João 12
William Hendriksen · Citado em PreceptAustin
João 12
Hendriksen adds that "Little did the world realize that by means of this very action it had condemned itself. As the context indicates, the term judgment is here the divine decision with reference to the world. That decision amounts to a condemnation." (BORROW Exposition of the Gospel according to John PAGE 202) J
João 12
Hendriksen: Jesus calls what she did “a beautiful thing,” And such it was indeed: unique in its thoughtfulness, regal in its lavishness, and marvelous in its timeliness. Mary saw the incomparable worth and beauty of Jesus and responded appropriately by anointing His body from head to toe with precious oil. This reminds me of Twila Paris' song. Play it as you ponder with wonder, awe and gratitude the beauty of the body of Christ, given for you and for me for the remission of our sins forever and ever. Amen.... How Beautiful How beautiful the hands that served the wine and the bread and the sons of the earth. How beautiful the feet that walked the long dusty roads and the hills to the cross. How beautiful how beautiful how beautiful is the body of Christ. How beautiful the heart that bled that took all my sin and bore it instead. How beautiful the tender eyes that chose to forgive and never despise. How beautiful how beautiful how beautiful is the body of Christ. And as He laid down His life we offer this sacrifice that we will live just as he died: willing to pay the price willing to pay the price. How beautiful the radient Bride who waits for her Groom with His light in her eyes. How beautiful when humble hearts give the fruit of pure lives so that others may live. How beautiful how beautiful how beautiful is the body of Christ. How beautiful the feet that bring the sound of good news and the love of the King. How beautiful the hands that serve the wine and the bread and the sons of the earth. How beautiful how beautiful how beautiful is the body of Christ. Perfume (ointment)(3464)(muron) is ointment, perfume, sweet-smelling substance made not from animal fats. A girl’s name Muriel is from the same root, and means perfume. Apart from a single reference in Revelation 18:13, muron occurs only in the four Gospels (13 times). The Synoptic Gospels record anointings of Jesus’ head by Mary of Bethany. Matthew and Mark clearly link this anointing to Jesus’ upcoming burial (Matthew 26:12; Mark 14:8).Gilbrant adds that "Muron is the juice-like aromatic extract from plants, or perfumed oil. As a cosmetic muron could be translated “perfume.” “Ointment” is perhaps a useful English translation, since muron was often medicinal and at times cultic in significance, being used for anointing (e.g., for burial). Another common use was in the embalming process (cf. Bauer)." NT uses - Matt. 26:7; Matt. 26:12; Mk. 14:3; Mk. 14:4; Mk. 14:5; Lk. 7:37; Lk. 7:38; Lk. 7:46; Lk. 23:56; Jn. 11:2; Jn. 12:3; Jn. 12:5; Rev. 18:13 Nard (3487)(nardos) a fragrant plant native to India (spike)nard and the aromatic oil extracted from its roots. Only in Jn 12:3 and Mk 14:3 ISBE - SPIKENARD - spik'-nard (nerd; nardos (Song 1:12; 4:14); neradhim; nardoi (Song 4:13), "spikenard plants"; nardos pistike (Mk 14:3; Jn 12:3), "pure nard," margin "liquid nard"; the English word is for "spiked nard," which comes from the Nardus spicatus of the Vulgate): Spikenard is the plant Nardostachys jatamansi (Natural Order, Valerianaceae); in Arabic the name Sunbul hind, "Indian spike," refers, like the English and Latin name, to the "snike"-like shape of the plant from which the perfume comes. The dried plant as sold consists of the "withered stalks and ribs of leaves cohering in a bundle of yellowish-brown capillary fibres and consisting of a spike about the size of a small finger" (Sir W. Jones, As. Res., II, 409); in appearance the whole plant is said to look like the tail of an ermine. It grows in the Himalayas. The extracted perfume is an oil, which was used by the Romans for anointing the head. Its great costliness is mentioned by Pliny. With regard to the exact meaning of the pistike, in the New Testament, there is much difference of opinion: "pure" and "liquid" are both given in margin, but it has also been suggested among other things that this was a local name, that it comes from the Latin spicita or from pisita, the Sanskrit name of the spikenard plant. The question is an open one: either "genuine" or "pure" is favored by most commentators.