Temple Talk

by peacefulpete 6 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  peacefulpete

  Recall the famous charge made against Jesus in his trial in the Gospel Mark:

  “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.’”

  Matt has a shorter version which likely reflects what he saw in his copy of Mark:

  “This fellow said, ‘I am able to destroy the temple of God and rebuild it in three days.’”

  Whether the authors understood Jesus as having actually said that is uncertain as both say this charge is brought by false witnesses. G.John on the other hand takes places the line in Jesus' mouth and offers an explanation as a symbolic metaphor. Temple=Jesus's body. (theological problems aside).

  Regardless, something I had never learned as a JW was the second temple period expectation that the Temple would be destroyed and subsequently rebuilt by the Messiah. The primary text lending to this is Zech 6:12

  12Then say to him, ‘The LORD of armies says this: “Behold, there is a Man whose name is [f]Branch, for He will [g]branch out from where He is; and He will build the temple of the LORD. 13Yes, it is He who will build the temple of the LORD, and He who will bear the majesty and sit and rule on His throne..."

  While a lot from that period has been lost sometimes we get lucky. The famous and renown first century Rabbi Yohana ben Zakkai is quoted as declaring after the doors of the Temple opened by themselves:

  "O Temple, Temple, why dost thou frighten thyself? I know of thee that thou shalt be destroyed; Zechariah the son of Iddo [Zech. xi. 1] has already prophesied concerning thee: 'Open thy doors, O Lebanon, that the fire may devour thy cedars'"

  The same R.Yohanan is said to have spoken with general Vespasian, addressed him as Lord Emperor to which Vespasian objected given he was not the emperor to which R, Yohanan announced:

  "If you are not the king you will be eventually, because the Temple will only be destroyed by a king's hand".

  As we know soon later he did become the Emperor so millions of Jews see him as a prophet. But note the resignation with the Temple being destroyed.

  There is more on this topic, but what do you think? If one of the most influential Pharisee of the time interpreted Zechariah as foretelling the destruction of the Temple so that it could be rebuilt by the Messiah, why the accusation in Mark? Was it evidence that he was declaring himself the Jewish Messiah? Why does Mark seem to be insisting the charge was a lie? Was the writer indicating Jesus was not the Messiah they were expecting?

  As for the author of G.John he seems to be in his own way also distancing Jesus from the charge by reinterpreting it as a prophecy of Jesus's death and resurrection. Maybe feeling the need to after the many years the Temple was not fully rebuilt. (btw. they did start) (G.Mark was likely interpolated to harmonize with John's spiritual take.)

  Discuss.
  
  

  
  
• 

  Phizzy

  As with all the Gospels, totally exact dating is impossible for Mark. We know it has suffered additions, the long Ending being the obvious, but was the bit written about the temple rebuild a fair time after 70 CE, a year or two, when it was obvious that it wasn't going to happen, the "three days" being long gone ?

  On the Zechariah "prophecy" this comes from the section of the book known as Second Zechariah from Chapter 9 on from memory, so is it a prophecy ? or by the time of writing was rebuilding well under way ? Please correct me if I have this wrong Pete, this is just my rambling thoughts, prompted by my skepticism of any seeming bible prophecy.
• 

  peacefulpete

  First a technical question. I tried 3 times to post this thread and each time it appeared to get stuck in que. I was just repeating that this morning and discovered it had posted a few hours before. Is it a known issue? Is it my computer?

  I agree G.Mark was written post70. In fact I'm persuaded the original form of G.Mark was written as a play for public performance and subsequently adapted as a narrative with a bunch of additions. However the thread was focusing on the language of the charge, to destroy the temple and rebuild it. It doesn't seem that that would have been necessarily controversial for someone claiming to be the Messiah. I find it too coincidental. Maybe the story reflects some historical kernel regarding a claimant to the title that was an embarrassment to the next generation, requiring the writer of Mark to assert it was a false claim and later G.John, to not deny, but reinterpret as symbolism. The 3 day motif plausibly appeared in an early revision of Mark that the writer of Matt had. The last part about, 'not made with hands' a still later addition post G.John. These were hand written copies and easily susceptible to harmonizations and interpolation.

  Regarding Zechariah, yes at least 2 authors are now recognized by critical scholarship, but what is relevant is how this work was perceived by the first century Jews. They saw 'prophecy' or dual meanings in texts that on their face did not present as prophecy or suggest a dual application. The NT writers were hardly original in doing this. It's basically recycling. You have only so many holy texts so you make them fit new situations.
• 

  punkofnice

  PPete - I tried 3 times to post this thread and each time it appeared to get stuck in que. I was just repeating that this morning and discovered it had posted a few hours before. Is it a known issue? Is it my computer?

  Without prying, could it be the browser you're using? Are you working through something like Citrix?

  Mine does the same if I'm going through Citrix.

  I've noticed that some browsers are not always that good.
• 

  peacefulpete

  Googe chrome
• 

  Vidqun

  Peacefulpete, sounds more like connectivity problems somewhere along the line.

  Here's my take on the rebuilding of the temple, not literal, but figurative.

  God’s new nation as His earthly temple: In the NT the new temple arrangement is God’s nation, the Israel of God (Gal. 6:15, 16; cf. 1 Cor. 3:16, 17; 2 Cor. 6:16; Eph. 2:21, 22). Jesus is the cornerstone. The apostles make up the foundation (Eph. 2:20; 1 Pet. 2:6). God keeps the temple sanctuary for Himself and intact. He allows John to measure it, meaning He will be preserving the majority of His people alive through the Tribulation. Support for this view comes from the editors of EDNT: “The instruction to the seer to measure the temple, the altar of burnt offerings and those who worship there, but not the court outside the temple (Rev. 11:1), is to be interpreted in an ecclesiological context: The Church will be preserved in the general destruction” (Rev. 7:9, 14; 11:1). The outer courtyard is to be trampled by the nations for 42 months (Rev. 11:2). This is the location of the dining rooms of the priests (Ezek. 42:1; cf. 1 Pet. 2:5). This points to the persecution of the leadership of the Israel of God during the second half of the Tribulation (Rev. 7:3, 4, 7; cf. Zech. 12:2, 3; 14:1-3).
• 

  peacefulpete

  Vidqun.... I don't know but another thread had an issue also. It posted then disappeared for about a day then reappeared without the comments. It's all above my head.

  Regarding your comment. I wasn't looking for religious interpretation of Rev or the Paulines. The post was about the historical expectation of the messiah rebuilding the temple and how to deconstruct the Gospels with that information.

  I guess I can add that 2 Baruch a first century Jewish work has similar language, the temple was not the real temple, it was in Paradise in heaven. So the thoughts were circulating, I imagine even more widely outside Israel.