Thursday, March 1, 2018

Conversation Points for John 2:13-22

Study Format:
1. Read passage aloud. What did you notice in the reading? What words or phrase caught your attention?
2. Read passage aloud a second time. What questions would you ask the text?
3. Read passage aloud a third time. What do you hear God calling you to do or be in response to this text?

Interesting Ideas to Consider:
• Unlike in the synoptic, in John’s Gospel, Jesus traveled to Jerusalem three times. In 2:13, after the intimate setting of the beginning of John’s Gospel with Jesus in Galilee surrounded by friends and family, Jesus made his first trip to the Temple in Jerusalem, the geographical and spiritual center of the Jewish faith. The story of Jesus cleansing the Temple contrasts Jesus’ authority with the authority of the religious leaders.
• The story of Jesus cleansing the temple appears in all four Gospels. However, the synoptics all place this incident as part of his passion, whereas John locates it at the very beginning of his ministry. The synoptics are probably more historically accurate; it is hard to imagine the religious authorities tolerating such a blatantly challenging act for long. In John, locating the incident here frames it as the completion of Jesus’ introduction. At the wedding at Cana, Jesus revealed his grace and glory by turning water into wine, highlighting the new life Jesus offers. In the temple cleansing, Jesus demonstrated the challenge and threat that new life poses to the existing order.
• In the Greek, verses 14-16 are all one long, complex sentence, serving to create a mood of urgency and haste, underscoring the intensity of Jesus’ actions. “Just as Jesus never hesitates as he moves through the Temple, so, too, vv. 14-16 never hesitate.”
• John’s description of the temple scene is much fuller and more dramatic than that of the synoptics, describing a scene of sheep and cattle, and Jesus driving out humans and animals with a whip.
• Historical context: Jesus was in town for the Passover, a pilgrimage feast in which people would travel for long distances to bring offerings to the temple. Because of the distance, most people would not be able to bring animals for the required sacrifice with them. Leviticus 1 and 3 list cattle, sheep, and doves as part of the required animals for burning at the temple as religious offerings. Therefore, in order to participate in the festival, there would need to be animals for purchase available to the pilgrims. Additionally, the temple tax couldn’t be paid in Greek or Roman coinage, because those coins included pictures of the emperor, which were forbidden, so foreign coins would need to be exchanged for local coin. Having animal sales and money changers were not solely corrupt, the purpose was to aid people in worship. But like so many things, these practices seem to have gotten away from their initial intention of aiding in worship.
• The role of the disciples in this story is to act as witnesses, framing how the reader is to interpret the events. V. 17 references Psalm 69:9, “It is zeal for your house that has consumed me; the insults of those who insult you have fallen on me.” But the Gospel makes an important theological alteration to the verse from Psalm 69, setting it in the future tense (“will consume me”) instead of the Psalm’s past tense (“has consumed me”). This shifts the story into a passion prediction of Jesus being “consumed” at his crucifixion instead of a story about the destruction of the temple (though historically, that also happened).
• V. 18, “sign” (semeion) is the word used in John’s Gospel to describe Jesus’ miracles. Here the demand for “a sign” is about questioning Jesus’ authority. “The Jews” in this verse refer specifically to the religious leadership in the temple who question Jesus and do not know him.
• Only in John’s Gospel does Jesus predict the destruction of the Temple. In the synoptics, it is ascribed to Jesus by false witnesses during the trial at his passion (Matthew 26:61; Mark 14:58) and taunts at the cross (Matthew 27:40; Mark 15:29; Acts 6:14).
• The “forty-six” years claim in v. 20 is historically plausible. Construction on the temple began in approximately 19 BCE during the reign of Herod the Great. 46 years would place the date of this event at 27 CE, which would make sense since in John the event happens at the start of Jesus’ three year ministry.
• Verse 18-20 employ a classic Johaninne narrative technique of misunderstanding. The Jews response in v. 20 demonstrated they only understand the surface level of Jesus’ conversation, that of the physical temple structure. But the verb Jesus used in v. 19 about raising the temple back up, egeiro, is also used to speak of resurrection (John 2:22; 5:21; 12:1, 9, 17: 21-14), giving the sentence a second, more symbolic meaning.
• V. 21 makes what was hinted in v. 19 clear, “he was speaking of the temple of his body.” In Judaism, the Temple was God’s physical location on earth, so to call Jesus’ body “the temple” was to suggest that Jesus is now God’s physical location on earth. The Fourth Evangelist’s commentary in v. 21 makes clear to the reader what the religious leaders missed, that Jesus has the authority to challenge the temple system because Jesus is God’s physical presence on earth.

Works Sourced:
O’ Day, Gail. “The Gospel of John.” The New Interpreter’s Bible Volume IX. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1995.

No comments:

Post a Comment