DRAFT - Nerdy Biblical Theology Majors Group Guidelines

I wrote this for a group I was participating in, before I got too busy. Saving it here as a good reference. 

***DRAFT*** Nerdy Biblical Theology Majors

 

“A text without a context is just a pretext for whatever you want it to mean; therefore always study the Bible in light of its original historical, archaeological, literary, theological, ethical contexts” – Ben Witherington III. “Reading and Understanding the Bible: An Interview with Ben Witherington III.” Interview by Jonathan Petersen. Blog Post of Interview, 11 December 2014. Bible Gateway Blog [LINK].

 

Nerdy Biblical Theology Majors Group Guidelines

Purpose:

This group exists to explore Biblical Theology, focusing on understanding biblical texts within their original historical and literary contexts.

We explore the language, culture, and intertextuality of the biblical authors within their original historical contexts and literary ecosystems.

We aim to foster thoughtful, text-based discussion, welcoming contributions from academics, students, and laypersons alike.

Core Guidelines:

1.       Stay Textual:

In general, posts should be grounded in a specific biblical text or series of inter-related textual themes. We’re here to discuss the Bible in its original context, not abstract theology. When contributing, please make it clear what verse, pericope, book, or textual theme you’re working with. Discussions about doctrines, creeds, or theological systems are generally discouraged, but may sometimes be appropriate when anchored to the biblical text itself.

• Acceptable: “How does Paul’s use of ‘righteousness’ in Romans reflect Second Temple Jewish thought?”
• Not acceptable: “Is (insert generic theology term) correct?”
1. Academic Sources Encouraged, but Popular Sources Allowed:
   We aim for an academic tone, but we recognize that laymen and students bring value too. When possible, cite academic sources such as peer-reviewed journal articles, books from academic publishers (Baker, IVP, Zondervan, etc.), or academic lexicons like BDB or HALOT or BDAG. Popular sources are welcome, provided they contribute constructively to the conversation and engage meaningfully with the biblical text.
• Acceptable: A YouTube video from a scholar or student who cites their sources.
• Not acceptable: YouTube where someone is not using an academic or scholarly tone or approach, or outdated materials like Strong’s Concordance.
2. Engage Respectfully and Openly:
   This is a place for discussion, not debate. Ask genuine questions of the group, be open to alternate readings, and engage in conversation with curiosity, not defensiveness. Posts should encourage dialogue rather than monologues, inviting others to share their perspectives.
• Example: “I’ve been thinking about this reading of Genesis—what do you think?”
• Example: “Have you considered…?”
3. Structure Your Contributions for Readability:
   Posts should be easy to read, especially on mobile. Use paragraphs, punctuation, and clear structure.
• Conciseness is key—keep it digestible while making your point. If your post is long, consider breaking it up or summarizing key points at the start.
• Consider providing a simple summary of the issue and linking it to an academic source for the broader discussion.
• Ask smaller questions, focus on one key point of discussion, one key word or phrase or theme.
4. Avoid Systematic Theology, Creeds, and Traditions:
   While systematic theology, doctrines, and creeds have their place, this group is dedicated to biblical theology—understanding the text as it was written in its own time. Posts focused on systems or traditions without textual grounding will be redirected or removed.
• What did the original author intend to communicate to his/her original ancient audience?
5. No Politics or Denominational or Fringe Debates:
   To maintain focus, political discussions and denominational disputes are not allowed. Keep the focus on the biblical text and avoid getting bogged down in eschatological debates, Calvinism vs. Arminianism debates, or similar well-worn theological conflicts. The late Dr. Michael Heiser used to “if it’s weird, it’s important”. So, we’re not against odd takes, but they should be rooted in the text and within solid academic evaluation of the text. Let’s avoid ranting YouTubers.
6. Post with Purpose:
   Make sure your post has a clear goal aimed at inviting a conversation—whether it's asking a question, presenting a thought, or inviting feedback. Posts should not simply state opinions without backing them up with evidence or questions.
7. No promotions or spam

Give more than you take in this group. Self-promotion, spam and irrelevant links aren't allowed. No solicitations for money or asking someone to pay for something.

---

Need Clarification?

If you’re unsure about what qualifies as biblical theology or whether your post fits the group’s focus, please review our Definitions Post or ask an admin for guidance.

 

 

Alt Info

 

·         The Hebrew Bible (Tanakh, aka Old Testament) is understood within its Ancient Near East (ANE) contexts.

·         The Greek Bible (New Covenant, B’rit Chadashah, aka New Testament) is understood within its Second Temple Judaism and Greco-Roman world, contexts.

·        Additional Texts (Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, Dead Sea Scrolls/Qumran writings, Ugaritic & Akkadian writings, Greco-Roman philosophers, and other comparative literature) are included in discussions to provide greater insight into the cultural and religious environment of the biblical authors. These texts help us understand how the biblical texts interacted with other literature of the time and what influence they may have had on early Jewish and Christian thought. They should be used to understand a biblical text but not become the sole focus of the post.

 

 

 

 

***DRAFT***

NERDY BIBLICAL THEOLOGY MAJORS - DEFINITIONS POST

To help clarify key terms and ensure discussions stay focused, we’ve provided definitions for some foundational concepts and terms frequently used in this group. Please reference these definitions when engaging in discussions, and feel free to ask questions if you're unsure whether your post fits within these boundaries.

---

Biblical Theology

Definition: Biblical Theology is the study of the Bible with a focus on understanding how the biblical authors communicated theological concepts within their own historical, cultural, and literary contexts. It emphasizes the progressive development of ideas within the Bible itself, without imposing later systems or doctrines.

• Example: Exploring how Paul’s letters develop ideas about resurrection within the Second Temple Jewish context.

Systematic Theology

Definition: Systematic Theology organizes theological ideas into a structured framework, often grouping concepts (e.g., sin, salvation, God) into categories that span the whole Bible. While systematic theology can be helpful, this group focuses on biblical theology, so discussions of systems must remain grounded in specific biblical texts and contexts.

