7.26.2007

Temple

This could very easily turn into something so much more than what I have the time to make it...

Jesus 'Attack' on the Temple

Jesus was not trying to reform Temple worship. He wasn't trying to rid spirituality of commercialism (the moneychangers were a requirement for worship, not a distraction from it) nor was he claiming that they were abusing the pilgrims who were coming to the Temple by extorting money from them. Jesus was attacking the Temple itself. He was not purifying worship, He was preventing it from happening (by preventing people from procuring the needed objects with which a devout Jew would worship God). We are blinded to this by the fact that our worship has never been accompanied by the smell of burning animal hair, blood, and the bleating of animals, we think worship is about guitars and drums...

This was not an attack on the 'money-lenders,' this was an attack on the entire system of Jewish redemption; not, as is often supposed, an attack on the system God set up, but rather, on the way in which people were abusing that system. A system that was impeccably trusted without question to make peace between God and men, and yet touched only the outer edge of Jewish lives, never entering the heart.

Jesus attacks it as a 'den of robbers' and for failing to be 'a house of prayer for all nations.'

It had become a source of national pride, a symbol of Jewish piety and spiritual superiority, allowing them to mistreat others, and still view themselves as superior to outsiders. They saw themselves arrogantly as priveledged insiders, instead of fortunate adopted children.

I was going to draw parralels to today's "christian" culture and the body of Christ as the Temple, but since I don't have the energy right now I will let you draw your own conclusions...

Jesus was attacking the mindset that viewed the Temple and the religion associated with it as essentially a short cut to being right, and that it has little to no effect on things that really matter in a persons conduct and character...

Jesus attack on the Pharisees is (in today's Christian worldview) understood as an attack on their spirituality, they were legalists; in reality, Jesus' attack was a political one, they were using their privileged position to oppress others for their own sake. They were not only neglecting their call to be the light of the world, but were using their election as a source of pride and separation from the world that they were supposed to be illuminating! (Does this hit close to home yet!)

Jesus doesn't accept blessing unless it gives away...

(Sorry this is scattered, but I had these thoughts collected here so long that I was forgetting what some of my short-hand meant and I thought I needed to get it somewhat coherent and just post it!)

4 comments:

Sean said...

This all seems like such a big deal for Jews for none of the Epistles to speak about it. Doesn't that strike you as odd?

WTF?! said...

I guess it depends on what you mean by 'not speaking about it...'

The Epistles certainly talk about the new covenant, new Temple, new creation, that God has brought into being through Jesus. The Epistles even talk about the King/Priest of the Jews who is Lord of the entire cosmos. However, it seems like the topics are addressed in much more systematically non-Jewish terminology. Perhaps this is due to the fact that most of the Epistles are written directly to non-Jewish followers of the Jewish Messiah.

There are, however, large sections of the Epistles that do deal directly with Israel. I know that some scholars believe that the main thrust of the letter to the Romans is about God's purposes in and through the Jews. Obviously the letter to the Hebrews is also highly 'Jewish' in nature.

Am I addressing the point you raised?

Sean said...

Yes, but it seems like such a big issue for it not to be "Wow, Jesus is the new Temple!" I know there are references, but for such an issue, it seems odd that it's not a HUGE issue for the Epistle writers, especially Hebrews, which is to Jews. I don't disagree with NT, but I'm not jumping in.

WTF?! said...

I guess I would say that it is a big deal, but it is only a big deal because of what the Temple, and its overthrow and replacement by a Person (and subsequently the community of people following that Person as marked by His supernatural presence with them) signify.

It seems that the significance of the Temple's overthrow is indeed made a major point of the NT liturature, it is simply done in a way that will not alienate people unaware of the peculiar history of the nation of Israel...