Sermon Notes

---

Berean Church of Huntsville The Advent and the Cleansing of the Temple (Notes for sermon on 12/22/2013) The cleansing of the temple was a traditional Advent reading in the old history of the Church, meant to spur us to prepare our hearts for the coming of the Messiah-King to dwell in them. This tradition has been largely lost because it does not jive with the popular focus on the cute baby Jesus over the (dominant view of scripture) of the bold and powerful Son of God.

Overview, Sermon Outline 1) The Advent is not about a baby (See notes at John 2:15) 2) Jesus was enacting a prophetic messianic sign; He came to bring peace on earth, but peace is not primarily an external issue - it is a heart issue! (See notes at John 2:18) 3) The temple is not an earthly building and was not "built" by Solomon but by the Son of God (new title for Christ: Logos>Phos>Lamb>Rabbi>Temple>...). (Notes at John 1:20, 22) 4) If we are the temple, then God desires the INSIDE of His dwelling place to be free from the bondage of pride, guilt, greed, and abuse (among other things). It is not RELIGION that clears the temple (in fact, it was primarily the cause of the problem!) but Christ who clears out the refuse to make it the quiet place to hear the voice of God.

Conclusion I encourage everyone to read on Christmas Eve this year the entire story of Jesus and a child in Luke 2. Interestingly, there are two surprising temple appearances there. In the Advent (when Christ was born) the world was looking for a king to rule the world and bring peace. This Christmas, reflect also on Christ the Son coming not just to bring peace, but to be the dwelling of God among us!

Verse Notes (Sidebar: Since I don't preach from a script, these are my notes simply cut/paste from my Bible Study software and may be filled with incomplete thoughts, half sentences, and stuff I did not actually talk about. It may even contain incomplete research rabbit trails. Do your own homework, this is not intended for publication!)

One Temple Cleansing or Two? Now the Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. And He found in the temple those who sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers doing business. John 2:13-14 There is some irony at the timing of this event as opposed to the only mention of Hanukkah in John 10. Since the Maccabean cleansing in 165 AD that lead to this era was celebrated by a non-prescribed feast day, the cleansing by Christ was linked to Passover instead, which is directly more in keeping with the prophetic significance of that feast related to his statements here regarding his death and resurrection. Sermon Notes



Page 1 of 8

Berean Church of Huntsville Also, this is often cited as a potential discrepancy between John and the Synoptics because they all place the cleansing of the temple late, in the final week, whereas John appears to place it after the wedding at Cana. The two common responses to this are well documented in other places for any that care to do the research: 1) John is systematic in his theological approach and not chronological - thus he is not documenting the timeline so much as building a theological case for Christ as the Logos> Phos> Lamb> Rabbi> Bridegroom> and now Temple. 2) There may have been two temple cleansing which served two different purposes, one marking the start of Jesus' ministry on earth (a clear proclamation of himself as Messiah) and a second in the final week as the lambs were being inspected prior to the sacrifice. Commentators favoring the first option point out that only Luke makes the claim that he is setting things into an orderly account (Luke 1:13) thus chronology was not the primary issue for the other writers. In addition, a cursory review of the OT histories will show frequently a bouncing chronology, where the author will make a point regarding an event that does not occur until much later in the timeline and then come back to the timeline. There is no reason to treat the Gospel accounts differently. John himself did this already once very clearly in the book regarding his introduction to the Baptist. Most of the commentators I study, however, prefer the second option - that John records a different event; this is largely supported by several points that John makes which are not mentioned in the other accounts. One of the most specific of those points is regarding the prophetic aspect, the reference to Ps 69:9. See note in v22. It was already clear that Jesus was in the temple EVERY year from the time He was a boy (Luke 2:41). And in fact the Advent story's reading typically stops just PRIOR to Jesus' first temple appearance in Luke 2:22-38! I also tend to prefer the two-cleansing theory, which is in keeping with my personal thesis that John expects the reader to have access to one or more Synoptic and is filling in gaps as well as drawing on significant understanding of the Old Testament. Note that this event is fairly precisely nailed down to AD27 (see v20), thus if an AD 30 crucifixion is kept (and an AD2ish birth), then there must have been two occurrences; note that it is precisely the date that is excluded from the other accounts (no mention of Herod's temple project in the Synoptics). Matthew and Mark do, however, refer to that quotation in the trial (see note in v19). Also, since John has been (I contend as largely missed) concentrating on Christ's fulfillment of prophetic types, this event may have had significantly more purpose to John in making his case (especially related to Num 19, etc), as discussed in the following notes. Yet he EXCLUDES Jesus' quotation of Isa 56:7, which all three others record, as well as mass healing (Mat 21:13) a few points John would be unlikely to miss if he were focusing on prophetic types. John by contrast points out the "Destroy this temple" quotation that the other Evangelists do not record. Quite simply, Jesus could have made one quote each only in the "first and second" cleansing,