• Example: Instead of discussing "salvation" broadly, we explore how specific texts like Romans or the Gospel of John address salvation within their historical settings.

Ancient Near East (ANE)

Definition: The ANE refers to the region and cultures surrounding ancient Israel, including Egypt, Mesopotamia, Assyria, Babylon, and Canaan. Understanding the cultural, religious, and political contexts of these civilizations helps illuminate the Hebrew Bible.

• Example: The covenant structure of Deuteronomy reflects similar treaties from the ANE.

Second Temple Judaism

Definition: This period (roughly 516 BCE to 70 CE) refers to the time between the rebuilding of the Jewish temple after the Babylonian exile and its destruction by the Romans. Many of the writings in the New Testament were shaped by the religious, political, and cultural dynamics of this era.

• Example: Understanding Pharisees, Sadducees, and Messianic expectations in this period helps contextualize Jesus' interactions with these groups in the Gospels.

Greco-Roman World

Definition: This refers to the cultural, political, and intellectual environment dominated by Greek and Roman influence during the New Testament era. Knowing this context helps us understand how early Christian writers like Paul engaged with Greco-Roman society.

• Example: Paul's use of household codes in Ephesians reflects common Greco-Roman structures, but he subverts them with Christian ethics.

Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha

Definition: These are collections of Jewish writings from the intertestamental period (between the Old and New Testaments). While not considered canon by most Protestant traditions, these texts were widely read by Jews and early Christians and provide important context for biblical writings.

• Example: The Book of Tobit or 1 Enoch offers insight into Jewish thought during the Second Temple period.

Lexicon (BDB, HALOT, BDAG, etc.)

Definition: A lexicon is a scholarly dictionary of ancient languages, offering definitions and explanations of how words were used in their original contexts.

• BDB (Brown-Driver-Briggs) and HALOT (Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament) are two of the most widely respected lexicons for biblical Hebrew studies.
• BDAG (Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich) A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature
• Example: Citing HALOT for the meaning of a Hebrew word in Isaiah adds depth to understanding the text's original meaning.

Intertextuality

Definition: Intertextuality refers to the way biblical texts reference, echo, or engage with other texts, both within the Bible and in external literature from surrounding cultures. It helps us see connections and influences across different works.

• Example: The use of Exodus themes in Isaiah or the allusions to the Psalms in the Gospels.

---

• Post Guidelines Recap

If your post involves systematic theology, creeds, or later traditions, remember that we aim to focus on biblical theology, so always anchor your discussion to specific texts and their original contexts. We welcome academic sources and encourage respectful dialogue.

---

Questions or Suggestions?
If you're uncertain about any of these definitions or terms, feel free to reach out to an admin or ask for clarification in the comments.

 

 

 

***DRAFT***

Lexicons for Language Studies

Here are some of the most widely accepted and respected academic lexicons for biblical Hebrew and Greek, including both older foundational works and more modern resources:

For Biblical Hebrew (and Aramaic):

1. Brown-Driver-Briggs (BDB) –
• Full title: A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament
• Published in 1906, this lexicon remains a widely-used standard for biblical Hebrew and Aramaic, despite its age. It is respected for its comprehensive definitions and historical insights.
• Pros: Easily accessible, widely referenced, detailed word studies.
• Cons: Some outdated interpretations; later scholarship has refined certain definitions.
2. HALOT (Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament) –
• Full title: The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (edited by Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner)
• This multi-volume lexicon is a more recent and comprehensive resource. It reflects modern linguistic scholarship and incorporates insights from Ugaritic and other ANE languages.
• Pros: Up-to-date, covers both Hebrew and Aramaic, includes comparative Semitic language insights.
• Cons: Expensive, more technical.
3. Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon –
• Published in the 19th century by Wilhelm Gesenius, this lexicon was one of the foundational works in biblical Hebrew lexicography and remains valuable for historical study.
• Pros: Widely accessible, foundational in lexicon studies.
• Cons: Somewhat outdated; modern scholarship has refined many entries.

For Biblical Greek:

1. BDAG (Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich) –
• Full title: A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature
• This is the gold standard for New Testament Greek. BDAG is comprehensive, modern, and indispensable for scholarly work in biblical Greek.
• Pros: Thorough, reflects modern scholarship, includes references to early Christian literature beyond the New Testament.
• Cons: Can be dense for beginners, expensive.
2. LSJ (Liddell-Scott-Jones) –
• Full title: A Greek-English Lexicon
• LSJ is the most comprehensive lexicon for classical Greek, but it is also highly relevant for biblical and Septuagint studies. It is essential for understanding the broader use of Greek in the ancient world.
• Pros: Extensive coverage of Greek, including non-biblical sources; freely accessible online in some versions.
• Cons: Not specific to biblical Greek, so it requires careful discernment when applying to the New Testament.
3. Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon –
• An older lexicon, published in the late 19th century. While dated, it was a widely used resource for biblical Greek and still finds use today in some circles.
• Pros: Accessible and clear for students.
• Cons: Many entries are outdated compared to BDAG; better used alongside more modern resources.

For Both Greek and Hebrew (Septuagint Studies):

1. Muraoka’s Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint (GELS) –
• Focuses on the Septuagint (LXX), the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, and is a valuable resource for scholars studying how Greek was used in the translation of Hebrew scriptures.
• Pros: Focused on the Septuagint, valuable for understanding the translation process and choices.
• Cons: Limited to the LXX; more specialized than BDAG or LSJ.

These lexicons are widely accepted in both academic and theological studies, even older ones like BDB and Thayer's, as long as they're used with an understanding of their limitations and supplemented by more modern scholarship.

Strong's is generally discouraged.

