The Gospel of John: The Temple 2:13 - 25

 In our last lesson we were at a wedding, today we go to the temple. This is a very different story, but, as we will see, it is about the same subject as the wedding story.

 Before we look at the story, two introductory points. The first one is about Jesus’ home. In 2:12 we see that Jesus with his mother, his brothers and his disciples – presumably the ones we read about in chapter one – went to Capernaum and remained there a few days. Capernaum was a border town, or even a large village, with perhaps a population of a thousand. In films we often see Jesus moving around with his disciples as if he had no home and was living apart from his family. It is true he travelled a lot, it is true his real home, like ours, was in heaven. But even after his ministry began Jesus had a home – with his family. It is clear here, we just have to note that his father Joseph is not mentioned. Most think that Joseph had died before Jesus began his ministry. We have the same picture at the start of chapter seven. Jesus is with his brothers in Galilee, and they are urging him to go to Jerusalem for the festival of Booths. It is also clear at the start of Mark 2 when we read that Jesus ‘returned to Capernaum…and it was reported that he was home.’ Then in Mark 3, after appointing the twelve, we read in v.19, ‘Then he went home.’ It is pretty clear. Jesus had a home in Capernaum, which is exactly what we have here in 2:12.

 Jesus never married, he said in heaven there would be no marriage, and he said his real family were those who obeyed God, but don’t let’s ever think that Jesus’ family was not important to him. As he was to them – his mother was at the cross, and his brother later led the church in Jerusalem. That’s the first introductory point: Jesus had a normal family.

 The second introductory point is more difficult: the timing of the clearing of the temple. In the Synoptics this happens in Jesus’ last week; here it seems to happen right at the start of Jesus’ ministry. What’s going on?

 We have three options.

 1. Either John or the Synoptic writers have made a mistake. There was one clearing of the temple, the Synoptics say it was in the last week of Jesus’ life; John says, that’s wrong, it was very early on in his ministry.

 I don’t think either John or the Synoptic writers would have made such a massive mistake. It is clear that there can be minor mistakes over details in the Gospels, and indeed in the Bible. For example go to the resurrection stories and try and work out how many angels were around. In Matthew there is one, in Mark there is a young man, in Luke and John there are two angels. We should not let these small differences worry us, the main point is that angels are in an empty tomb.

 But what we have here is not a small mistake. To have the clearing) at the start of the Jesus story when in fact it happened at the end of Jesus’ life is a big mistake and I do not believe that the writer of the Gospel is the sort of man to make such a mistake. He is not careless. John is very careful about names and places. Look at the detail he gives in John 5 about where the healing of the lame man happened.

 Nor are the writers of the Synoptics careless. Luke said he investigated everything carefully. (Luke 1:3), So I don’t think either John or the Synoptic writers have made a mistake.

 2.The second option is that there were two cleansings of the temple. One is as John has it, at the start of Jesus’ ministry, the other, with the Synoptics, at the end. So, there are no mistakes.

 Some scholars believe this; many, with good reason, are not convinced.

Historically anyone creating mayhem in the temple would be arrested – immediately. The Jews and the Romans had soldiers right there in the temple to do this. In the Synoptics Jesus is not arrested, and we can easily understand why. Thousands have just welcomed him into Jerusalem calling him the Son of David. We are told that the authorities did not want to risk a riot by arresting him. For the event to have happened in the last week of his life makes sense. To say it also happened at the start of his ministry makes no sense at all. Jesus was then only well known in Galilee, not in Jerusalem. He did not have a vast following, so he could have easily been arrested – probably put in prison for a long time, or handed over to the Romans for execution.

 Connected to this historical problem, is the competence of the Synoptic writers.  I cannot see how a writer like Luke, who made a ‘careful investigation’ into Jesus’ life, would say nothing about this first clearing of the temple when he wrote about the second one.

 This idea that there were two clearings of the temple throws up another question. Why would Jesus do this twice? He knows very well that his protest will not change anything. It is a protest. A statement that the whole system is rotten Such a dramatic protest only needs to happen once, not twice. If we say Jesus did it twice it means he is the sort of person who likes protest for the sake of protest. I don’t think that is his character.

 There is also an artistic problem. It is rather vulgar for there to be two clearings of the temple. It is a massive event. It needs to stand alone. The drama in the Synoptics is perfect. Jesus enters Jerusalem and looks around the temple. Then the next day he clears out the money changers and the traders. There is an element of surprise. All that goes if we think he has already done this at the start of his ministry. Oh, here we go again…

 So, I don’t believe it happened twice. Let’s go to the third option.

 3. The clearing happened in the last week, as recorded in the Synoptics; but John has deliberately moved the story forward.  

 This is the option that makes most sense to me. First of all it’s important to note how close the stories are in both John and the Synoptics, especially Mark. Both take place near the time of the Passover, both have tables being overturned and after the incident, in both accounts the authority of Jesus is challenged.

