Week 7: John 2:12-23. Jesus is a better temple

Week 7: John 2:12ff Let's begin this morning, by simply rereading last week's passage, starting at John 2:1: (2:1) And on the third day, a wedding, there w as in Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there. (2) Now, Jesus was also invited, with his disciples, to the wedding, (3) and when the wine ran out, the mother of Jesus says to him, "Wine we don't have," (4) and Jesus says to her, "What to me, and to you? My hour has not yet come." (5) His mother says to the servants, "Whatever he may say to you, do [it]." (6) Now, six stone water jars were there, in accordance with the cleansing/purification of the Judeans being set, each one holding 18 to 27 gallons. (7) Jesus says to them, "Fill the water jars with water," and they filled them up to the brim, (8) and he says to them, "Draw some out, and bring [it] to the head steward." Now, they brought [it]. (9) Now, when the head steward tasted the water, wine having become, and he didn't know from where it is-- now, the servants knew-- the ones having drawn the water-- the head steward calls the bridegroom, and he says to him, "Every man first the good wine sets out, and whenever they are drunk, the inferior. You have kept the good wine until now." (11) This, [the] beginning/first of the signs, Jesus did at Cana in Galilee, and he revealed his glory, and his disciples gave allegiance to him. The main point of John 2:1-11 is that Jesus has come offering a greater grace than what came before-- a grace in place of the grace found in Judaism (John 1:16-17). And if/when you see what Jesus offers, with eyes of faith, and understand what it reveals about Jesus, you will give your allegiance to Jesus. Truly, Jesus is God. Truly, Jesus is the one we should come to, and abide with, and follow. Our story continues this week, in verse 12:1 (12) After this, he went down to Capernaum-- he, and his mother, and the brothers, and his disciples-- and there they abided not many days, (13) and near, the Passover of the Judeans2 was, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem, (14) and he found in the temple the ones selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers seated, (15) and making a whip from cords, all he drove them from the temple, both the sheep and the oxen, (16) and of the money changers he scattered the coins, and the tables he overturned, (16) and to the ones selling doves, he said, "Take away these things from here. Don't make the house of my Father a house of [the] marketplace."3 When we read these verses, we are going to be tempted to accidentally read the Synoptic gospels (M, M, L) into this story. There, Jesus drives out the merchants because they have made the temple a den of thieves. There, Jesus' complaint is that the merchants are ripping people off somehow. But we are reading the gospel of John. Why does Jesus drive out the animals from the temple? Here, Jesus probably alludes to Zechariah 14:20-21:4 (20) On that day it shall be written on the bells of the horse: "Holy/dedicated to Yahweh," and the cooking pots in the house of Yahweh shall be as the sprinkling bowls before the altar, (21) and every pot in Jerusalem and Judah shall be holy to Yahweh of Armies, and all the ones sacrificing shall come, and they shall take from them,5 and they shall cook in them, and there shall not be a trader any longer in the house of Yahweh of Armies on that day. Zechariah prophecies that the day is coming when all of Jerusalem will be holy/dedicated to Yahweh. Everything will be clean throughout the entire land; there will no longer be levels, or degrees, of holiness. And if everything is clean, and holy, and acceptable to Yahweh, then there is no more need for merchants. They can't offer you anything you don't already have, and need. So on that day, when you come to the temple as a family to worship Yahweh, and have a meal in Yahweh's presence (Lev. 7:15ff; Ezek. 46:21-24), you can use your own utensils, and bowls. You can bring your own food. You don't have to purchase anything. On that day, what will make your worship acceptable, is that it comes from a clean and obedient heart-- a heart committed/holy to Yahweh (Zechariah 13:1-2, 9). What, then, will be the role of merchants and traders? There will be no need for them. Now, Jesus is not quoting Zechariah 14 here, exactly. And I don't think we are supposed to read John 2 as a total fulfillment of Zechariah 13-14. I think it's more like Jesus is echoing parts of Zechariah's language, to make a point. And what is that point? When you look at the Jerusalem temple, you should understand that this is fundamentally flawed structure. The temple was designed to be a house for Jesus' Father-- for God. It was the place where Yahweh placed his Name, so that people could come to the temple to worship, and pray, and seek forgiveness from sins (1 Kings 8). But when Jesus looks at the temple in John 2, what does he see? All he sees is a "house of trade." He sees a Walmart, not a temple. -------------------------------------------------------- There is a lot of debate about how we should understand Jesus' actions in the temple. In English Bibles, in the heading above this story, they will