Note: Limitations of Using Strong's Concordance in Modern Academic Biblical Studies

Strong's Concordance, a popular reference tool for biblical languages, is not commonly used in modern academic biblical studies due to several significant limitations:

1. Contextual Nuances: Strong's lists all possible definitions for Hebrew and Greek words without considering their specific contexts. Words can have varied meanings depending on their usage, similar to how the phrase "that's hot" in English can mean physically warm, sexually appealing, popular, or even contentious. Academic scholarship requires understanding words within their specific textual and historical contexts to accurately interpret their meanings.
2. Outdated and Over-simplified: The definitions in Strong's are based on 19th-century scholarship and tend to oversimplify complex linguistic phenomena. Modern biblical studies use advanced lexicons like HALOT or BDAG, which provide updated and nuanced language analysis.
3. Lacks Critical Engagement: Strong's Concordance does not address textual variants, historical linguistics, or the evolution of language, all of which are crucial for in-depth academic research.

Due to these issues, scholars opt for more comprehensive and critically-engaged resources that consider the broader linguistic and cultural settings of biblical texts.

 

Shalom שָׁלוֹם: Live Long and Prosper!

Darrell Wolfe

Storyteller | Writer | Thinker | Consultant | Freelancer | Bible Nerd *Written withs some editing and research assistance from ChatGPT-4o

Read more →

Class Assignment: John 2.13-15 Table Flipping Jesus in the Fourth Gospel

For a link to this paper in paper format: John 2.13-15 Table Flipping Jesus in the Fourth Gospel

INTERPRETIVE WORKING PAPER (IWP)

John 2:13–25 | Table Flipping Jesus in the Fourth Gospel

by Darrell Wolfe

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the course New Testament Introduction: New Testament Introduction

Professor Janette Ok

Monday, April 14, 2025

 

I - TABLE FLIPPING JESUS

JOHN 2:13–25

“The Passover of the Jews was near, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. In the temple he found people selling cattle, sheep, and doves and the money changers seated at their tables. Making a whip of cords, he drove all of them out of the temple, with the sheep and the cattle. He also poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. He told those who were selling the doves, “Take these things out of here! Stop making my Father’s house a marketplace!” His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal for your house will consume me.” The Jews then said to him, “What sign can you show us for doing this?” Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” The Jews then said, “This temple has been under construction for forty-six years, and will you raise it up in three days?” But he was speaking of the temple of his body. After he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the scripture and the word that Jesus had spoken. When he was in Jerusalem during the Passover festival, many believed in his name because they saw the signs that he was doing. But Jesus on his part would not entrust himself to them, because he knew all people and needed no one to testify about anyone, for he himself knew what was in everyone.” (John 2:13–25, NRSVue)[1]

OUTLINE of John 2:13–25 (NRSVue)

1.      Introduction and Setting (v. 13–14)

a.       New Scene: Passover in Jerusalem (v. 13)

b.      Upon arrival, merchants are selling things at their tables (v. 14)

                                                              i.      Background Context Required for Conflict: Tanakh and 2^nd Temple Judaism.

2.      Jesus Flips Out (v. 15–16)

a.       Jesus ‘Flips Out’ (v. 15)

b.      Jesus Explains His Anger (v. 16)

3.      Parenthetical Authorial Interpretation (v. 17)

a.       Author inserts interpretation for the reader (motive) (v. 17)

4.      Jesus’ Authority Challenged (v. 18–20)

a.       Unidentified “Jews” challenge his authority (v. 18)

b.      Jesus responds with a cryptic response (which John’s author will payoff in a future section) (v. 19)

c.       Unidentified “Jews” scoff at his cryptic response (v. 20)

5.      Parenthetical Authorial Interpretation (v. 21)

a.       Author inserts interpretation for the reader (the key to the cryptic response) (v. 21)

Note: This is parenthetical to the above section, and not part of the conclusion

6.      Conclusion: Authorial Interpretation with Hindsight (v. 22-25)

a.       Author inserts a final interpretation for the reader (v. 22-25)

                                                              i.      Foreshadowing the end of the gospel (v. 22)

                                                            ii.      Results of his actions, many believe (v. 23)

                                                          iii.      Hesitance in Jesus to get too close (Messianic Secret) (v. 24)

                                                          iv.      Omniscient Jesus (or at least wisely cautious) (v. 25)

II - EXEGETICAL ISSUES

Boundaries

In the Fourth Gospel (John), 2:12 ends with a conclusion for the previous pericope, v. 13 picks up with a new scene setting to start a new narrative entry. One could argue that the pericope ends with v. 22 as the conclusion of the event. However, the author continues the interpretive conclusion into v.25, and 3:1 begins a new narrative pericope with a new introduction. So, the data-driven boundaries are 2:12-25.

Translations

The key to this pericope is Jesus’ anger at the temple workers. The following translations reflect a strong similarity in the migration of the Greek for this pericope into English. While the synoptics use a different phrasing (“cave of robbers”), the author of the Fourth Gospel is focused on turning the Sacred Space of Yahweh’s temple into a common profit center, or business center.

·         “He told those who were selling the doves, “Take these things out of here! Stop making my Father’s house a marketplace!”” (John 2:16, NRSVue)

·         “And to the ones selling the doves he said, “Take these things away from here! Do not make my Father’s house a marketplace!”” (John 2:16, LEB)

·         “To those who sold the doves he said, “Take these things away from here! Do not make my Father’s house a marketplace!”” (John 2:16, NET 2nd ed.)

·         “He said to the dove sellers, “Get these things out of here! Don’t make my Father’s house a place of business.”” (John 2:16, CEB)

·         “And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father’s house an house of merchandise.” (John 2:16, KJV 1900)

·         “and to the pigeon-sellers he said, “Get these things out of here! How dare you turn my Father’s house into a market?”” (John 2:16, CJB)

·         “And he told those who sold the pigeons, “Take these things away; do not make my Father’s house a house of trade.”” (John 2:16, ESV)

Keywords

·         Key Words: Temple and House, Hebrew (בַּ֫יִת, bayit) Greek (οἶκος, oikos) has intricate ties to the Tanakh, specifically 2 Samuel 7 (David’s House / Yahweh’s House), see discussion below.

·         Key Words: Marketplace (Greek: ἐμπόριον, emporion). It is worth noting that the synoptics all use “den of thieves” or “cave or robbers” for this in lieu of “Marketplace”, indicating a different narrative goal or possibly a different oral tradition.