- E. W. G. Masterman See R K Harrison's in depth description of spikenard in his book Healing Herbs in the Bible, page 48 (BORROW). Wikipedia - Spikenard, also called nard, nardin, and muskroot, is a class of aromatic amber-colored essential oil derived from Nardostachys jatamansi, a flowering plant in the honeysuckle family which grows in the Himalayas of Nepal, China, and India. The oil has been used over centuries as a perfume, a traditional medicine, or in religious ceremonies across a wide territory from India to Europe. Historically, the name nard has also referred to essential oils derived from other species including the closely related valerian genus, as well as Spanish lavender; these cheaper, more common plants have been used in perfume-making, and sometimes to adulterate true spikenard. Gilbrant - Classical Greek Nardos refers to a fragrant and very valuable oil used as a perfume and for the anointing of important guests and persons. It was extracted from the Nardostaychys Jatamansi plant which was found in the Himalayan mountains. In the classical Greek nardos is used in reference both to the plant and to the oil from the plant. The Septuagint uses the word in the sense of the oil or perfume only (Song of Solomon 1:12; 4:13,14). In the 4:14 passage it is mentioned in a list of some of the other most valued ancient aromatics. The two references in the New Testament (Mark 14:3 and John 12:3) refer also to the oil or perfume from the plant. In these passages great emphasis is given to the extreme value of the oil that was used to anoint Jesus. Obviously, it was of great value. The oil was so expensive because of the distance it had to be transported (from the Himalayan mountains), the difficulty of its transportation, the further difficulty of its preservation, and also because Jesus was anointed with the oil in its unadulterated form. According to R.K. Harrison, “The best spikenard was imported from India in scaled alabaster boxes, which were opened only on very special occasions” (“Nard,” International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, 3:490f.). (Complete Biblical Library) COMPARISON OF JESUS' ANOINTING IN THREE GOSPELS John 12:1-8+ Mark 14:1-9+ Time Before Passover 6 days Jn 12:1+ None 2 days Mk 14:1+ Town Bethany Jn 12:1+ Bethany Bethany Mk 14:3+ Home no home mentioned Jn 12:1+ home of Simon the leper home of Simon the leper Mk 14:3+ Name of one anointing Mary Jn 12:3+ A woman A woman Mk 14:3+ Perfume Very Costly Pure Nard Jn 12:3+ Very Costly Very Costly Pure Nard Jn 14:3+ Container -- Alabaster Vial Alabaster Vial Broke Mk 14:3+ Amount Pound Jn 12:2+ -- -- Value 300 Denarii Jn 12:5+ High Price 300 Denarii Mk 14:5+ Proposed Purpose Sold...given to poor Jn 12:5+ Sold...given to poor Sold...given to poor Mk 14:5+ Conclusion -- Why this waste? Wasted Mk 14:4+ Persons Reacting Judas Iscariot Jn 12:4-6+ Disciples indignant: waste Some indignant: waste Mk 14:4+ Where Anointed Anointed feet Jn 12:3+ Poured on His Head Poured over His head Mk 14:3+ Jesus' Words Let her alone Jn 12:7+ Why bother the woman Let her alone. Why bother her Mk 14:6+ Rationale Poor you have with you always Jn 12:8+ Poor you have with you always have Poor you always have & can do them good Mk 14:6+ Woman's Purpose Preparation for burial Jn 12:7+ Prepared Me for burial Done a good deed to Jesus Mk 14:6+ Woman's Renown/ Reward -- Woman's act remembered wherever Gospel preached Woman's deed be memory wherever Gospel preached Mk 14:9+ Note that the similarities of the three accounts are highlighted in red. Even many of the differences can be explained. E.g., name of the one anointing named Mary and then referred to as woman is easily resolved. The location of the anointing in Simon the Leper would still fit John's description because he says Jesus went to Bethany but does not specifically say he went to a home. Grant Osborne adds "There are two issues related to this account that need to be addressed: (1) harmonizing the