Matthew 26:1–16
26 When Jesus had finished all these sayings, he said to his disciples, 2 “You know that after two days the Passover is coming, and the Son of Man will be delivered up to be crucified.”
3 Then the chief priests and the elders of the people gathered in the palace of the high priest, whose name was Caiaphas, 4 and plotted together in order to arrest Jesus by stealth and kill him. 5 But they said, “Not during the feast, lest there be an uproar among the people.”
6 Now when Jesus was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper,1 7 a woman came up to him with an alabaster flask of very expensive ointment, and she poured it on his head as he reclined at table. 8 And when the disciples saw it, they were indignant, saying, “Why this waste? 9 For this could have been sold for a large sum and given to the poor.” 10 But Jesus, aware of this, said to them, “Why do you trouble the woman? For she has done a beautiful thing to me. 11 For you always have the poor with you, but you will not always have me. 12 In pouring this ointment on my body, she has done it to prepare me for burial. 13 Truly, I say to you, wherever this gospel is proclaimed in the whole world, what she has done will also be told in memory of her.”
14 Then one of the twelve, whose name was Judas Iscariot, went to the chief priests 15 and said, “What will you give me if I deliver him over to you?” And they paid him thirty pieces of silver. 16 And from that moment he sought an opportunity to betray him.
1 Leprosy was a term for several skin diseases; see Leviticus 13
Section Overview
With the close of Matthew 25, Jesus has completed his fifth and final block of instruction of the disciples. In chapter 26, the events Jesus has long predicted begin to unfold. As he said would happen, Jesus is “delivered over to the chief priests and scribes” (20:18), and Matthew’s narrative moves toward its climax. Chapter 25 described Jesus in glory (25:31); chapters 26–28 show Jesus suffering and humiliated, then restored to life and authority.
Section Outline
IX. Death, and Resurrection (26:1–28:20)
A. Transition to the Conspiracy against Jesus (26:1–5)
B. Honored by Anointing in Bethany (26:6–13)
C. Rejected in Judas’s Plan for Betrayal (26:14–16)
Matthew 26:1–16 describes the preliminary stages of Matthew’s passion narrative. It includes four elements: Jesus predicts his death (v. 2), leaders plot his death (vv. 3–5), a woman anoints him for burial (vv. 6–13), and Judas prepares to betray him (vv. 14–16). At the broadest level, this chapter contrasts the love of Jesus for his people with their painful rebellion against him.
Verses 1–16 have two structures. First, the opening and concluding elements form a small inclusio. As the passage opens, Jesus predicts that “the Son of Man will be delivered up to be crucified” during the Passover (vv. 1–2). As it closes, Judas arranges to betray Jesus into the hands of the chief priests (vv. 14–16). We also see three characters responding to Jesus in contrasting ways. Religious leaders plot to kill Jesus, first, and Judas volunteers to help them, last. By contrast, the woman in the center answers God’s love with her love and partially matches Jesus’ sacrifice with her own. The leaders act out of envy, the woman out of love, Judas out of greed. Wise readers discern the right and wrong ways to respond to Jesus.
Response
Judas’s betrayal highlights the mystery of the cross. How could a disciple betray Jesus? How could any creature turn against the Creator? What could motivate hatred of God? Judas’s action is mysterious, but essentially it is an extreme case of the mystery of all human rebellion. Despite the depravity of Judas’s greed and betrayal, God plans it as a catalyst for the final events. This is one of several biblical themes to which Matthew’s narrative points.
Above all, we see Jesus’ mastery of the final week. He predicts, oversees, and accepts everything that Judas and the authorities do to him. Peter, who betrays Jesus in a different way with a different result (below), explains it like this at Pentecost: “This Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men” (Acts 2:23).
Second, since Paul notes that biblical narratives contain negative examples, “written down for our instruction” (1 Cor. 10:6–12), Judas requires the conclusion that it is possible to see all the evidence for Jesus, and even do great things in his name (miracles), without believing him or knowing his redemptive grace. As Jesus himself had said, “Many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name . . . and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you’” (Matt. 7:22–23). Even something as banal as greed can contribute to a separation from Christ.
Third, power can have the same effect. Matthew has already suggested that the powerful can ask, “Who gave you the right?” instead of “What is right?” (cf. 21:23). Power is addictive. When a reform movement rises, how often do the authorities embrace it? How often do they guard their privileges? This holds even for Christian leaders. When the Reformation burst forth, few of the early ecclesiastical adopters were either mature or powerful. The Jewish leaders show how easy it is for the powerful to use their position to protect their interests.
Fourth, Matthew’s juxtaposition of the accounts of the authorities, the anointing woman, and Judas presents the path of discipleship as it proves itself in acts of costly and memorable love.
Finally, we hear Matthew’s promise that “this gospel” will be “proclaimed in the whole world” (26:13). What “she,” Jesus’ anointer, does for him is broadcast as an act of sacrificial love. Hidden in that promise is the assurance that the world will know the gospel of Jesus.