Authorship

            Echevarría points out that the gospels were all originally anonymous, being assigned authorship as they were shared in early Jesus communities.[2] While many attribute authorship either to the apostle John or John the Elder, deSilva posits an interesting case for understanding the author as Lazurus.[3] Whoever the Beloved Disciple was, his testimony has the feel of someone intimately familiar with Jesus and with the life situation of the residence of Israel before the temple was destroyed. Keener points out that the author of this gospel is “noteworthy not for including the Greek translation but rather for including the Semitic terms that are translated.”[4] Johannine scholarship has begun to recognize the influence of E.P Sanders’ and Mark Nanos’ work on Jesus within Judaism, reflecting that John’s gospel does not “drift away from Judaism towards Greek patterns of thought” but rather “fits within the variety of Jewish ideas about God found in the first century C.E.”[5] Meanwhile, Tat Yu Lam demonstrated that the Gospel of John sits within the 2^nd Temple Judaism ecosystem as part of the “Temple Cleansing-Rebuilding Tradition”.[6] Lam’s argument is to see larger themes within the cultural landscape as a framework for understanding John’s Gospel within this tradition. When we see the hyper-Jewishness of John’s Gospel, we cease to see his use of “the Jews” as a racial slur against Jewish people in general, and instead we see this as an internal debate between Jewish Jesus Followers and Jewish non-Jesus-Followers. When we read the gospel within this framework interpretive options around the temple cleansing theme become more apparent.

Related New Covenant texts (Intertextual - NT)

The author of the Fourth Gospel is generally believed to have written long after the synoptics were complete and circulating (circa 90 C.E.) and “incorporates earlier traditions.”[7] Rather than simply rehash the other gospels or oral traditions, John provides new insights into the person of Jesus. There is an overlap and difference with this event in the other gospels.[8] Matthew presents the driving out of the money changers but provides other details about the events, miracles, and children crying praises. Then he segues into a retreat for the night and shows more events the next day in which the challenges to his authority continue (Matt 21:1–46). Likewise, Mark provides slightly different details in a different order of events (Mark 11:1–33). Luke mentions the story, citing the “cave of robbers” line, but downplays the physical events of Jesus’ actions, focusing instead on challenge to Jesus’ authority (Luke 19:28–47). Also, Luke makes it sound like these Jerusalem temple trips were a daily occurrence for a season, each night retreating to home base (Luke 20:1). Blum says that the synoptics including this event at the end of Jesus’ public ministry means there were two separate cleansing events, citing some dissimilarities in the details. [9] The radical nature of the cleansing event makes it unlikely to have occurred twice. If the historicity of the event is assumed, it is far more likely the synoptics got the timing correct, as a culmination event leading to the temple leadership seeking the death of Jesus as he interrupted their center of power in such a dramatic way. It is far more likely, given the various narrative and stylistic choices for the author of the Fourth Gospel, and the likely Socio-Historical contexts, that the author placed the story here to set the tone of why Jesus’s cleansing was important and to set the tone of his ministry, rather than a strict adherence to details of history that is foreign to ancient biographers.

Internal (Intratextual) Literary Contexts

Brown simplifies the Fourth Gospel into two books, “the book of signs” (chs. 1–12) and “the book of glory” (chs. 13–21).[10] David deSilva provides a brief overview of the structure of the fourth gospel as a whole:

“Prologue: Jn 1:1–18

The “Book of Signs”: Jn 1:19–12:50: Jesus’ ministry to the world

The “Book of Glory”: Jn 13:1–20:31

Jesus’ instructions to his followers: Jn 13:1–17:26

Passion and resurrection appearances and conclusion: Jn 18:1–20:31

Epilogue: Additional resurrection appearance and conclusion: Jn 21:1–25”[11]

The temple cleansing narrative is located at the front end of the Book of Signs, demonstrating the meaning-centered view of the events surrounding Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection. The placement at the front of the text provides a book end to the moment where Jesus’ body is destroyed, and he raises from the dead three day later, as he promised he would in the start of the narrative (John 2:19). This is a narrative literary move showing “meaning and moment of the incarnate Word.”[12] Gupta notes that some early interpreters considered John a “spiritual gospel”.[13]

Literary & Rhetorical (Intratextual) Observations

The Tanakh indicates that a Jewish currency (half-shekel) was to be paid to the priests/temple as a “ransom” and to fund the temple activities (Exod 30:11-16). For people to fulfill this Torah command in the 2^nd Temple Period under Greco-Roman occupation, “Roman money was changed into Jewish money to pay the Temple tax.”[14] Given that this type of activity is advocated in the Torah, or it is at least an attempt to fulfill the Mitzvah of Torah, one then wonders why Jesus found it so abhorrent. Commenting on this, Grassmick notes that it was the way in which the half-shekel command was handled, casually turning the temple into a center of commerce, that was at the root of Jesus’ anger.[15] This speaks to debates and splits between Sadducees, Pharisees, Essenes, and the Qumran sects.[16] Jesus’s Way finds itself in conflict with each, though to differing levels. Here in this pericope, the conflict is directed at the Sadducee handling of Torah and Temple. Understanding this conflict gives us a deeper understanding of the tension Jesus is addressing with his display of righteous anger.

Socio-Historical (Extratextual) Contexts

For the sake of brevity, a full discussion of the Ancient Near East (ANE) and Tanakh concepts of Sacred Space is omitted here, but this gives further background to the discussion that follows regarding the 2^nd Temple Period tensions regarding the temple. This framework also provides additional context as to the source of Jesus’ anger regarding the handling of Temple as Sacred Space. For that background, see Jesus and the Forces of Death by Matthew Thiessen.[17] For the more immediate context, we examine the current tensions between Jewish sects regarding the handling of the temple, and how that played out after its destruction.