tell you that Jesus "cleansed" the temple. And they encourage you to read this as a story about Jesus fixing what was wrong with the temple, and making it so that people can worship God rightly at the temple. It could be that this is the idea in the Synoptic gospels. I'm not brave enough to say for sure. But in the gospel of John, there's no way this is right. True worship-- worship that pleases God-- is not tied to the temple (John 4:21-24). So if you're reading an ESV, NRSV, NKJV, etc., you should run a sharpie through the heading. NIV is much better-- "Jesus Clears the Temple Courts." The other main approach is to say that Jesus is symbolically destroying the temple. Jesus isn't "cleansing" the temple; he's condemning it (C.H. Dodd, followed by many). I think this is maybe right, but we can only reach this point through a total understanding of the story. "Destroy this temple..." I feel safer simply saying: Based just on Jesus' words here, and letting AJ tell it as his pace, Jesus is making the point that the temple is being misused. D.A. Carson: "There is no evidence that the animal merchants and money-changers or the priestly authorities who allowed them to use the outer court were corrupt companions in graft. Jesus' complaint is not that they are guilty of sharp business practices and should therefore reform their ethical life, but that they should not be in the temple area at all. How dare you turn my Father's house into a market! he exclaims. Instead of solemn dignity and the murmur of prayer, there is the bellowing of cattle and the bleating of sheep. Instead of brokenness and contrition, holy adoration and prolonged petition, there is noisy commerce."6 You can have milk in the fridge, without keeping a cow in the kitchen. ------------------------------------------------------- Verse 17: (17) His disciples remembered that it is written, "Zeal for your house will consume me."7 In verse 17, AJ helps us understand Jesus' actions by pointing to the disciples' understanding of Psalm 69:10. At some point,8 the disciples realized that Jesus, in clearing the temple, was consumed by zeal. Jesus saw that his Father's house had become a house of trade, and couldn't just let it slide. A good son is zealous for his Father's house. Now, when we read this quotation from Psalm 69:10, we should hear this at two levels. This is another example of AJ's 2 story story coming out. At one level, we can understand that Jesus was overcome by zeal for his Father's house, and that's why he cleared the temple. But when we read these words, they should make us pause. We should hear the higher level of truth here (the upper story). We should find ourselves thinking about Jesus' death on a cross. Jesus was zealous for his Father's house, and this zeal consumed him. Verse 18: (18) Then the Judeans answered,9 and they said to him, "What sign do you show10 us, that these things you do?" The Judeans understand that Jesus is making a larger point here. What Jesus did is not senseless vandalism. It's not a one man riot. Jesus is doing some type of symbolic act. But on what basis? On whose authority? And so the Judeans come to Jesus, and they demand that Jesus show them some evidence of his authority to clear the temple. What right does Jesus have to do this? We as readers have already been told the answer. Whose house is it? "My Father's house. Jesus has the right to do whatever he wants with the temple, because he is the Unique Son. And we know why Jesus did this-- zeal for his Father's house consumed him. But this is how Jesus answers them, in verse 19: (19) Jesus answered, and he said to them, "Destroy this sanctuary/temple (different Greek word: νᾱός), and in three days11 I will raise it."12 Jesus is willing to give them evidence of his authority. First, they need to destroy "this temple." Then, he will prove his authority by rebuilding it in three days. And so he offers them a powerful sign-- but one that would require astonishing faith in Jesus in order to see. ---------------------------------------------- Now, the word Jesus uses for "temple" here is not the same word used in 2:14. It's a word that can refer more specifically to the inner sanctuary (Luke 1:9, 21, 22; 23:45), but also be used to describe the temple as a whole (Matt. 26:61 with 27:5). So there's maybe a little clue here that something is going on at the higher level of the 2 story story. I'm not sure. ------------------------------------------------------------ Verse 20: (20) Then the Judeans said, "46 years this temple (νᾱός )has been under construction,13 and you in three days14 will raise it? The Judeans hear Jesus' offer, and they reject it as ridiculous. This "temple" has been under construction for 46 years. Jesus, in three days, can raise it? That's impossible. Verse 21: (21) Now, that15 he was saying16 concerning the temple (νᾱός )of his body. Here, AJ helps us. It turns out that Jesus and the Judeans are talking past each other. The Judeans are working at a lower level of understanding; Jesus from a higher level. And what we are seeing in this verse, is something that's going to keep happening in the gospel of John. People try to understand Jesus from this lower level-- taking his words