Gospel accounts and (2) the chronology of the event....The story in Mt 26:6-13 and Mk 14:3-9 has some interesting differences (the home of Simon the leper, an unnamed woman who breaks the jar and anoints Jesus’ head), but the similarities are far greater, and as the discussion below will show, the differences can be reasonably harmonized. These are the same account, so historically Jesus was anointed twice—first, the one in Luke and second the one reported in the other three Gospels....As to the second issue (CHRONOLOGY), the story in Matthew and Mark occurs after the Triumphal Entry, while the one here in John occurs before that event. However, this is only a problem if we demand that the Gospels follow a strictly chronological pattern. Actually, this is a modern development, and ancient historians did not do so. It has long been realized that the Gospel writers often arranged their material topically, especially the Synoptics (cf. Blomberg 1987). It is generally agreed that John probably has the correct order (he tends to have a more chronological arrangement, so Coakley 1988) and that Matthew and Mark place it where they do in order to contrast the woman’s worshipful act with Judas’s betrayal (cf. Carson, Blomberg 2001, Keener). (See The Gospel of John) THOSE IN FAVOR OF ONE ANOINTING DESCRIBED IN ALL THREE ACCOUNTS - John MacArthur, Grant Osborne, Edwin Blum (Bible Knowledge Commentary, Tom Constable, J C Ryle, A B Bruce, Rodney A Whitacre (IVP Commentary), Warren Wiersbe, William Cook (Focus on the Bible), NIV Study Bible, Reformation Study Bible, ESV Study Bible, J Vernon McGee, C L Blomberg, H. Ridderbos, William MacDonald (BORROW Believer's Bible Commentary), THOSE OPPOSED - Gotquestions.org, John Phillips NOTE: I AM SURE THERE ARE OTHERS, BUT IN MY CURSORY SURVEY OF THIS ISSUE, IT SEEMS THAT BY FAR MOST WRITERS FAVOR THE FACT THAT THE ANOINTINGS ARE PARALLEL IN JOHN, MATTHEW AND MARK. I will admit I was extremely surprised to find Charles Swindoll also included Luke's account as parallel with John, Matthew and Mark. He is in the minority on that unusual interpretation! See discussion of this interpretation. Here is an excellent discussion for Third Millenium ministries an excellent, conservative resource. QUESTION - Atheists point to these two different renderings of the anointing of Jesus and state that the Bible is unreliable. In one Jesus' head is anointed, in the other his feet. In one it is an unnamed woman, and in the other it is Mary. ANSWER - Matthew 26:6-7 While Jesus was in Bethany in the home of Simon the Leper, a woman came to him with an alabaster jar of very expensive perfume, which she poured on his head as he was reclining at the table. Luke 7:36-38 When one of the Pharisees invited Jesus to have dinner with him, he went to the Pharisees house and reclined at the table. A woman in that town who lived a sinful life learned that Jesus was eating at the Pharisees house, so she came there with an alabaster jar of perfume. As she stood behind him at his feet weeping, she began to wet his feet with her tears. Then she wiped them with her hair, kissed them and poured perfume on them. There is no discrepancy. These are not the same events. Hendriksen and Kistemaker maintain: It is claimed by many interpreters that, in describing the beautiful deed of Mary, the evangelist borrowed from Luke 7:36-50, and that the Mary mentioned in John 12:3 is the same as the sinful woman of Luke 7; or, that, while the two events are distinct, the author of the Fourth Gospel got his sources mixed and simply added to the story which he had found in Matthew 26:6-13 and Mark 14:39 the detail concerning the wiping of Jesus feet, which feature he had found in Luke 7. Compare the Accounts In Luke: (1) The Occasion: The dinner was in all probability occasioned by the desire of a certain unfriendly Pharisee to examine this famous rabbi, perhaps in order to confirm his suspicions with respect to Jesus. Note the unfriendly manner in which he treated the Lord. See Luke 7:44-46. (2) The Place: The house of a Pharisee. (3) The Main Female Character: A woman who was in the city, a sinner. Even according to Luke, this woman was not Mary the sister of Martha, for