The destruction of the temple in 70 C.E. is a factor largely overlooked by some interpreters of the New Testament.[18] By 85 C.E (though certainly before this), non-Jesus-follower Jews were purging their synagogues of Jesus-follower Jews. This inside-baseball rivalry between the Jewish sects led to questions about the legitimacy of each sides’ perspectives. This becomes a “recurrent concern in John 9:22; 12:42; 16:2.”[19] The author of the fourth gospel is writing this gospel after the destruction of the temple and of Jerusalem, and the perspective of the author processing this radical event must be considered when looking at the passage of Jesus cleansing the temple. In this, the author justifies The Way of Rabbi Yeshua as legitimate cleanser and ultimate representation of Torah, despite the devastating loss of Judaism’s center of activity.

Throughout the Tanakh there was a “longstanding tradition of Temple critique.”[20] While the entire Tanakh could be seen as a commentary by the biblical redactors against the long history of syncretism in Israel, this criticism reached a fever pitch during the 2^nd Temple period. Several sects divided over issues of Torah observance, leading in one case to the cache of texts discovered at Qumran (Dead Sea Scrolls). To understand the more immediate history into which Jesus is stepping, we pull back briefly to look at the events leading up to the current state of Temple affairs.

Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164 B.C.E.) led a series of persecutions against the Jewish anti-Hellenizers, which (among other things) included idol worship, cult-prostitutes, and unclean-animal sacrifices in the Temple of Jerusalem (this is the action referred to by author of Daniel as “the abomination that causes desolation”, Dan 9:27; 11:31; 12:11). The Maccabean Revolt of 168-164 B.C.E. led to the restoration and cleansing of the temple in 164 B.C.E., which Jewish communities worldwide still celebrate as Hanukkah (rededication) to this day.

On one hand, this temple cleansing was a huge win for the Jewish community in Jerusalem. On the other hand, it led to a deep chasm in the life of various Jewish communities, when the long-held Zadokite line of priests was ousted by the new Hasmonaean priestly line. These events eventually led to the division of 2^nd Temple Judaism into multiple sects, of which the most well-known are the Sadducees (primary caretakers of the Temple), Pharisees (involved in temple life, but more involved in small local synagogues and day-to-day life of Jewish people), and Essenes (a hyper purity group, less is known about them), and the Qumran/Dead Sea sect that may or may not be related to the Essenes, but who considered themselves separate from the Temple primarily due to its impurities. Skarsaune also mentions a fact relevant here in relation to the opposition parties; the “Sadducean chief priests, who denied the resurrection of the dead (Mt 22:23–33; Acts 23:6–9)”.[21] These were the ruling elite, and the primary source of Jesus’ opposition. While the Pharisees had their disputes, many of their disputes with Jesus could be seen as disputes within the same group, not outsiders. While he stands alone in his own Halakhic tradition, Jesus is closest in scope to the Pharisees.

This history is in the minds of all the hearers of Jesus’ words in the temple that day, and the subsequent history is in the minds of John’s Jewish and Gentile audience, especially in light of both the destruction of the temple in real space-time and the synagogue cleansing activities of non-Jesus-follower Jews in the aftermath.

The author of the Fourth Gospel is writing this within a few years after the temple’s destruction and placing Jesus’ temple cleansing activity just a decades before. Schiffman and Potok note that when the Temple was destroyed and Jerusalem purged by the Romans in 70 C.E., most of these groups were eliminated or at least lost their base of operations. Of these, only the Pharisees were equipped to continue existing and thriving without the temple or Jerusalem as their base of operations.[22] Likewise, Skarsaune posits that a subset of two sects of 2^nd Temple Judaism “were mentally prepared to cope with the new situation,”[23] namely, the Pharisees and The Way of Rabbi Yeshua (Christ-Followers) were the two groups most well situated to carry on.

Therefore, placing this narrative at the front of his Gospel (whereas the synoptics place it at the end of theirs (Luke 19:46, Mark 11:17, Matthew 21:13), sets the tone of this gospel in a context where John’s audience is not only facing questions about the legitimacy of a Jewish Messiah without the temple but also in light of their expulsion from traditionally Jewish spaces (diaspora synagogues).

Author’s use of Sources (Intertextual - Tanakh, Other NT Authors, Other contemporary works)

            When Jesus refers to the Temple as “my father’s house” (v. 16) and then refers to his body as the temple (v. 19), he is drawing a long history of interpretation regarding the interchangeable terms Temple and House. In my paper on 2 Samuel 7,[24] I discussed the how the author of 2 Samuel uses the concept of “House” (Hebrew: בַּ֫יִת, bayit) in multiple interwoven meanings. David wants to build Yahweh a structure (temple/house) then Yahweh decides to build David a dynasty (house) and Yahweh goes further to say that he will use David’s descendant to build himself a house (both structure and dynasty). Throughout the Tanakh and into the 2^nd Temple Judaism literature, the hope was building for a descendant of David to come and make things right.[25]^/[26]

The author of John ends his prologue with declarations that Jesus is the “Son of God” and “King of Israel”, both kingly declarations that draw upon the wider Messianic hope that builds on the promise of a son of David, that would eventually be the culmination of the physical and dynastic “House” for Yahweh, as promised to David in 2 Samuel 7. In these images, the author of the Fourth Gospel is weaving Jewish and Greek expectations. The author’s use of “Zeal for your house will consume me” (v. 17) is a reference to a Psalm written from David’s perspective, reflecting on this House/Temple/Dynasty promise, “It is for your sake that I have borne reproach, that shame has covered my face. I have become a stranger to my kindred, an alien to my mother’s children. It is zeal for your house that has consumed me; the insults of those who insult you have fallen on me.” (Psalm 69:7–9, NRSVue)[27]

            In this way, the author of the Fourth Gospel is drawing a reader familiar with the Messianic hopes of 2^nd Temple Judaism to the longstanding hope that David’s descendant would come and clean house and make everything right again. Carrying the concept forward, then, the author shows Jesus reimagining the promise further blurring the lines between House, Temple, Dynasty, and now his physical body, showing that his life, death, and resurrection (coming at the end of John’s gospel) would be the culmination of this David Covenant promise.