literally, at face value. But if you want to understand Jesus, you have to reach higher. You have to hear his words "from above"-- from the heavenly perspective. So what it is that Jesus actually means? How are we supposed to hear Jesus? The proof that Jesus has the authority to clear the temple is this: If you destroy Jesus' body, and kill him, he will raise it in three days. Verse 22: (22) Then, when he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered, that this17 he was saying,18 and they "gave allegiance to"19 the Scripture, and the word that Jesus spoke.20 Jesus' disciples didn't understand everything he said at the time. They didn't realize Jesus was talking about his own body, and how zeal for his Father's house would consume him on the cross, and how he would rise from the dead after three days. And that was okay. But after all these things happened, the disciples remembered what he said, and everything clicked into place for them (John 14:26). They realized that the OT bore witness to Jesus, and they "gave their allegiance" to Scripture. And they remembered Jesus' words, and they "gave their allegiance to" Jesus' words as well. What can you trust? You can trust the OT. And you can trust the red letters in your Bibles, as well, as Scripture. Verse 23-24: (23) Now, while he was in Jerusalem at the Passover during the feast, many "gave allegiance to" his name, seeing his signs that he was doing. (24) Now, Jesus himself didn't "give his allegiance" to them, because he knew all people, and because need he didn't have, that anyone should testify/witness about man. For he himself knew what was in man. So, when the disciples saw the sign Jesus did, in rising from the dead, they understood that sign in light of the OT and Jesus' words. And they gave their allegiance both to Scripture, and to Jesus' words. But what did the "many" do? In verse 23, AJ tells us that "many" gave their allegiance to Jesus' name, seeing the signs he was doing. Let's just stop, and think about these verses. In these two verses, Jesus goes from having a handful of disciples following him, to having crowds of people "believe" in him-- "give allegiance" to him. Most Christians, seeing this, would find themselves rejoicing. Your ministry is taking off. People are "believing" in Jesus-- doing the one thing that many pastors/Christians say you need to do to be saved. Everything looks great. But not to Jesus. Jesus refused to "give his allegiance" to them, for two reasons: (1) Jesus knew all people. (2) Jesus didn't need anyone to bear witness to him, about what was in the heart of man. We've seen repeatedly so far in the gospel of John, that Jesus sees straight through people. He looks at Nathaniel, and into Nathaniel, and Jesus knows that he is a true Israelite, in whom there is no deceit (1:47). Jesus looks into Simon's heart, and he knows that here is a man who will be called "Rock" (1:42). But the crowds? It looks like the crowds are coming to Jesus just as his disciples did. The crowds see some evidence that Jesus is Someone special, and they commit themselves to him. But this commitment-- this allegiance-- is flawed in some way. How? To get that answer, you'll have to come back next week :) But understand that what Jesus rejects as being untrustworthy, is the same thing that most churches teach is all God wants from you. Is it enough to "believe in/toward" Jesus? Is it enough to understand that Jesus is Someone Special Who Can Do Great Signs? Jesus looks at the crowds, and he knows the answer is "no." There is something missing. And this should make you pause. All of us, probably, assume we are okay. All of us, probably, have given our allegiance to Jesus. We think we are insiders, part of Jesus' disciples. Does Jesus view us, the way we view ourselves? Or is there something rotten inside us? Is something missing? ---------------------------------------------------------------- So what have we seen so far in the gospel of John? We've seen Jesus revealing his glory. We've seen something of the greater grace Jesus offers the world. And we've seen three groups of people. (1) Disciples. This group of people are the ones who have come to Jesus, followed him, and abide with him. They've given their allegiance to him. Do they understand everything? No. Not at all. But they are growing in their understanding, while they abide with Jesus. They see everything Jesus does as insiders. (2) "Judeans." The gospel of John began by saying that Jesus came to his own, and his own didn't receive him (1:11). And we are getting a hint of what that looks like. Jesus came to Jerusalem, to his Father's house, and the Judeans don't "receive" him. They challenge him, wondering what authority he has to do this. They make no movement toward Jesus. All they have is skepticism, and hostility. (3) "The many." "The many" see the signs Jesus does, and AJ tells us that they "give their allegiance" to Jesus. They do the exact same thing that the disciples have already done. But something about this allegiance isn't trustworthy. What is that? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is a story that you can turn over and over in your heads. You can read and reread it, and it feels a little like a kaleidoscope, moving and changing. But let me just step back, and try to help you see the big picture. In these verses, we read about two temples. The first temple is the temple of the Judeans in Jerusalem. You might have viewed this temple as being something great (Luke 21:5). This was the place where Yahweh placed his Name (1 Kings 8). The place people turned toward in prayer for forgiveness and help. The place you'd go to worship God. What was the Judean temple? You could say that this temple was God's grace-- it was evidence of His favor, and help. The temple was a blessing. You could say all of this, and it's all true, but what else is the temple? Jesus looks at this temple, and he views it as fundamentally flawed. The temple was designed to be our Father's house. But what was it, actually? God's house had become a house of trade. And God never meant for his house to be used this way. God didn't want to run a business from his front lawn. So when you think about this temple, you should understand that it's flawed. It's a grace-- a kindness on God's part. But it's not everything a temple should be. Now, these verses also tell us about a second temple-- the temple of Jesus' body. What does this mean? How will worship work at this temple? AJ doesn't try to answer this here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- The short answer, cheating ahead, is something like this (this is super messy): John 14:8-11: 8 Philip said to him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." 9 Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works. 11 Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves. The Father dwells/abides in Jesus, and Jesus dwells/abides in the Father. Jesus is God's temple. And the And Jesus promised that he would also abide with his disciples (14:25), so long as they abided with him through obedience (15:4, 5, 7). So Jesus is connected to the Father. And we are connected to Jesus. And it's through Jesus, then, that we are connected to the Father-- and worship Him in Spirit and in truth (John 4:24). "Certain words in the Fourth Gospel carry an enriched meaning, such as "light," "hour," "true," and "dwelling" (μένειν), the verb from which μονή comes. Raymond Brown's classification of "dwelling" yields two basic meanings: 1) permanence and 2) immanence/relationship. For example, the Spirit of God "dwelled/remained" on Jesus (1:33), indicating a permanent relationship with him (see 8:35; 12:34; 15:16); Jesus, on the other hand, promises to "dwell" with his disciples (14:25) and demands that they "dwell" in the vine (15:4, 5, 7)-all of which expresses both permanence and closeness. The majority of the references to "dwell" occur in the Farewell Address and function to balance Jesus' unsettling remarks about "going away" and "coming back" with a strategy of loyalty and faithfulness. Several important usages then emerge: "dwell" refers to "the Father dwelling in me" (14:10), implying that Jesus is like a shrine or temple where the presence of God dwells. But turning to the disciples, Jesus commands them to "dwell" in him in an immanent relationship as branches remain in the vine. Aspects of this relationship include 1) having "the Spirit dwelling in you" (14:17) or the "words of Jesus dwelling" in you (15:7) and 2) "dwelling in Jesus' love" (15:9, 10), which is achieved by keeping his commandments. Thus "dwell" connotes strong relational ties, but not spatial location. Yet, we were told, "dwelling" in Jesus means corresponding proximity to the Father who "dwells" in Jesus. This dwelling-as-relation is not located in any fixed place, yet it is treated as such. Truly it points to Jesus as pontifex, mediator, broker, and priest uniting God and the disciples."21 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- AJ doesn't tell us any of that here. I'm cheating, rather badly. So what point is AJ making? Let me ask you a question. On any given day, at any one time, you can only go to one temple to worship God. You have to make a choice. And Jesus says there are two temples. There's the temple in Jerusalem. And there's the temple that is his body. How can you tell which temple is superior? How do you know which temple you should choose, to worship God? Pretty much everyone agrees that the gospel of John was written (or completed, at least) late, after 85 A.D. And part of why that matters, is that it means it was written after the Judean temple was destroyed by the Romans. So when you, as AJ's readers, hear Jesus' words, you read them understanding that there used to be two temples. And both of these temples were destroyed. But only one was raised. Jesus rose from the dead. And it's this fact that proves the superiority of Jesus, and the superiority of what he offers. The temple that Jesus raised, is the only one still standing. "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it." Destroy the other temple, and all you'll have left for 2,000 years is the Wailing Wall. And we who have come to Jesus-- we who follow him, and abide with him, and give our allegiance to him, read these words with understanding. We recognize what we have in Jesus, and we rejoice. We know that God accepts our worship. We know