Sermon Notes



Page 2 of 8

Berean Church of Huntsville OR John was again filling in a gap (you already know this other things from Mat 21:12; Mark 11:15; Luke 19:45), but placing the cleansing here to connect it somehow to the wedding in Cana. Either way, if this had been an important issue in the early church it would have been clarified; but we will miss the point and depth of what the author IS telling us if we only focus on what he is NOT telling us! (See also Mat 12 for various side references to cleansing.)

The Advent is More Than The Nativity (v14-15) When He had made a whip of cords, He drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen, and poured out the changers’ money and overturned the tables. John 2:13-15 In verse 14, it is noted that there are money changers in the temple. The function that the money changers were doing was actually required based on the idea that the sacrifices could be purchased by travelers who held different kinds of coin that needed to be "standardized". Many have speculated that this irate response by Christ is because they were charging usury (forbidden in the OT). The appearance of the commerce INSIDE the temple is more clearly an issue - this action was by way of convince not commandment. The driving out of businesses from the house of God is often pointed at by commentators to refute the weak and effeminate pseudo-Jesus popular in both Renaissance art and popular culture. The Bible Belt likes the little baby Jesus (cultural ref from "Ricky Bobby" in "Talladega Nights"):

• ["Dear Lord Baby Jesus, we'd also like to thank you for my wife’s father Chip. We hope that you can use your baby Jesus powers to heal him and his horrible leg. It smells terrible and the dogs are always bothering with it..." • "Dear Lord Baby Jesus, lying there in your...your little ghost manger, lookin' at your Baby Einstein developmental...videos, learnin' 'bout shapes and colors..." • "Hang on, Baby Jesus, this is gon' get bumpy!"] This is a brilliant cultural analysis of "Jesus as my co-pilot", where he can get pulled out once a year, placed in a manger, and then put away for the rest of the year... he's just along for the ride. Amazingly, by focusing on the nativity, we entirely miss the powerful man! His name will be Emmanuel, God with us, (Isa 7:14, Isa 8:8; Mat 1:23), fulfilling the presence of God bodily (Col 1:19) that was seen only in the tabernacle veiled before the Advent. In fact, Isa 8:14 goes so far as to call Emmanuel the sanctuary and a stone to stumble on!! Ironically, the cleansing of the temple was a traditional Advent reading in the old history of the Church, meant to spur us to prepare our hearts for the coming of the Messiah-King to dwell in them. This tradition has been largely lost because it does not jive with the popular focus on the cute baby Jesus over the dominant view of scripture of the bold and powerful Son of God.

Sermon Notes



Page 3 of 8

Berean Church of Huntsville Zeal Consumes Me And He said to those who sold doves, “Take these things away! Do not make My Father's house a house of merchandise!” Then His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal for Your house has eaten Me up.” John 2:17 If we are now the temple of God, there is some significant correlation to the concepts of 1 Cor 6:12-20 regarding how we use the new temple in exchange of commerce for the indulgence of our own selfishness. The relationship to 1 Cor 6 and 7 was already mentioned last week connecting to the Wedding at Cana; the wedding precedes the cleansing of the Temple due to the correlation of the macro-examples of marriage and the unification of husband and wife to the unification of believer and savior! Further more, Christ was literally consumed, not simply that he was overtaken with zeal, but that he was actually consumed by his own righteousness. Considering the unity of the Godhead, the idea that he met His own justice on our behalf is staggering. There may also be an allusion to communion in this, given that we are to remember Christ broken and consumed for us.

Looking for the Messiah So the Jews answered and said to Him, “What sign do You show to us, since You do these things?” John 2:18 The quest for evidence of a sign was clearly not just a call to question the authority of Christ, but it was a call for Christ to demonstrate it precisely because they were expecting a Messiah. There is already a potential correlation in the changing of water into wine with Moses' sign in turning the Nile into blood. Some commentators also draw a comparison to this question by the Jews to their understanding of the events in Exodus 4:8-9 and Exodus 7:9. This is essentially in keeping with the understanding of the Rod used by Moses and the prophecy of the Rod of Jesse (Isa 11:1-4) There is also a potential connection to the cleansing of the temple in the 70 weeks (Dan 8:14; 9:25), but I contend that there are two references (see note in v13) and thus the timing would point to the second event when the Messiah is cut off rather than to this reference in AD 27 (see note in v20). The question of the Jewish leadership would likely have been driven from the clear Messianic connection, regardless of the timing. They knew the day was drawing near because it was so very specific in Daniel's account. The action he performed would have been self-proclaiming as a Messianic action; likely there was a dual-intent with the question. "How dare you" is I think the way most modern readers hear it; however, it may also have been similar to the questioning of John 1:25. There also may be the rumor, having escaped from the lips of the servants at the Wedding in Cana, that Christ had been witnessed as one who performed signs. This would then be a specific request for a public sign. The response of Christ was taken as an affront and was far larger than the kind of sign they were looking for, because the action was to be on them to tear down the temple!