Wisdom of the text

            The author of the Fourth Gospel had a purpose in including the narratives they chose to include. Echevarria says that while “some speculate the John’s gospel addresses deficient beliefs of his followers in Asia Minor…” we should focus on the resulting gospel, and what it tells us about Jesus, not speculations regarding what it might have been correcting.[28] The author is writing to a post 70 C.E. audience who’ve been ejected from diaspora synagogues while following the ways of a Jewish Messiah. The author wants to encourage his audience that this path is the correct path, despite increasing persecution both from non-Jesus-follower Jews and from the Roman Empire as a whole. By including this narrative at the front of the text, the author agrees with the Qumran sect that the temple was corrupt and needed to be cleansed, and that those who are in Jesus are the new Temple. At the point of this writing, the temple was already gone, and persecution was widespread. What motivation is there that the followers of Jesus should continue in The Way despite all those odds against them? The author provides this story to answer the question of which group had the better answers after the temple’s destruction and which group had The Way of Life.

III - SIGNIFICANCE FOR THEOLOGY AND PREACHING

I spent the better part of the last five years visiting as many different churches and church traditions as I could fit into my schedule (and emotional bandwidth). I attended a Catholic Mass recently that reminded me of a temple, with iconography and stained glass and ornate fixtures. A prominent open-air gift shop displayed trinkets, crosses, rosaries, prayer shawls, and other iconographic wares for sale. I thought about this narrative from John and wondered, “What would Jesus feel about this gift shop?” I then thought about all the bookstores and coffee shops in the ubiquitous Mega Churches I’ve visited and joined over the years. I thought about specialty Bibles with our favorite celebrity pastor’s name on the cover. I thought about how an entire wing of white US-American evangelicals sold their soul to a scam artist and huckster whose dedication to Jesus is so plastic, so surface, so veneer, that it is plain to all who did not buy his snake oil. Then I thought about how he doubled down on this pseudo-Christianity by selling them a Bible with his name on it and then blending a feigned love of God with love of country (a Yahweh-Roman syncretistic hybrid). In a post 70 C.E. world, Jewish people were seeking an identity without a temple. Some went to The Way of Rabbi Yeshua, others went with the Pharisees. Today, many of us who are disillusioned with both the USA and the Churchianity we were raised with are also looking for an identity without them. Some have gone with the Pharisees and followed the way of MAGA. Others have been left feeling homeless and asking what it would mean to continue being Jesus Followers without our temples.

 

IV - ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Course Assigned Texts

1.      Nijay K. Gupta. A Beginner’s Guide to New Testament Studies: Understanding Key Debates. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2020.

– Gupta’s text provides a framework for new students to begin asking interpretive questions of the text, including text critical discussions. There is a discussion introducing each book’s most common questions, including John’s Gospel.

 

2.      Janette H. Ok, Osvaldo Padilla, and Amy L. B. Peeler. The New Testament in Color: A Multiethnic Bible Commentary. Edited by Esau McCaulley. IVP Academic, 2024.

– Specifically, Miguel G. Echevarría provides a breakdown for the “Gospel of John”. Like deSilva, Echevarría also mentions the possibility of Lazarus being the Beloved Disciple. Echevarría discusses various text critical elements of John’s Gospel as well as the over arching themes present within the text.

 

Commentaries

1.      C. S. Keener, “John, Gospel Of,” in Nicholas Perrin, Jeannine K. Brown, and Joel B. Green. Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (DJG). IVP Bible Dictionary Series. Downers Grove, Ill: IVP Academic, 2013

 – Keener provides additional details about text critical issues regarding John’s gospel. Specifically, the section 2.3.2 Judaism was helpful in providing context regarding this passage.

 

2.      DeSilva, David Arthur. An Introduction to the New Testament: Contexts, Methods & Ministry Formation. Second Edition. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2018.

– DeSilva’s text pairs well with the two course texts in introducing the reader to text critical issues and interpretive methods. He also provides a breakdown of Narrative Criticism which is helpful when discussing Johannine literature.

 

3.      Edwin A. Blum, “John,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures, ed. J. F. Walvoord and R. B. Zuck (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985), 279–280.

– While not a text from after 2000, this text deserves an honorable mention as it helped provide some additional insights into the larger/longer debates in Johannine studies.

Monographs

1.      Craig R. Koester, The Word of Life: A Theology of John’s Gospel (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2008)

– This text helps take some of the text critical and historical hats off, and place a “so what” hat on. Why does this gospel matter? How can it help one think theologically about the text.

 

2.      Skarsaune, Oskar. In the Shadow of the Temple: Jewish Influences on Early Christianity. Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 2002.

– This text is helpful for understanding the cultural moment in which the gospels take place.

 

3.      Jipp, Joshua W. The Messianic Theology of the New Testament. Grand Rapids (Mich.): William. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2020.

- This text is helpful for understanding Messianism in the 2^nd Temple Judaism.

 

4.      Schiffman, Lawrence H., and Chaim Potok. Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls: The History of Judaism, the Background of Christianity, the Lost Library of Qumran. Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library. New Haven, Conn.: Yale Univ. Pr, 1995.

- This text provides a detailed breakdown of the history of Qumran’s break with the Hasmonean dynasty; and thus the Sadducees and Pharisees. It also provides a Jewish Rabbinical scholarship breakdown of Messianism in 2^nd Temple Judaism without Christian filters.

 

5.      Matthew Thiessen. Jesus and the Forces of Death: The Gospels’ Portrayal of Ritual Impurity within First-Century Judaism. Paperback edition. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, a division of Baker Publishing Group, 2021.

– While not discussed or referenced much, this text heavily influenced my understanding of the way a Jewish audience understands what a temple is and why it matters to Jesus.

 

Journal Articles

1.      Tat Yu Lam. “Hyper-Intertextuality: The Temple Cleansing-Rebuilding Tradition as a Compositional Framework in John’s Gospel” (2023).

– This article makes a compelling argument for how themes within a culture and narrative traditions can help us better understand the biblical texts without being one-for-one quotes or directly linked phrasings.