that we are worshipping God at the right place, through the right temple (Jesus), in the right way. So that's how we respond. And that's how Jesus' disciples responded. But AJ ends this story on kind of a sour note, and so I want to end on a sour note as well. "Many" see the signs Jesus is doing, and they respond like the disciples, doing the same main verb: They "give their allegiance" to Jesus. But something is wrong with them. Something about them can't be trusted. What? This should bother us. This should trouble us. What is wrong with "the many"? And how do we know that we are like the disciples, and not like "the many"? How do we know that we've really "given allegiance to Jesus"? More importantly, how do we know that Jesus has given his allegiance to us? Translation: (12) After this, he went down to Capernaum-- he, and his mother, and the brothers, and his disciples-- and there they abided not many days, (13) and near, the Passover of the Judeans was, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem, (14) and he found in the temple the ones selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers seated, (15) and making a whip from cords, all he drove them from the temple, both the sheep, and the oxen, (16) and of the money changers he scattered the coins, and the tables he overturned, (16) and to the ones selling doves, he said, "Take away these things from here. Don't make the house of my father a house of [the] marketplace." (17) His disciples remembered that it is written, "Zeal for your house will consume me." (18) Then the Judeans answered, and they said to him, "What sign do you show us, that these things you do?" (19) Jesus answered, and he said to them, "Destroy this temple (different Greek word: νᾱός), and in three days I will raise it." (20) Then the Judeans said, "46 years this temple (νᾱός )has been under construction, and you in three days will raise it? (21) Now, that he was saying concerning the temple of his body. (22) Then, when he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered, that this he was saying, and they "gave allegiance to" the Scripture, and the word that Jesus spoke. (23) Now, while he was in Jerusalem at the Passover during the feast, many "gave allegiance to" his name, seeing his signs that he was doing. (24) Now Jesus himself didn't "give his allegiance" to them, because he knew all people, and because need he didn't have, that anyone should testify/witness about man. For he himself knew what was in man. 1 Verse 12 is a transitional verse. 2 spoken of, with a sense of distance between the church and the Judeans. This is something that belongs to Judeans. 3 each sentence starts with "and," so we are encouraged to read this as a whole without pause. 4 As opposed to Matt. 21:12, where he quotes from a combination of Isaiah 56:7 and Jer. 7:11. 5 them= the previously ordinary/common cooking pots. 6 Carson, D. A. (1991). The Gospel according to John (pp. 178-179). Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity Press; W.B. Eerdmans. 7 Psalm 69:10. A qatal in Hebrew. LXX is past tense in most texts. 8 It's not clear, and it's debated, whether they "remembered" then, or later. 9 Interesting. It's like they are "answering" his action. Not anything he says. 10 or, "What sign are you showing us," It's a present tense, not a future, which is weird?? But based on John 6:30, they are asking for validation of his authority. 11 Runge thinks "in three days" is focused. I'd call a temporal frame. ?? 12 Mark 14:58. 13 Runge note: "Lexical/Grammatical: This translation of the aorist verb is based on a very close parallel in Ezra 5:16 (LXX), where it is clear from the following verb that the construction had not yet been completed. However, some suggest that the term "temple" here refers only to the sanctuary itself and thus the aorist verb would mean "this temple was built forty-six years ago." 14 Here, it's focused. "You" is position 1, topicalization, and in three days is position 2. 15 Here, AJ uses a far distinction: " Far Demonstrative Pronoun-The use of the 'far' demonstrative pronoun (ἐκεῖνός, that/those) to establish a near/far distinction where one literally exists, or to figuratively create one. The far demonstrative is used for things that are not thematically central to the discourse, i.e. they are 'athematic'." It's a parenthetical explanation to let you know they misunderstood him, and how. 16 Here, the imperfect verb serves as offline background information. 17 Runge calls this a topical frame, and not focused. 18 Here, the imperfect verb creates anticipation that something else will follow?? 19 Here, it's the verb "believe" with a dative. No "into." I'm translating it this way because of verse 23. I'm tempted otherwise to read "trust and commit to," but I don't want to pick just one half of that. 20 So the sign Jesus offered, again strengthened their faith after Jesus' resurrection.? 21 Neyrey, J. H. (2009). The Gospel of John in Cultural and Rhetorical Perspective (pp. 76-77). Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. --------------- ------------------------------------------------------------ --------------- ------------------------------------------------------------