Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [John_Lit] Temple

Expand Messages
  • Horace Jeffery Hodges
    Tom Butler wrote: I have suggested that Jesus replaced every element of the Mosaic system of worship: the temple, the festivals of sacrifice and the temple
    Message 1 of 16 , Sep 23, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Tom Butler wrote:

      "I have suggested that Jesus replaced every element of
      the Mosaic system of worship: the temple, the
      festivals of sacrifice and the temple priesthood.
      That is what I call the sub-plot, the hidden story in
      the Fourth Gospel."

      I'd be interested in hearing more about this. Do you
      mean that Jesus in John's Gospel is physically the
      temple, that he is the site of sacrifices, that he is
      the sacrifice itself, that he is all of the temple
      festivals, and that he is the priesthood, too? Say
      more.

      Jeffery Hodges

      =====
      Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
      Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
      447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
      Yangsandong 411
      South Korea

      __________________________________________________
      Do you Yahoo!?
      New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
      http://sbc.yahoo.com
    • kaare.fuglseth@hibo.no
      ... I must say that I am very sceptical to theories of hidden messages like this one in John. The Johannine Jesus in ch. 2:13-22 is clearly supporting the
      Message 2 of 16 , Sep 24, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        >On Sat, 21 Sep 2002 23:19:45 -0700 Bob MacDonald <bobmacdonald@...>
        >writes:
        >>
        >> Where does the concept of body as temple first arise?
        >>
        >> (snip)
        >> The incarnation puts the tent with the people in a new way.
        >> What could move the author of John or any other first century
        >> person to see the Body of Christ, the body of the individual,
        >> the body of Jesus - as a temple - and the implication
        >> subsequently for there to be no further need for a physical
        >> temple?
        >
        >Bob,
        > As you know, my suggestion is that the Herodian temple was
        >seen by the Johannine community (and the Qumran community)
        >as defiled, and, therefore in need of replacement. In fact, the
        >Fourth Gospel uses language borrowed from the OT and in clear
        >unambiguous Greek to suggest that Jesus - metaphorically -
        >destroyed the temple and replaced it with his own body. In fact,
        >I have suggested that Jesus replaced every element of the
        >Mosaic system of worship: the temple, the festivals of sacrifice
        >and the temple priesthood. That is what I call the sub-plot, the
        >hidden story in the Fourth Gospel.
        > I know that I've said a lot without offering support. If anyone
        >is interested, I'd be pleased to offer a more extensive reply.
        >
        >Yours in Christ's service,

        I must say that I am very sceptical to theories of hidden messages
        like this one in John.

        The Johannine Jesus in ch. 2:13-22 is clearly supporting the temple
        and John 4 just reflects the fact that the temple was gone. And Jesus
        keeps coming back to both the temple and the synagogues throughout
        the whole gospel.

        The many references in the second temple period of the temple idea to
        other areas (body, fist man, Israel, the community etc. in Philo,
        Paul, and others.) in fact only reduces the importance of the
        metaphor in connection with replacement theories.

        As I see it, the temple was much too important for the ioudaioi of
        any group that they would abandon it, until they had to. Then, the
        parting of the ways between what we now call Judaism and Christianity
        is inaugurated.

        It is also very questionable if the Qumranites or Essenes or the
        Yahad wanted to replace the temple, they might have replaced parts of
        temple elements, but that was only because they (too) were forced out
        and they would be happy to (re)capture the power there, which they
        actually did, according to H. Stegemann "The Qumran Essenes-Local
        Members of the Main Jewish Union in Late Second Temple Times". The
        Madrid Qumran Congress. Proceedings of the International Congress on
        the Dead Sea Scrolls Madrid 18-21 March, 1991. Leiden/Madrid,
        Brill/Editorial Complutense. Ed. J.T. Barrera and L.V. Montaner.
        83-166. 1992.


        --
        Kaare Fuglseth
        Associate Professor
        Regional University of Bodoe
        N-8049 Bodø
        Norway
        Tel.: + 47 7551 7700/7713
        Fax : + 47 7551 7798
        The Philo Concordance Project at
        http://webster.hibo.no/alu/krl/kaare/filon.htm

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Matson, Mark (Academic)
        ... Kaare: I am also a but suspicious of hidden messages in texts, but I see below for a bit more interaction on this particular issue. I think Tom Butler
        Message 3 of 16 , Sep 24, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          Kaare Fuglseth wrote:

          > I must say that I am very sceptical to theories of hidden messages
          > like this one in John.