 

2.      Jutta Leonhardt-Balzer. “The Johannine Literature and Contemporary Jewish Literature.” in The Oxford Handbook of Johannine Studies. Edited by Judith M. Lieu and Martinus C. de Boer. Oxford University Press, 2018.

– The Oxford Handbook is a series of articles showing the state of Johannine studies to date. While I read and saved multiple articles from this collection, this article in particular was helpful in further reading the Fourth Gospel in light of its 2^nd Temple Judaism contexts.

 

V - WORD COUNT

Leaving out the biblical text plus outline and final works cited, the total word count for this IWP paper is 4,819.

 

 

VI - WORKS CITED

 

Adams, Paul. Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (IVP Bible Dictionary). IVP Bible Dictionary. Downers Grove: IVP, 2016.

Darrell G. Wolfe. “INTERPRETATION OF 2 SAMUEL 7.1-17.” Introduction to Old Testament: OT500. Pasadena, CA: Fuller Theological Seminary, 2024. https://www.academia.edu/126053128/INTERPRETATION_OF_2_SAMUEL_7_1_17.

David deSilva. An Introduction to the New Testament: Contexts, Methods & Ministry Formation. Second Edition. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2018.

Gregerman, Adam. Building on the Ruins of the Temple: Apologetics and Polemics in Early Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism. First Edition. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2016.

Janette H. Ok, Osvaldo Padilla, and Amy L. B. Peeler. The New Testament in Color: A Multiethnic Bible Commentary. Edited by Esau McCaulley. IVP Academic, 2024.

Jeannine K Brown. “BI131 Introducing Literary Interpretation” presented at the Logos Mobile Education, Lexham Press. Bellingham, WA, 2015.

Jipp, Joshua W. The Messianic Theology of the New Testament. Grand Rapids (Mich.): William. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2020.

John F. Walvoord, Roy B. Zuck, and Dallas Theological Seminary, eds. The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures. Wheaton, Ill: Victor Books, 1983.

Jutta Leonhardt-Balzer. “The Johannine Literature and Contemporary Jewish Literature.” Page 0 in The Oxford Handbook of Johannine Studies. Edited by Judith M. Lieu and Martinus C. de Boer. Oxford University Press, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198739982.013.9, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198739982.013.9.

Matthew Thiessen. Jesus and the Forces of Death: The Gospels’ Portrayal of Ritual Impurity within First-Century Judaism. Paperback edition. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, a division of Baker Publishing Group, 2021.

Michael David Coogan, Marc Zvi Brettler, and Carol Ann Newsom, eds. The New Oxford Annotated Bible: New Revised Standard Version (NRSV); with the Apocrypha ; An Ecumenical Study Bible. Fully revised fifth edition. Oxford New York: Oxford University Press, 2018.

Nijay K. Gupta. A Beginner’s Guide to New Testament Studies: Understanding Key Debates. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2020.

Oskar Skarsaune. In the Shadow of the Temple: Jewish Influences on Early Christianity. Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 2002.

Schiffman, Lawrence H., and Chaim Potok. Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls: The History of Judaism, the Background of Christianity, the Lost Library of Qumran. Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library. New Haven, Conn.: Yale Univ. Pr, 1995. https://ref.ly/logosres/reclaimdss?ref=Page.p+101&off=1239.

Selvén, Sebastian. “Building on The Ruins of the Temple: Apologetics and Polemics in Early Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism.” J. Theol. Stud. 69.1 (2018): 277–79. https://doi.org/10.1093/jts/flx230, https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=9886d0f8-4c68-389f-89c9-6687d9f28e4e.

Tat Yu Lam. “Hyper-Intertextuality: The Temple Cleansing-Rebuilding Tradition as a Compositional Framework in John’s Gospel” (2023). https://doi.org/10.1163/15685152-20231746, https://brill.com/view/journals/bi/32/1/article-p71_004.xml.

Weiss, Dov. “Building on The Ruins of the Temple: Apologetics and Polemics in Early Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism.” AJS Rev. 42.1 (2018): 219–21. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0364009418000223, https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=b244192f-4ce4-3949-ab00-e947a89d99e0.

New Revised Standard Version, Updated Edition (NRSVue). Logos Bible Software. USA: Friendship Press, National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America, 2021.

 

 

 

Footnotes

---

[1] New Revised Standard Version, Updated Edition (NRSVue), Logos Bible Software. (USA: Friendship Press, National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America, 2021).

[2] Janette H. Ok, Osvaldo Padilla, and Amy L. B. Peeler, The New Testament in Color: A Multiethnic Bible Commentary, ed. Esau McCaulley (IVP Academic, 2024), 173; Miguel G. Echevarría, “Gospel of John,”.

[3] David deSilva, An Introduction to the New Testament: Contexts, Methods & Ministry Formation, Second Edition. (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2018), 341–42.

[4] Paul Adams, Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (IVP Bible Dictionary), IVP Bible Dictionary (Downers Grove: IVP, 2016), 423–24; C. S. Keener, “John, Gospel Of,” 2.3.2 Judaism.

[5] Jutta Leonhardt-Balzer, “The Johannine Literature and Contemporary Jewish Literature,” in The Oxford Handbook of Johannine Studies, ed. Judith M. Lieu and Martinus C. de Boer (Oxford University Press, 2018), 156, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198739982.013.9, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198739982.013.9.

[6] Tat Yu Lam, “Hyper-Intertextuality: The Temple Cleansing-Rebuilding Tradition as a Compositional Framework in John’s Gospel” (2023), https://doi.org/10.1163/15685152-20231746, https://brill.com/view/journals/bi/32/1/article-p71_004.xml.

[7] Michael David Coogan, Marc Zvi Brettler, and Carol Ann Newsom, eds., The New Oxford Annotated Bible: New Revised Standard Version (NRSV); with the Apocrypha ; An Ecumenical Study Bible, Fully revised fifth edition. (Oxford New York: Oxford University Press, 2018), §Introduction to John.