 And then there is something else that ties this story in John to the Synoptics. More than once in the Synoptics we have the Jews asking Jesus for a sign, even though Jesus has performed many miracles. Jesus refuses to give them a sign and calls them ‘an evil and adulterous generation’. They are not sincere. We have the same here in John, 2:18, the Jews say, what sign have you done to give you this authority, but look at v. 23. It’s obvious Jesus has been performing many miracles. So many that Nicodemus talks about them at the start of chapter 3, and the Galileans who were in Jerusalem remember them. So – we have a similar request with a similar background.

 There is something else that shows this is one story, not two. In both the Synoptics and John Jesus refuses to give a sign. But once in reply to the demand for a sign Jesus had given an enigmatic response. He said the only sign they would be given would be the sign of Jonah who spent three nights in the belly of a whale. This is a reference to his death and resurrection. That is the basis of his authority. Now look what we have here. Another enigmatic response – but what is it about? It’s about Jesus’ death and resurrection.

 From all these details I am pretty sure the story told in Mark 11 is exactly the same as the one we have in John 2, with the writer knowing that we know that this is happening in the last week of Jesus’ life.

 There is one last point that – for me – settles the matter that what we have here in John 2 is the same story that we have in Mark 11. For in John 2:19 Jesus says, ‘Destroy this temple and in three days I will rise it up’.  In Mark 14: 53 – 65 we have an account of Jesus’s first trial before the Sanhedrin. We are told that many people are standing up and speaking against Jesus. We don’t know exactly what they are saying until we come to v. 58. It is almost exactly what we have in John 2. ‘We heard him say, ‘I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I will build another, not made with hands.’

 In Mark we are not told when Jesus said this, but the idea this was said three years earlier is surely not true. No, this is hot, up to date evidence. Jesus has come to Jerusalem and has said the temple is going to be destroyed – not three years ago, but just a few days before this trial.

 All the evidence points to there being one cleansing of the temple which happened in the last week of Jesus’ life. There was no cleansing of the temple three years earlier at the start of his ministry.

 So John decided to move the story – for good reason.

 Someone might say: but it is not right to change the dates however good the reasons. But the writer does not change the chronology. Look at the text carefully. He never says when the clearing of the temple  happened. Unlike in chapter one there is no ‘the next day here’. We just read that the Passover of the Jews was near. And we know from the Synoptics that this was indeed the case. The writer is not changing the chronology at all, in fact, as said, he is trusting that his readers know that the story happened at the end of Jesus’ ministry and will understand that he wants emphasize something by placing it by the account of the water changing into wine.

 But why? Why move the cleansing of the temple? What is to be gained? A lot. Chapter Two is the start of Jesus’ public ministry. And so this is the writer telling us what is at the heart of all Jesus’ ministry. This is the writer telling us how to view all of Jesus’ ministry. This is the lens from how we should view things? The writer is saying – don’t get lost in the detail of this healing or that teaching, remember the big picture. I gave it to you in chapter two.

 And what is that big picture? The story of the wedding in Cana was all about wine, the blood of Jesus. The story of the temple is all about Jesus’ body, how it will be destroyed and raised up after three days. What is the author wanting to say? That the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ stands at the heart of the Gospel story. It is what we had at the heart of the prologue. He came to his own, he was rejected, but to all who believed in him, he gave the right to become children of God. It’s what we had with John the Baptist. Not once, but twice – ‘Behold the lamb of God’. The best wine. The best bread. The death and resurrection. This is the story. This is the anchor. This is where everything beings and where everything ends. God’s love for sinful mankind in the blood and body of his beloved Son Jesus Christ. Lose this and we lose everything. No wonder the writer wants to move the story to the start.

 Let’s now look at the story. We have just 13 verses, so in this lesson we will go verse by verse.

 v. 13. As noted, we are not told when this happened, just that the Passover of the Jews was ‘at hand’, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. It was the duty of every Israeli man to attend three festivals which were held in Jerusalem. These were the Passover, when the exodus from Egypt was remembered; Pentecost, which celebrated the giving of the law; and Tabernacles, which both gave thanks for the harvest and remembered the time when the Israelites lived in tents in the wilderness. Passover was most important. And, as we noted when thinking about the lamb of God, this Passover is very important in this Gospel. It is mentioned here, before the feeding of the five thousand and the discourse about the bread of life, and around the time of his crucifixion. When the writer talks about the Passover –remember there is no Exodus without a sacrifice, remember there would have been no Mount Sinai and Tabernacle without a Passover. We must connect it to the Passover.

 14. The action we watch is very busy – in the temple. Jews lived all over the Roman Empire and so arrived in Jerusalem with different coins This they had to change into the only currency accepted in the temple, which was Tyrian coins, known for containing very pure silver. They then used this money to buy an animal that they needed for the sacrifice. It is likely that the prices were fixed, as Jesus in the Synoptics calls them a ‘den of thieves’ That is one thing that makes Jesus angry. Another is about where all of this was happening. In the Jewish temple there were three main courts. There was this outer court, which was for everyone. There was one just for Jewish women. And there was a men’s court. All of this trade was happening in the outer court, the one place where Gentiles could come and worship God. Hoping for an atmosphere of quiet and prayer, instead the seeking Gentile met the noise and smells of a market. This made Jesus angry. All of this buying and selling should be happening outside the temple area.

