John 12:2

There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him.

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(2) There they made him a supper.—Comp. Notes on Matthew 26:6 et seq., and Mark 14:3 et seq., which are clearly accounts of the same supper. Here the details peculiar to St. John, who was an eyewitness, will be noted. St. Matthew gives no indication of the day. St. Mark seems to place it two days before the Passover; but comp. Notes on Mark 16:1-2. Both the other accounts tell us that the supper was in the house of Simon the leper. St. John docs not define the place more definitely than to say that it was in Bethany; but he alone adds the facts that Martha was still serving, and that Lazarus was present as a guest.

And Martha served.—The tense of this verb differs from that of the others in the verse, and implies the continued act of serving, whilst “made a feast” is the statement of the fact as a whole. (Comp. Luke 10:40.)

Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him.—This is a natural touch answering to the impression that the fact made. It is closely connected with the statement of the preceding verse, “Lazarus had been dead, whom he raised from the dead.” Here was one sitting at meat with them who had lain in the sepulchre four days. The meal is in his case, as afterwards in that of our Lord Himself (Luke 24:41-43), a physical proof of the Resurrection; and his presence by the side of our Lord calls forth from Mary the anointing, which testifies to her gratitude and love.

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

12:1-11 Christ had formerly blamed Martha for being troubled with much serving. But she did not leave off serving, as some, who when found fault with for going too far in one way, peevishly run too far another way; she still served, but within hearing of Christ's gracious words. Mary gave a token of love to Christ, who had given real tokens of his love to her and her family. God's Anointed should be our Anointed. Has God poured on him the oil of gladness above his fellows, let us pour on him the ointment of our best affections. In Judas a foul sin is gilded over with a plausible pretence. We must not think that those do no acceptable service, who do it not in our way. The reigning love of money is heart-theft. The grace of Christ puts kind comments on pious words and actions, makes the best of what is amiss, and the most of what is good. Opportunities are to be improved; and those first and most vigorously, which are likely to be the shortest. To consult to hinder the further effect of the miracle, by putting Lazarus to death, is such wickedness, malice, and folly, as cannot be explained, except by the desperate enmity of the human heart against God. They resolved that the man should die whom the Lord had raised to life. The success of the gospel often makes wicked men so angry, that they speak and act as if they hoped to obtain a victory over the Almighty himself.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

See this passage explained in the notes at Matthew 26:3-16.

John 12:2

A supper - At the house of Simon the leper, Matthew 26:6.

Lazarus was ... - The names of Martha and Lazarus are mentioned because it was not in their own house, but in that of Simon. Lazarus is particularly mentioned, since it was so remarkable that one who had been once dead should be enjoying again the endearments of friendship. This shows, also, that his resurrection was no illusion - that he was really restored to the blessings of life and friendship. Calmet thinks that this was about two months after his resurrection, and it is the last that we hear of him. How long he lived is unknown, nor is it recorded that he made any communication about the world of spirits. It is remarkable that none who have been restored to life from the dead have made any communications respecting that world. See Luke 16:31, and the notes at 2 Corinthians 12:4.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

2. Martha served—This, with what is afterwards said of Mary's way of honoring her Lord, is so true to the character in which those two women appear in Lu 10:38-42, as to constitute one of the strongest and most delightful confirmations of the truth of both narratives. (See also on Joh 11:20).

Lazarus … sat at the table—"Between the raised Lazarus and the healed leper (Simon, Mr 14:3), the Lord probably sits as between two trophies of His glory" [Stier].

Matthew Poole's Commentary

That this supper was made in Bethany is no question; but at whose house there it is questioned. Some think that it was at the house of Simon the leper. We read indeed of a supper made for our Saviour at his house, both Matthew 26:6,7, and Mark 14:3, and that Simon is said to have been of Bethany: only the supper here mentioned is said to have been six days before the passover, and that mentioned by Matthew and Mark seems to have been but two days before, Matthew 26:2 Mark 14:1. That which is probably said to solve that difficulty is, the circumstances of the supper, and history about it, seem the very same, both in Matthew, Mark, and John; but it seems in Matthew and Mark to be a little put out of order; they do not say that this supper was two days before the passover, (that indeed had been a contradiction to what John doth here relate), but both Matthew and Mark first tell us, that Christ told his disciples that the passover was to be within two days, and of the counsel taken by the chief priests and elders against Christ, and then relates the story of this supper: John first gives us an account of this supper, which was six days before the passover; so John seems to have related it in its proper time and order.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

There they made him a supper,.... At Bethany, in the house of Lazarus, Martha, and Mary; by whose order, and at whose charge it was prepared for him; and not in the house of Simon the leper, which was four days after this, Matthew 26:2.