[8] Michael David Coogan, Marc Zvi Brettler, and Carol Ann Newsom, The New Oxford Annotated Bible, n. Pointed out to me by the textual note: "2:13–25 The demonstration against corruption in the Temple (cf. Mt 21:17; Mk 11:15–19; Lk 19:45–48).".

[9] John F. Walvoord, Roy B. Zuck, and Dallas Theological Seminary, eds., The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures (Wheaton, Ill: Victor Books, 1983), §Pg 279-280. Edwin A. Blum, “John,” ; Section 5. JESUS’ FIRST MINISTRY IN JERUSALEM (2:13–3:21).  Subsection a.      Jesus’ cleansing of the temple (2:13–25).

[10] Jeannine K Brown, “BI131 Introducing Literary Interpretation” (presented at the Logos Mobile Education, Lexham Press, Bellingham, WA, 2015).

[11] David deSilva, An Introduction to the New Testament, 352.

[12] David deSilva, An Introduction to the New Testament, 341; "Earlier assessments of the lack of historical value to John’s Gospel have given way to a more balanced assessment of the tradition behind this Gospel, but we are still struck more by the Gospel’s focus on the meaning and moment of the incarnate Word than by its contributions to a “life of Jesus.”".

[13] Nijay K. Gupta, A Beginner’s Guide to New Testament Studies: Understanding Key Debates (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2020), 33.

[14] Michael David Coogan, Marc Zvi Brettler, and Carol Ann Newsom, The New Oxford Annotated Bible, n. Michael D. Coogan, Commentary on Jn 2:14. “2:14 Animals were sold for sacrifice. Different currencies used by worshipers had to be changed to the official half-shekel of Tyre for the Temple tax (see Ex 30:11–16). Roman money was changed into Jewish money to pay the Temple tax.”.

[15] John F. Walvoord, Roy B. Zuck, and Dallas Theological Seminary, The Bible Knowledge Commentary, 157–158; John D. Grassmick, “Mark,”: “Though a small surcharge was permitted in these transactions, dealings were not free from extortion and fraud. In addition (according to Mark 11:16) people loaded with merchandise were taking shortcuts through this area, making it a thoroughfare from one part of the city to another. Jesus was outraged by this blatant disregard for the temple area specifically set apart for Gentile use. So He overturned the money changers’ tables and the dove-sellers’ benches, and would not allow people to use the area as a thoroughfare. Other certified markets were available elsewhere in the city.”.

[16] Nijay K. Gupta, A Beginner’s Guide to New Testament Studies, 32. See Gupta's discussion on how John lumps "the Jews" together as an internal debate among Jewish Jesus followers and non-Jesus followers, not as an epithet against the ethnicity or people.

[17] Matthew Thiessen, Jesus and the Forces of Death: The Gospels’ Portrayal of Ritual Impurity within First-Century Judaism, Paperback edition. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, a division of Baker Publishing Group, 2021).

[18] Adam Gregerman, Building on the Ruins of the Temple: Apologetics and Polemics in Early Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism, First Edition. (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2016), n. The case was made by Adam Gregerman in this text, but I could not obtain a copy of the text. I referenced two academic reviews to get the gist of his argument, with which I agree.; Sebastian Selvén, “Building on The Ruins of the Temple: Apologetics and Polemics in Early Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism,” J. Theol. Stud. 69.1 (2018): 277–79, https://doi.org/10.1093/jts/flx230, https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=9886d0f8-4c68-389f-89c9-6687d9f28e4e; Dov Weiss, “Building on The Ruins of the Temple: Apologetics and Polemics in Early Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism,” AJS Rev. 42.1 (2018): 219–21, https://doi.org/10.1017/s0364009418000223, https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=b244192f-4ce4-3949-ab00-e947a89d99e0.

[19] David deSilva, An Introduction to the New Testament, 27-62. See discussion on the synagogues.

[20] Michael David Coogan, Marc Zvi Brettler, and Carol Ann Newsom, The New Oxford Annotated Bible, n. Michael D. Coogan: Commentary on 2:19 “Destroy this temple …, reflects a longstanding tradition of Temple critique (cf. 4:21; 2 Sam 7:5–7; see Jer 7:1–15; 35:2–10; Ezek 10:18–19; Acts 7:48).”.

[21] Oskar Skarsaune, In the Shadow of the Temple: Jewish Influences on Early Christianity (Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 2002), 149.

[22] Lawrence H. Schiffman and Chaim Potok, Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls: The History of Judaism, the Background of Christianity, the Lost Library of Qumran, Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library (New Haven, Conn.: Yale Univ. Pr, 1995), 69-81. Note: The entire discussion of pages 69-81 is summarized in my review, but the final conclusion is in the last pargraphs of page 81., https://ref.ly/logosres/reclaimdss?ref=Page.p+101&off=1239.

[23] Oskar Skarsaune, In the Shadow of the Temple, 155.

[24] Darrell G. Wolfe, “INTERPRETATION OF 2 SAMUEL 7.1-17,” in Introduction to Old Testament: OT500 (Pasadena, CA: Fuller Theological Seminary, 2024), https://www.academia.edu/126053128/INTERPRETATION_OF_2_SAMUEL_7_1_17.

[25] Schiffman and Potok, Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls, n. See Chapter 19: The Messianic Idea.

[26] Joshua W. Jipp, The Messianic Theology of the New Testament (Grand Rapids (Mich.): William. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2020), n. See also Jipps text, discussing how the ideas of Messiah in 2nd Temple Judaism played in the New Testament texts.

[27] NRSVue, v. Psalm 69:7–9.

[28] Janette H. Ok, Osvaldo Padilla, and Amy L. B. Peeler, The New Testament in Color (NTIC), 175. Miguel G. Echevarría, “Gospel of John,”.

Shalom שָׁלוֹם: Live Long and Prosper!

Darrell Wolfe

Storyteller | Writer | Thinker | Consultant | Freelancer | Bible Nerd *Written withs some editing and research assistance from ChatGPT-4o

Read more →