Sermon Notes



Page 4 of 8

Berean Church of Huntsville Three Days Jesus answered and said to them, “ Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” John 2:19 Compare this to the account of a similar encounter with the religious leadership in Mat 12:38-39 and note that in both cases Jesus responds to the request for a sign with an allusion to the Old Testament prophetic types regarding his death and resurrection. In one analogy Jonah was used, in the other the temple was used, but in both cases he was clearly pointing to the three days in the tomb.

The Wrong Temple Then the Jews said, “It has taken forty- six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?” John 2:20 This specific event becomes one of the very weak arguments given at Christ's trial (Mat 26:59-61; Mark 14:58-59) and a mocking at the crucifixion (Mat 27:39-40; Mar 15:29-30) IVP Commentary Notes [Many groups in Judaism expected a new or transformed temple. But the old temple was one of the most magnificent buildings in antiquity, the symbol to which the rest of Judaism looked. To most Jews, and especially to the aristocracy who controlled Jerusalem’s temple, Jesus’ words here would sound blasphemous. Herod the Great began work on the temple in 20-19 b.c., and work continued until a.d. 64; its forty-sixth year mentioned here places Jesus’ words in a.d. 27.] The question is, of course, if this was such a magnificent renovation, then why were they expecting a new and more glorious temple? Because they knew that Herod, who was not the coming prophetic king, was not the correct builder. Also, it was noted that the Shekina glory of God was never witnessed in Herod's temple, thus the glory of the Messiah had yet to be revealed there. See note at v22 regarding Hag 2:1-6.

The Temple, The Body But He was speaking of the temple of His body. John 2:21 John 1:14, 16 has already stated, and the author also makes the point later, that the dwelling place of God is personal, not in a building (John 14:23) Compare 1 Cor 6:19; See notes for "Temple" at 1 Cor 3:16 This is a strong evidence that the events surrounding the destruction of the temple had not yet occurred, thus placing forward the (rare) view that John could have written the Gospel prior to AD 70. Most commentators assume a post-80 date, but it seems that at a minimum that John would have clarified (His body and also the temple itself; His body AND the temple) - certainly an event of that magnitude would not go unnoticed by the author when recalling this passage. Yet, "evidence from absence" is a logical fallacy, so it must remain conjecture and not provable on this point alone.

Sermon Notes



Page 5 of 8

Berean Church of Huntsville Contrasted to Num 19:13 (and the remainder of that chapter), which links it to the Wedding at Cana even more strongly, there is a correlation to the cleansing of the body and the cleansing of the temple. The concept relating a tent to a body is not entirely foreign to other writers, consider 2 Pet 1:13-14. You can begin to see John weave the strands of these things together: we are washed by the blood of Christ, whose tabernacle was broken down for us and who will return with a wedding feast of his own; we are the body of Christ and charged to keep His tent pure. Consider also the Greek concept of "Soma Sema" (the body the tomb) which considered the flesh to be a prison, but this call to resurrection is totally different because it considers the new body to be perfected.

