed Jesus.

Mark tells the same story, also keeping the woman anonymous. Luke and John also tell very similar stories. Luke’s was probably a different occasion, but John’s story is extremely similar and probably the same one.

John names the woman as none other than Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus (hence the possible connection to Simon the leper).

There are some differences in the stories. Namely, John says that Mary anointed Jesus on the night before the triumphal entry. This doesn’t really conflict with Matthew, as Matthew seems to insert the story here thematically (preparation), rather than chronologically.

The other minor difference is that Matthew says the woman anointed Jesus’ head, while John says Mary anointed his feet. It’s not that difficult to think Mary/the woman anointed both though.

For our purposes going forward, I will assume the woman is in fact Mary.

Mary brings in an alabaster jar with very expensive ointment. Matthew (the tax collector, who was probably very good at math!) opts not to tell us it’s worth. Mark and John both reveal that it was a jar of nard worth at least 300 denarii which was at least a year’s wages, if not more!

Interestingly, even though Matthew decides not to tell us the amount, John tells us that it was in fact Judas Iscariot who knew how much it was worth!

Matthew, keeping up with his anonymous writing, merely tells us that “the disciples” were upset. John is less keen on hiding identities and makes it clear that Judas was in the one who was really upset.

John 12:4–6 “But Judas Iscariot, one of his disciples (he who was about to betray him), said, “Why was this ointment not sold for three hundred denarii and given to the poor?” He said this, not because he cared about the poor, but because he was a thief, and having charge of the moneybag he used to help himself to what was put into it.”

The statement that is made, on it’s surface can be seen as noble. It is true, the perfume could have been sold and the money given to the poor. But Jesus doesn’t commend them for their “noble reaction” he rebukes them!

As we learned from John, Judas didn’t actually care about the poor. He was just jealous that he couldn’t get his hands on the money it was worth.

This is unfortunately the attitude many people have towards the spending of money for anything within the church, other than giving it to the poor.

Take for example spending money on building churches, or building beautiful churches!

In the last few years an organization called “He Gets Us” has produced incredible commercials that have proclaimed the Gospel on TV - this has drawn criticism that the money could have been given to the poor instead!

Money spent on various worship activities and pageantry.

But the reality is, money can be spent on things that glorify the Lord. And usually these critiques come from non-Christians who themselves don’t really care about the poor, nor would they lift a finger to help the poor.

However, this passage shouldn’t be used to justify not helping the poor. We could easily find ourselves like the Pharisees who justified not helping their parents by “dedicating” the money to God.

Contrary to the critics, Christians have historically been able to balance caring for the poor AND glorifying God with our money.

Despite Judas (and the disciples) statement and feelings, Jesus rebukes them, telling them to leave her alone.

The ESV (and other translations) say that the woman “has done a beautiful thing”. The phrase ‘beautiful thing’ literally means ‘good work’. While “beautiful thing” isn’t a terrible translation, it can hide the connection between faith and works that Matthew might want us to see in this woman.

Even though they claimed the money could give given to the poor, Jesus says, “You’ll always have the poor, you won’t always have me.” This is almost a direct quote of Deuteronomy 15:11 “For there will never cease to be poor in the land. Therefore I command you, ‘You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in your land.’”

Thus, Jesus is showing that he does have sympathy for the poor, and encourages their treatment. But in this case, their complaints were unwarranted.

So what was the purpose of this woman pouring an ultra expensive perfume on Jesus? “To prepare me for burial”.

The word translated “ointment” is “myrrh”, and it was used to anoint corpses to make them smell better.

Interestingly, it’s the same stuff (Myrrh) that was apparently brought to Jesus when he was a baby/child and maybe Matthew is wanting us to recall that.

What this might tell us is that even though the disciples were all in denial about the Lord’s impending death....Mary was not. She had heard Jesus declare that He was The Resurrection not long before this, and while she may not have totally known what that meant, it seems like she knew it meant death must come first. And so now, she was preparing Jesus, and herself, for it.

The final note we are given from Jesus is that, because of her good deed, the woman would be remembered wherever the Gospel was proclaimed. And that did happen, as evidenced by the fact that 3 of the Gospels record this story, and 2,000 years ago we are still talking about her.

14-16: Preparing for the worst

Even though Matthew doesn’t name Judas in the previous story, like John does, he names him now as the one who would betray the Lord.

We don’t know why Judas went to the chief priests. Perhaps out of greed? Maybe it was disillusionment with the type of Messiah Jesus was turning out to be (and that last story was the final straw)? Maybe he thought he could force Jesus into ushering the kingdom by betraying him? We don’t know.

The leaders were already planning on a way to arrest and kill Jesus quietly. But now one of his own disciples shows up willing to betray him? How fortuitous.

Judas’ question? “How much will you give me to do this?” The answer? “Thirty pieces of silver.”

Thirty pieces of silver would have been worth about 120 days wages.

Interestingly according to Exodus 21:32, this was the same price that was to be paid for an ox killing a slave. You’d think the cost of killing the Son of God would be a little more than that. But it also shows that Paul was right: The God really did take on the form of a slave.

Later, Matthew will view this as a fulfilment of prophecy.

And with that, the plot to betray, arrest, and kill Jesus is underway. Judas is now on the lookout for the perfect time to betray His Lord and Master.

Conclusion

This passage may same small, but it is important. It shows us that the Lord’s passion wasn’t just random, but actually prepared for. And more than that, it was predicted by Himself. Despite the leaders of the world plotting against Him, it was all in vain. The Lord Jesus was in complete control, the entire time.