Leprosy was a term for several skin diseases; see Leviticus 13
26:1–2 Chapter 26 begins by repeating the refrain that followed the end of each block of teaching material, “When Jesus had finished all these sayings . . .” Here he opens the narrative that leads to the crucifixion with an announcement: “You know that after two days the Passover is coming, and the Son of Man will be delivered up to be crucified” (v. 2). Because Jesus predicts his death, the reader sees that he is not a passive victim. He predicts it, embraces it, and controls it.
The disciples always resist the prospect of Jesus’ crucifixion (16:21–23; 17:22–23; 20:17–28), even as Jesus’ insists on it. To this day, many wonder why Jesus had to die so shamefully, under God’s curse. The unfolding passion narrative answers that question.
26:3–5 The Jewish leaders have long accused Jesus (9:34) and plotted to kill him (12:14; cf. Mark 3:6; John 7:1; 11:50–53). Generally, the hostility has emanated from the Pharisees (Matt. 9:11, 34; 12:2, 14, 24; 15:1–2; 16:1; 19:3; 22:15), but 26:3 names a different set of opponents, “the chief priests and the elders.” This is the group that questioned Jesus’ right to cast money-changers from the temple and to teach there (21:23). While the Pharisees had spiritual authority and influence with the people, the priests and elders had temporal authority and influence with Rome. The Pharisees could wish Jesus’ death; the priests and elders might accomplish it.
We need to define the nature of this antipathy. To paraphrase Jack Dean Kingsbury, the Pharisees and scribes believe Jesus blasphemes by claiming the right to forgive sins. No one could deny his power, but since he exercises it wrongly by healing on the Sabbath, that power must derive from “collusion with Satan.” Further, he places himself “above law and tradition” and dismisses their request to prove that he acts by God’s authorization. All along he impugns their way of life and undermines their authority as Israel’s leaders. Finally, he seems capable of causing an upheaval that would incite Roman governors to deprive the nation of the remnants of self-government it still possesses (John 11:45–53).
In short, the leaders convince themselves that Jesus is a proper target of their wrath. The Gospels also see other forces at work. They report that the leaders envy Jesus’ authority and popularity (Matt. 27:18; Mark 15:10; John 11:48). He also exposes their hypocrisy (Matt. 15:1–20; 23:1–36), ignores their authority (21:12–27), and threatens their supremacy. The leaders also fear that Jesus’ popularity could lead the Romans to “take away both our place and our nation” (John 11:48; cf. Matt. 26:5).
The chief priests and elders gather in the palace of the high priest, Caiaphas, and plot to arrest Jesus by stealth and to kill him. But they caution, “Not during the feast, lest there be an uproar among the people” (vv. 3–5). Matthew and John call Caiaphas “high priest” (Matt. 26:3; John 11:49), whereas Luke names “Annas and Caiaphas” (Luke 3:2; Acts 4:6). The conflict is superficial; the Romans deposed Annas and replaced him with Caiaphas. Caiaphas acted as high priest daily and answered to Rome, but by Jewish law a high priest—Annas—held his position until his death.
Ironic contrasts cover the page. Jesus accused the leaders of hypocrisy in Matthew 23; now they prove themselves guilty of the charge. Jesus, the judge of all flesh, submits to unjust judgment. Caiaphas is a counterfeit high priest; he keeps his position by acting as a tool of Rome for eighteen years. Jesus is the true high priest; he holds his position from eternity but fulfills it in time by offering himself as the final sacrifice for sins (Heb. 9:22–28). Caiaphas serves God unwittingly; Jesus acts by design. Caiaphas plots stealthily to minimize Jesus’ popularity; Jesus is open and embraces his suffering. Caiaphas thinks his office and schemes can control events, but Jesus predicts and controls everything. Caiaphas wants to act after the Passover, but Jesus plans his sacrifice for Passover week, and prevails.
26:6–13 All four Gospels have an account of a woman who anoints Jesus, but Matthew 26, Mark 14, and John 12 describe one event, and Luke 7 another. Luke 7 overlaps with the other Gospels at just two points: a woman anoints Jesus in the house of a man named Simon. All other points differ: in Luke, the woman is a “sinner,” her host is a Pharisee living in Galilee, her motive is gratitude for forgiveness, the event is early in Jesus’ ministry, and the reaction is dismay that Jesus lets a sinner touch him. In Matthew, Mark, and John, the woman is no “sinner,” the host is a leper, the goal is to anoint Jesus for burial, the anointing occurs shortly before Passover, and the result is a complaint about financial waste.
The arrangement of the three encounters with Jesus in Matthew 26:1–16 is topical, not chronological. Matthew writes, “When Jesus was at Bethany . . . a woman came up to him” (vv. 6–7). John 12:1 locates the event earlier: “Six days before the Passover, Jesus therefore came to Bethany.” There is no contradiction, since Matthew does not present a chronological account; he juxtaposes people and events to make a point. While the priests and elders plot to kill Jesus (Matt. 26:3–5) and Judas plans to betray him (vv. 14–16), a devoted woman anoints him with costly perfume.
