Skip to main content

Jesus Cleanses The Temple (John 2:13-25)

 This part of the text tells us that the Passover was at hand. Exodus 12 is the Bible chapter dealing with the Passover as an event, and the Passover as a memorial meal, to remember that event. That final plague against the Egyptians was terrible, taking all the firstborn sons and animals of the Egyptians. The Israelites were safe, because they had followed the instructions given by the Lord. Passover is still celebrated today, because Exodus 12:14 commands the people to observe it forever.

So what's the big deal? Why is Jesus so upset that people are selling things in the Temple area? There are a couple of reasons. Most religious traditions in the world recognize a difference between sacred things, and ordinary things. "Sacred" refers to something set apart for a holy purpose. The Temple was sacred, and people were treating it like the lobby of a Wal-Mart. Secondly, according to the rules the people were given for worship, the outer court of the Temple was reserved for non-Israelites to gather to worship and pray. They were not allowed to go into the inner places of the Temple, where the children of Jacob would go, and certainly not into the very most important sacred places, where only the high priest and other priests could go. But they had a right to hear the word of God to them, and you can't even hear it, if people are selling things in the place where you're supposed to be.

It is also worth pointing out that a ritual cleansing was something that a priest would do, before making a sacrifice. Hold that in your mind, for the rest of this Gospel, if you can.

The quotation in verse 17 is from Psalm 69:9, and if you read the entire Psalm, I think it is fair to say that it's about Jesus, whether it's suffering he endured, or mockery, or persecution. And the psalmist is trying to say that he only wants to bring the mercy of God to everyone, and that is exactly what he was doing, and why others were angry. Sometimes it happens that religious people want to keep the things of God for themselves, like a symbol or a token, rather than share them with the people who need to hear about God's love.

It's a good idea that if you see a quotation in the New Testament from somewhere in the Old Testament, you should assume that the writer intended you to read maybe even the entire chapter, and not just the quotation. If you make it a point to do that, everything Jesus does and says makes a lot more sense.

They get into a discussion here about the Temple, because Jesus says if the leaders destroy it, that he will rebuild it in three days. This obviously sounds crazy, because they note that Herod didn't finish his finishing touches for 46 years.

Jesus is speaking spiritually here, and St. John eventually tells us that he was speaking of his body as the Temple. Even to say that is pretty thought-provoking, because the ordinary person would think of the Temple as the place where God dwells. In that way, Jesus is talking about his Incarnation, as God in human flesh.

St. John gives us a little preview of the resurrection of Jesus. He won't stay dead, but will rise again. Some skeptics and scholars claim that because St. John was sort of interpreting his own book right here, by telling us what it means, that some guys made it up later. That explanation doesn't really hold water, because St. John lived for a long time, and if he had been making up things about Jesus, the Church would have called it out really fast. But the early Church was absolutely united and unanimous in the belief that Jesus was God, and that he rose again from the dead, after his death on the Cross.

John gives us a little note here at the end, to say that Jesus gained some popularity, after these miracles and sayings. We should be able to say that Jesus is at least as smart as we are--and much more--because even we know not to be too impressed with people who spend a lot of time telling us how great we are. Chances are, they're up to something.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con

A Friend I Once Had, And The Dogmatic Principle

 I once had a friend, a dear friend, who helped me with personal care needs in college. Reformed Presbyterian to the core. When I was a Reformed Presbyterian, I visited their church many times. We were close. I still consider his siblings my friends. (And siblings in the Lord.) Nevertheless, when I began to consider the claims of the Catholic Church to be the Church Christ founded, he took me out to breakfast. He implied--but never quite stated--that we would not be brothers, if I sought full communion with the Catholic Church. That came true; a couple years later, I called him on his birthday, as I'd done every year for close to ten of them. He didn't recognize my number, and it was the most strained, awkward phone call I have ever had. We haven't spoken since. We were close enough that I attended the rehearsal dinner for his wedding. His wife's uncle is a Catholic priest. I remember reading a blog post of theirs, that early in their relationship, she told him of the p
My wheelchair was nearly destroyed by a car last night. That's a bit melodramatic, I suppose, because it is intact and undamaged. But we'd left my power chair ("Red Sam" in the official designation) in-between the maze of cars parked out front of Chris Yee's house for Bible Study. [Isn't that a Protestant Bible study?--ed.] They are good friends, and it is not under any official auspices. [Not BSF?--ed.] They're BSF guys, but it's not a BSF study. Anyway, I wasn't worried; I made a joke about calling the vendor the next day: "What seems to be the problem, sir?" 'Well, it was destroyed by a car.' As it happened, a guy bumped into it at slow speed. His car got the worst of it. And this only reinforces what I've said for a solid 13 years [Quickie commercial coming] If you want a power wheelchair that lasts, get a Quickie. They're fast, obviously, and they're tanks. Heck, my old one still would work, but the batteries ar