........................................................................................................................................................
(John
2:13-16)
by
James F. McGrath
Some people call it the “temple tantrum.”
Others refer to it as the “cleansing of the
temple.”
Anyone who knows anything about Jesus,
whether from books, movies, or other sources, seems to know at least this one
incident, in which Jesus turns over tables full of coins and chases away
animals.
Most historians agree that an actual
occurrence lies behind this story in the Gospels.
But beyond that, there is a lot of
disagreement. When did the event occur?
And what motivated Jesus to drive money
changers and sellers of animals out of the temple courts?
When did Jesus' temple action occur?
The Gospel of John places the story of Jesus’
action in the temple toward the beginning of Jesus’ public activity, while the
other Gospels place it toward the end.
This might seem like a simple case of three
against one, and thus easily settled.
In actuality, since Matthew and Luke follow
Mark’s structure, it is a case of Mark versus John.
And since Mark and the other Synoptic Gospels
only narrate one visit of Jesus to Jerusalem, they could not have placed the
event earlier without changing that framework.
Nevertheless, most historians follow Mark’s
placement, with the Romans taking an interest in Jesus as a result, setting in
motion the events that led to his arrest and crucifixion.
Passover, with its focus on liberation from
foreign oppression, had been the occasion of disturbances in the past.
So even a small-scale symbolic action in the
temple, as this must have been, would have attracted their attention.
What was the significance of the temple
action?
Both the Gospel of John and the Gospel of
Mark depict not a sudden rash outburst but something carefully planned.
In Mark 11:11-19, Jesus visits the temple but
waits until the next day to do anything.
In John’s version, Jesus actually takes the
time to make a whip from cords (John 2:15).
If calling it a temple tantrum gives the
wrong impression, does “the cleansing of the temple” get closer to the
meaning of the incident?
If the selling of animals occurred anywhere
within the temple precincts, it would have been in the outer court called the
Court of the Gentiles.
Animals leave behind messy droppings, and
dung was considered to defile sacred space.
But some may have thought that the presence
of Gentiles, viewed as inherently unclean, was no more and no less defiling
than the presence of animal dung.
Jesus, on the other hand, is depicted as
touching and dining with the ritually unclean, and he may therefore have
objected both to the implied slight toward non-Jews and to the disrespect for
their space of worship that was involved in holding commercial activities in
the Court of the Gentiles.
The words attributed
to Jesus in Mark 11 focus on the status of the temple, according to the
prediction of Isaiah 56:7, as a “house of prayer for all peoples,” while
the version in the Gospel of John focuses on the temple turning into a
marketplace, possibly alluding to Zechariah 14:21.
These can be viewed as two sides of the same
coin, rather than as completely distinct concerns, for Jesus.
.
We should not think that the presence of noisy animals and commerce bothered Jesus just because they spoiled the worshipful atmosphere.
.
We should not think that the presence of noisy animals and commerce bothered Jesus just because they spoiled the worshipful atmosphere.
An ancient temple was not supposed to be like
a quiet cathedral. It was loud and bustling.
The sale of animals was essential for the
temple’s main function as a place for the offering of animal sacrifices.
Bringing an animal from one’s home risked
something happening to it on the way, and so many chose to sell their own
animal, bring the money with them, and then purchase a replacement in
Jerusalem.
The money changers were there to convert
various currencies into one standard coinage, the Tyrian shekel, that was used
for the payment of the annual temple tax.
Both the selling of animals for sacrifices
and the payment of the temple tax were activities required by Jewish law and
central to the temple’s functions.
Because Jesus drove out people and animals
that were essential, many scholars view his action not as a cleansing of the
temple but as a symbolic act predicting its destruction.
This puts Jesus in
line with the actions of Israel’s earlier prophets and agrees with the words
that John 2:19 has Jesus utter on this occasion: “Destroy this temple, and
in three days I will raise it up.”
Jesus seems to have envisaged that the temple
would be removed to make room for whatever more perfect state of affairs would
replace it in the kingdom of God.
The temple incident depicted in the canonical Gospels
is one of the more certain details from the life of Jesus, but scholars debate
what the action signified.
Did you know…?
· While a few have
disputed that the event occurred, many historians and scholars consider this
one of the more certain details about the life of Jesus.
· The temple action
occurs at the start of John’s Gospel and thus at the beginning of Jesus’
public ministry while
the other Gospels place it toward the end of their narratives.
· Among the canonical
Gospels, only John places the saying about the temple being destroyed and
rebuilt on the lips of Jesus, and John alone places the saying in the context
of Jesus’ temple action.
· Ancient temples were
primarily places for animal sacrifice,
but they often served as banks and repositories for debts as well.
James
F. McGrath, "Jesus and the Money Changers (John 2:13-16)", n.p.
[cited 10 Mar 2020]. Online: https://www.bibleodyssey.org:443/en/passages/main-articles/jesus-and-the-moneychangers
James
F. McGrath is a professor in New Testament language and literature at Butler
University in Indianapolis.
No comments:
Post a Comment