They Believed the Scriptures John 2:22 Therefore, when He had risen from the dead, His disciples remembered that He had said this to them; and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said. John, by writing in this narrative style, clearly interprets the passage with the lens of the resurrection. This is in keeping with a Jewish pattern of a prophetic word not being seen until it was fulfilled. IPV notes [A prophetic word was often understood only in retrospect (e. g., 2 Kings 9:36- 37). Many Jewish interpreters (attested especially in the Dead Sea Scrolls) interpreted Scripture in this way.] This is part of the way that prophecy as pattern instead of simply prediction works - pattern can only be seen in the match and cannot be "coerced" whereas prediction can be faked more easily. But this makes the patterns more obscure to someone not familiar with that kind of study, so John explains it directly. But he also recalls that the event somehow caused them to believe " ...the scriptures and the word which Jesus had said." Which scriptures? My first thought on this was to look at the passage regarding the construction of the temple as it was given to David regarding his son. But then there is also reference to the rebuilding of the temple that is in the prophets. The author himself had already referenced Psalm 69 above, so there are nuggets there to consume also. Suffice it to say that since John does not specify, there is a treasure hunt to discover what he means! I. Let's start with the author's reference within the text: Ps 69 contains a number of references about the Messiah, many of them specific to the resurrection and some that appear to be about his childhood. The same Psalm is also quoted in John 15:25 and alluded to in John 19:24-28. Ps 69:35-26 also contains a reference that could be considered prophetic as yet unfulfilled in the diaspora and restoration of Zion, which would have been viewed very differently after the events of AD70 because Israel was fully dispossessed from the land, versus the remnant left there in the prior captivity. Also, Ps 69:8 contains an allusion to John 7:1-9 and the historical fact that none of Jesus' brothers followed him prior to the resurrection (most notably James, cf 1 Cor 15:7). Another strong case for Ps 69 is the reference in Rom 15:1-6... looks like every Christian should be quite familiar with this very referenced chapter!

Sermon Notes



Page 6 of 8

Berean Church of Huntsville There is a similar reference in Ps 119:139, a chapter we have already noted for its heavy use of Logos in the LXX (note the LXX contains the exact phrase whereas the temple reference is not contained in the MT). II. Second we have some of the many prophetic references to the temple. Already reviewed (see note at v18) was the potential relationship to Isa 11:1-4 and the potential connection to the cleansing of the temple in the 70 weeks (Dan 8:14; 9:25). Examples are not just in the Scriptures themselves, but also in non-canonical books such as the Psalms of Solomon that point to the temple with messianic implications. One example of this may be Mal 1:1-3 which contains some messianic reference to the temple; however, when looking all the way, the inclusion of Mal 1:6-8 is even so far as to address the commerce and purpose of the temple, right down through the mission of God to all nations! So poorly has this passage been quoted as a "guilt-tithe" verse; by doing so, have many in the churches become precisely what Jesus drove out of the temple, a justification for the exchange of money for sacrifices so that people could cover their sins for a brief time? Yet the prophet is not really talking about tithes only but the cleansing of the temple, and is still on that theme by Mal 3:1! Another reference has to do with the way the Rabbis of this day were anticipating the 'Desire of Nations' and his glory in the temple. The temple renovated by Herod was considered one of the most magnificent structures in the world at that time. The question is, of course, if this was such a magnificent renovation, then why were they expecting a new and more glorious temple? A common answer was the way Hag 2:1-9 was viewed by the Rabbis as not being built by Herod (who they considered a squatter on the throne) but by the Messiah. In that same passage, similar references are made to cleansing (v 13, 15, etc), and even a reference to dead bodies and stones! Reading on through the rest of that chapter (which ends the book) helps show why they expected this Messiah to be the warrior king. The same kind if mix in cleansing the temple can also be seen throughout the time of Israel's "adultery", such as in passages like Eze 22:12; Eze 22:26; Eze 23:4; Eze 23:39. In these passages, the two sisters (23:4) names literally point to the temple. III. Finally, there is the view that the temple prophecies to David were not about the Earthly temple at all! The temple was suppose to be a place of quiet reflection (1 Kings 6:7), thus the temple cleansing here points also to the heart issues of what clutters our relationship with God. Several commentators have pointed out the worthy study of the dimensions of the temple and the layout of a man, thus even in its dimensions it was prophetic. Compare Mark 14:58 and the idea of "made without hands" (see notes in Col 2:11-17). The prophecy in 2 Sam 7:12-16 contains the reference to David's vision of the coming temple - not just of a building, but a son, and not just a son of David, but a Son of God! In fact, the difference between a house and a tent are contrasted in God's statement to Nathan in 2 Sam 7:5, which may also be part of the rationale behind John 1:14 and John's choice of the word dwell, or "tabernacle" [G4637], a term used only by John in that verse and 4x in Revelation. This would lead to the conjecture that Jesus himself was the temple that Nathan was instructed to prophecy to David. Sermon Notes



Page 7 of 8

Berean Church of Huntsville One Story, a Communion Connection? The first body of Christ was a temple that was torn down, broken in His death; the new one built, brick by brick, as the body of Christ (the Church) on the Cornerstone. Eph 2:19-22. Taken together with the idea of the Wedding at Cana and the symbol of the wine, there is a powerful echo of communion in these two events together as the temple of His body is remembered in the bread! In fact, the cleansing of our own hearts is part of the remembrance (1 Cor 11:28).

Sermon Notes



Page 8 of 8