these sisters are subsequently introduced as new personages (in Luke 10:38-39). (4) The Act: This woman wept. Her tears dropped on Jesus' feet. She then proceeded to wipe off these tears. She also kissed and anointed them. (5) The Result: Jesus sharply rebuked the Pharisee. He praised the woman and dismissed her with a friendly and encouraging word. In John (1) The Occasion: The dinner is in all probability occasioned by the desire of a group at Bethany friendly to Jesus to honor him and to express their gratitude. (2) The Place: The house of Simon the leper, according to Matthew 26:6. (3) The Main Female Character: Mary of Bethany, a devout disciple of Jesus. She is mentioned in connection with her sister Martha and her brother Lazarus. (4) The Act: Mary did not weep. She did not wet Jesus' feet with her tears. She anointed these feet with ointment and then wiped off the excess ointment. It is clear, therefore, that even the detail concerning the wiping of the feet is completely different in the two accounts. ' (5) The Result: Jesus rebuked Judas Iscariot for criticizing Mary. He defended Mary's deed in the light of its purpose. So, the anointing of Jesus recounted in Luke 7:36-50 is a different incident from this anointing by Mary, which is related also in Matthew 26:6-12 and Mark 14:39. Reference: Hendriksen, W., & Kistemaker, S. J. (1953-2001). Vol. 1-2: New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Gospel According to John. (John 12:3). Grand Rapids: Baker Book House. Answer by Dr. Joseph R. Nally, Jr. SOURCE: Third Millennium Ministries - an excellent, conservative resource Dave
João 12
Hendriksen - Jesus had asked that the Father would glorify his name; i.e., that the Father by means of his revelation in the Son would cause the radiance of his majestic attributes to become publicly displayed, in order that men might ascribe to him the honor due unto his name. The name of the Father is his revelation; here, his revelation in Christ. (BORROW Exposition of the Gospel according to John PAGE 200)
João 12
Hendriksen has an interesting explanation of Satan being cast out -- "The casting out of the prince of this world must be explained in the light of the immediately following statement: “And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself.” The drawing of all men to the Christ is the casting out of the devil. He loses his power over the nations. A moment ago the Greeks had requested to see Jesus. That is definitely the context. These Greeks represented the nations—elect from every nation—that would come to accept Christ by living faith, through the sovereign grace of God. Hence, through the death of Christ the power of satan over the nations of the world is broken (BORROW Exposition of the Gospel according to John PAGE 202) When heaven bleeds on the cross, hell is defeated by its own schemes. -- Brian Bell NET NOTE on be cast (driven) out - The phrase driven out must refer to Satan’s loss of authority over this world. This must be in principle rather than in immediate fact, since 1 John 5:19 (ED: WHICH WAS WRITTEN AFTER THE GOSPEL) states that the whole world (still) lies in the power of the evil one (a reference to Satan). In an absolute sense the reference is proleptic (ED: PREDICTIVE OF WHAT WOULD DEFINITELY TRANSPIRE IN THE FUTURE - SEE FOUR "STAGES"). The coming of Jesus’ hour (his crucifixion, death, resurrection, and exaltation to the Father) marks the end of Satan’s domain and brings about his defeat, even though that defeat has not been ultimately worked out in history yet and awaits the consummation of the age. MacArthur on cast out agrees with the NET Note - "Here he is cast out in the sense that he loses his authority and influence." THOUGHT - I would qualify MacArthur's statement by saying Satan is still the prince of the power of the air (Eph 2:2+), he is still the father of the lost (Jn 8:44+), and when one walks in darkness, they are walking in his kingdom, over which he still exerts authority and influence. Satan's major point of loss in the present world is the loss of authority and influence over believers because we have been delivered from his domain (exousia - right and might) of darkness (Col 1:13+).