And Martha served; who was always a busy, active, and stirring woman; and this she did, to testify her love to Christ, and great respect for him; otherwise, as she was a person of substance, she had servants enough to wait at table:

but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him; and ate, and drank, and conversed; by which it appeared, that he was really risen from the dead, and was in a good state of health.

Geneva Study Bible

There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him.

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Expositor's Greek Testament

John 12:2. ἐποίησαν … αὐτῷ. ἐποίησαν is the indefinite plural: “they made Him” a supper; δεῖπνον, originally any meal, came to be used invariably of the evening meal.—καὶ ἡ Μάρθα διηκόνει, “and Martha waited at table,” which was her peculiar province (Luke 10:40).—ὁ δὲ Λάζαρος … αὐτῷ. This is mentioned, not to show that Lazarus was still alive and well, but because the feast was not in his house but in that of Simon the leper (Mark 14:3, Matthew 26:6). That this was the same feast as that mentioned by the Synoptists is apparent; the only discrepancy of any consequence being that the Synoptists seem to place the feast only two days before the Passover. But they introduce the feast parenthetically to present the immediate motive of Judas’ action, and accordingly disregard strict chronology.

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

2–8. The Devotion of Mary

2. they made him a supper] ‘They’ is indefinite: if we had only this account we should suppose that the supper was in the house of Martha, Mary, and Lazarus; but S. Mark (Mark 14:3) and S. Matthew (Matthew 26:6) tell us that it was in the house of Simon the leper, who had possibly been healed by Christ and probably was a friend or relation of Lazarus and his sisters. Martha’s serving (comp. Luke 10:40) in his house is evidence of the latter point (see the notes on the accounts of S. Matthew and S. Mark).

Lazarus was one of them] This is probably introduced to prove the reality and completeness of his restoration to life: but it also confirms the Synoptic accounts by indicating that Lazarus was a guest rather than a host.

sat at the table] Literally, reclined, as was the custom.

Bengel's Gnomen

John 12:2. Ἐποίησαν, they made) the people of Bethany.—αὐτῷ, for Him) in His honour.—δεῖπνον, a supper) a solemn [festive] one. The banquet, at which Lazarus was present after his being raised to life, may be compared with the heavenly banquet, at which hereafter there shall be present the dead saints, when they shall have risen again.—ἡ Μάρθα, Martha) Martha manifested her zealous affection in one way, Mary in another, John 12:3, [Martha served; Mary anointed Jesus’ feet with the costly ointment, etc.]

Pulpit Commentary

Verse 2. - There, therefore, they made him a supper, and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him. John does not tell us in whose house "they made the dinner" or supper, and unless Simon the leper (Matthew 26:6 and Mark 14:3) is a member of the family (or, as some suggest, the husband of Martha), we cannot suppose that it was in the quiet home of Bethany that this feast in honor of Jesus was held, but that it took place, as the synoptists positively declare, "in the house of Simon the leper." Simon may easily have been one of the many lepers whom our Lord had healed, and whose soul was filled with accordant gratitude. At that table there would be seated two transcendent; proofs of the power of Jesus to save, not only from the semblance but from the reality of death (see Meyer; Matthew 26:6). We wonder, with Godet, that Meyer should reject this simple supposition as "spurious harmony." All that is here stated is in agreement with it:

(1) that Martha should have shown her reverence by serving her Lord, according to her wont, not necessarily as hostess (Hengstenberg and Lange), but as the expression of her devoted thankfulness;

(2) that Lazarus should have been one of those who sat at meat, reclined at table, with him, i.e. took a position as a guest, like himself; and

(3) that Mary should have poured forth her costly spikenard, in royal self-forgetting love. The conduct of all the three thus mentioned is compatible with the fact stated in the synoptic narrative, that the festival was celebrated in the house of Simon the leper. Our Lord had commented, in the house of Simon the Pharisee (Luke 7:44, etc.), on the absence of the customary anointing with oil. Mary knew of this, and resolved that, whatever the woman who was a sinner had done, no similar act of neglect should occur on that memorable evening. A chronological discrepancy renders an identification of the synoptic narrative of Matthew with this story perplexing. In Matthew 26:2 we are brought to within two days of the Passover, whereas here we cannot well be less than five days before it. However, there is nothing in Matthew 26:6-13 which indubitably declares the date of the supper The "two days" may refer to the date of Judas's treachery, after mentioning which he goes back to an event which furnished occasion and temptation to the avaricious mind of Judas. John 12:2