 15. The anger becomes dramatic action. A whip, cattle and sheep running around; tables being up turned, coins everywhere. There is total uproar. And Jesus is in the middle of it all.

 16. There is great attention to detail here. Jesus has whipped out the cows and the sheep. But the doves are in cages). He has not got the time to unlock every cage, so he shouts at the owners, ‘Take them out of here’. Then we have the heart of his anger. ‘His father’s place has been turned into a market place.’ Money has replaced worship.

 17. We don’t know if Jesus told his disciples of his plans, but surely, they were a little shocked. And fearful. This was war with the religious leaders. But…but they remembered that this is the sort of thing a true prophet did. We have it in Zachariah 14:21 says ‘on that day…i.e. when the Lord comes, ‘there will be no traders in the house of the Lord.’ Or Malachi, ‘Suddenly the Lord you are seeking will come to his temple.’ It made sense. If Jesus was the Messiah, then He would care about the temple.

 Let’s draw back and learn two things from the story so far.

 First of all on this occasion Jesus used physical force to make a point for this protest Nobody is hurt. It is not excessive. But this is physical force. Hence it is entirely wrong to think that Jesus was a complete pacifist who never made a protest.

 Secondly Jesus’ zeal is for his temple. When Jesus enters Jerusalem the first place he goes to is the temple. This is his concern. This is what matters to him. This is where, as Marks says, ‘he looks around’. Jesus could have gone to the Praetorium to talk foreign policy with Pilate; he could have gone to Herod’s palace to have discussed domestic policy; but he doesn’t. He first goes to the temple. How does this apply to us? As followers of Jesus the place where we should be causing an uproar is not the offices of some politician, but in the church. That is where cleansing must first happen.

 18. Jesus has taken authority over the temple, the most important place for the Jewish religion. So, the question from the Jews is not surprising. Where has this authority come from? What sign from heaven do you have?

 And here is Jesus’ enigmatic reply again

 Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up.

 It’s quite a statement. The temple in Jerusalem was stunning. It was thought of being one of the greatest buildings in the Middle East. It was world famous. And it still wasn’t finished. Herod – to try and win the love of the Jews – had been building it for forty-six years.

 And now Jesus says if you destroy it, he will be able to raise it up in three days.

 The Jews, not surprisingly, question this, and then the narrator tells us that Jesus was talking about his body. And we are told in v. 22 that this connects to his resurrected body.

 What then is Jesus’ authority? His death and especially his resurrection.

 There is, as usual, irony here. It was Jesus’s body that was destroyed and back in AD33 it looked as if the temple in Jerusalem was eternal. Life was in the temple, death in Jesus’ body. But the reality is the exact opposite. In AD70 the temple in Jerusalem was razed to dust by the Romans. It has never been re-built. It is no more. It is dead. But – even as John was writing – there were churches which honoured the living Christ, the one who was raised after three days. Now there are churches all over the world.

 There is more to say about Jesus referring to himself as the temple. Just like He replaces all wines, so He replaces all temples. In the temple at Jerusalem two things happened. Here there was an atonement for sin, every day, a lamb was sacrificed. A temple was a bloody place. But then it was a place where man meets God. A place of worship, of prayer, of fellowship. Now there is no sacrifice for sins. Jesus is the lamb of God, the sacrifice has happened once for all. And now the meeting place of man with God is not in a temple, but it is ‘in Christ’. It is in Him that we worship, pray, have fellowship.

 Let’s move on to v.22. You will remember that after the sign of the water changing into wine Jesus’ disciples sensed His glory (2:11), now when they remembered this event after his resurrection we are told ‘they believed the Scripture and that word that Jesus had spoken.’ This is important for disciples. Yes, we must pray for Christ to reveal his glory to us as He changes our water into wine, but we must also believe what He has said, because what He says turns out to be true. As the story ends we are encouraged to believe what Jesus says. That too will be an anchor for our souls.

 I have made a comment on v. 23, about the signs. So that just leaves v. 24 and 25.

 They are dark verses. Jesus knows what is in the heart of man. This reminds us of Jeremiah 17:10 where it says the Lord searches the heart and mind. It is God who knows what is in our hearts. And that is Jesus. He is God and He knows he cannot trust men. Interestingly it is Mark who tells us exactly what Jesus sees in the heart of man. It’s not very pleasant. You can read about it in Mark 7:21 – 23. Jesus was true to this belief so when in chapter six the crowd wanted to make him king, he didn’t trust himself to them, he escaped. We need to have the same wisdom when it comes to what people want.

 And so we end Chapter Two. What have we learned?

 That the author wants us to see everything through the prism of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This is the heart of the story. And so he moves the account of the cleansing of the temple to place it besides the story of the wine at the wedding. The camera goes to the blood, and then the body.

 Jesus’s passion is not the politics of Jerusalem, but the temple in Jerusalem. And his passion is that this temple is a holy place of worship. To make this happen he is willing to make a whip (sholagh) of chords and drive out the money changers and the tradesmen.

 With the wedding Jesus revealed his glory; in the temple He showed the authority of his words. They can be trusted.

 In our next lesson we are going to meet a supposedly wise and learned man – Nicodemus.