In the house of Simon the leper (whom we assume Jesus has healed; otherwise they would not have gathered there), a woman pours an “alabaster flask of very expensive ointment” on his head (v. 7). John 12:1–8 identifies the woman as Mary, the sister of Lazarus and Martha, and notes the perfume has a value of three hundred denarii, the sum a laborer would earn in a full year. She snaps the neck of the vial and pours all of it on Jesus’ head.
The disciples—especially Judas, according to John 12:4–6—are indignant at the costly display and grumble, “Why this waste? For this could have been sold for a large sum and given to the poor” (Matt. 26:8–9). We understand the concern. The disciples live in near poverty and see it on every side. Further, they have not accepted the uniqueness of the hour, as Jesus’ death draws near.
Jesus corrects them, saying, “She has done a beautiful thing to me. For you always have the poor with you, but you will not always have me” (vv. 10–11). In saying this, Jesus does not devalue alms or generosity to the poor—he gave generously to the poor himself, by healing and feeding them. But Jesus places surpassing value on his impending sacrifice. Poverty is neither an insignificant nor a hopeless cause, but it is an ongoing cause. Deuteronomy 15:11 declares, “There will never cease to be poor in the land. Therefore . . . ‘You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor.’” The righteous can give to the poor every day. But this day is unique, the day to honor Jesus before his death, before his physical presence on earth ends. For good reasons, therefore, the woman rightly spends extravagantly to anoint Jesus. She grasps what Judas and the other disciples do not: Jesus must die, soon, and in a way that will preclude a proper burial.
How does she grasp what the disciples miss? This is hardly the first time a minor character in the Gospels understands Jesus better than the disciples do (cf. Matt. 15:21–28). Further, John reveals that this is Mary, who is identified as a listener in Luke 10:39 and again in John 11, after Lazarus dies. No one can say that she foresees Jesus’ substitutionary atonement, but she apparently follows his predictions of imminent death. She knows how much Jesus has given her, and so she chooses to give in return. Her gift is miniscule compared to that of Jesus, but she gives generously, and Jesus promises it will be remembered “wherever this gospel is proclaimed in the whole world” (Matt. 26:13). Her act becomes a sign of Jesus’ redemptive sacrifice, given in advance and understood afterward. By it she honors Jesus, and Jesus honors her in return.
26:14–16 Next, Matthew sketches Judas’s treachery with awful simplicity: “Then one of the twelve . . . went to the chief priests and said, ‘What will you give me if I deliver him over to you?” (vv. 14–15). How could one of the Twelve, one of the men who has spoken, healed, walked, eaten, and rested with Jesus daily, betray him?
Some suggest that the name Iscariot is derived from the Latin sicarii, meaning “dagger men,” or insurrectionists. They propose that Judas is a political extremist, a member of the radical sect known as “zealots.” On this reading, he has followed Jesus because he expects Jesus to lead a revolt against Rome. Jesus’ failure to act against Rome so distresses Judas that he decides Jesus must be destroyed. Others suggest that Judas tries to force Jesus to act by arranging his arrest. At any event, they propose that Judas’s political agenda leads him to misread Jesus. Matthew says nothing that supports such proposals. He does mention Judas’s interest in money, which John 12 also accents.
The Gospels, taken together, rule out the possibility that Judas is merely misguided. He seeks out the priests; they do not tempt him. When Matthew describes how Judas offers to “deliver” Jesus, he uses a verb (Gk. paradidōmi) that ordinarily means “betray” or, at best, “hand over” in the passion narratives (Matt. 27:3–4 renders the same word in terms of betrayal). Both Luke 22:3 and John 13:27 record how Satan enters into Judas before the betrayal. John 17:12 calls him “the son of destruction,” which could be translated “the son of perdition” (KJV). The Gospels agree that afterward, instead of turning upward to God in repentance, he turns inward, upon himself in remorse, until he hangs himself (Matt. 27:3–5; cf. 2 Cor. 7:10). Finally, Acts 1:15–20 draws on Psalm 69:19–28, the longest psalm of David on the theme of betrayal, and sees it as a picture of the betrayal of Christ.
The Gospels also mention greed as a motive. John notes how Judas carried the disciples’ common purse and stole from it (John 12:5–6). Craig Keener judges that once Judas “realizes that Jesus advocates servanthood rather than conquest . . . [he] determines to gain at least some profit.” Matthew records how Judas betrays Jesus for thirty pieces of silver, roughly four months’ wages. Since thirty pieces is also the penalty for letting an ox gore a slave to death in Exodus 21:32, there may be a hint at disdain for Jesus. Judas bristles when a woman spends a year’s wages on anointing Jesus, then betrays him for a third the price. So Matthew contrasts Mary’s “uncalculating generosity” with Judas’s “coldly calculated bargain.” From the time he takes the money, Judas continuously looks for an opportunity to betray Jesus. He will provide the mechanism for Jesus’ arrest, leading the authorities, who feared the multitudes, to a secluded place where, they think, Jesus’ arrest will be easy.