          Kaare: I am also a but suspicious of "hidden messages" in texts, but I see below for a bit more interaction on this particular issue. I think Tom Butler may be overemphazing a point, but perhaps there is more here than you are willing to allow.

          > The Johannine Jesus in ch. 2:13-22 is clearly supporting the temple
          > and John 4 just reflects the fact that the temple was gone. And Jesus
          > keeps coming back to both the temple and the synagogues throughout
          > the whole gospel.

          Yes, the temple is a central feature in John's story, not only in chapter 2, but also in the Tabernacle stories, chapters 7-9. But in each case, while the temple is important, there are interesting twists that suggest a redefinition. In the case of chapter 2, the temple destruction is predicted and the temple is reinterpreted as Jesus body (2:19-22). This seems fairly clear from the text, doesn't it? This is hardly a hidden message. In the Tabernacles controversies, Jesus uses temple practices at the tabernacle feast (water libation, nighttime candle lighting) to illustrate his particular role (rivers of living water, I am the light) to redefine the temple practices in a very curious way -- surely one that suggests some significant alteration.

          Now perhaps that is all part of a "post resurrection" and "post destruction" reflection. But I wonder?

          One intriquing issue that I have pointed to is the curious allusion to Zech. 14 in 2:16. Now Zech 14. imagines a time when the temple is relatively unimportant -- all of Zion will be holy, the nations will all come and bring offerings, all the pots in the city will be holy just like the temple. Thus, the "holiness" function of the temple is diminished, and Gentiles are allowed into the holy precincts. Sounds pretty radical -- almost like the early church's understanding that in Jesus the separation between Jew and Gentile was demolished. Is there not a possibility this was inherent in Jesus' message, and is found in this passage in John?


          > As I see it, the temple was much too important for the ioudaioi of
          > any group that they would abandon it, until they had to. Then, the
          > parting of the ways between what we now call Judaism and Christianity
          > is inaugurated.

          But there is a significant body of Jewish literature that suggests an anticipation of some radical re-working of temple ideology. Zech. 14, discussed above is one (picked up, by the way, in Rev. 21 & 22, where there is no temple, but a new Jerusalem only). Ed Sanders points to these passages in his discussion of the New Temple and Restoration ideology in his "Jesus and Judaism". I think these are compelling passages that suggest across a broad range of Jewish writings either a new restored temple (following a destruction), or some modified approach to a temple or Zion was broadly anticipated. So can we really say that the temple was simply too important for any Jews to abandon it. In fact the Essenes seem to have abandoned it -- as long as it was practiced in the way it was. They probably expected a new temple, but what kind? Would it have been a huge stretch to image Jesus reinterpreting this "restoration" eschatology in a new way, perhaps one that was interpreted metaphorically?


          Mark A. Matson
          Academic Dean, Milligan College
          http://www.milligan.edu/Administrative/MMatson/personal.htm

          ---
          Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
          Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
          Version: 6.0.385 / Virus Database: 217 - Release Date: 9/4/2002
        • Thatcher, Tom
          Greetings, all! Kaare wrote: As I see it, the temple was much too important for the ioudaioi of ... I think the key issue in your statement is the final
          Message 4 of 16 , Sep 24, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            Greetings, all!

            Kaare wrote:

            <<> As I see it, the temple was much too important for the ioudaioi of
            > any group that they would abandon it, until they had to.>>

            I think the key issue in your statement is the final qualifier, "until they
            had to." I think a number of Jews in Jesus' day had indeed come to the
            conclusion that "they had to". Mark Matson has already noted the various
            Hebrew Bible texts which touch on this issue. I would also point out that
            there appear to be strong strains in "heterodox" Judaism at that time which
            suggest that the temple cult, as it then existed, was viewed as inadequate.
            In some cases this led to an apparently wholesale rejection of the temple in
            favor of other means of purification--as in the case of Qumran, John the
            Baptist and others like him, the Samaritans, the Egyptian Jews who set up an
            alternate "temple", and Paul. In other cases, it led to the drastic reform
            measures that we generally lump under the heading "zealots". It might also
            be relevant to note that the temple may not have dominated the religious
            landscape of the Diaspora to the extent that it did in Palestine. In Philo,
            for example--and I make no claim to be an expert on Philo at all--it seems
            to me that the temple takes on a primarily symbolic function, based more on
            the temple as a concept from the Scriptures than as a physical place in
            Jerusalem.

            So I think I agree with Mark that there was a movement in 1st-century
            Judaism toward the need to rework the temple operation--maybe not so much
            the building itself, but at least the religious industry around it (although
            in some cases the building itself, like the "Golden Eagle" incident
            described by Josephus). My own thinking would also be that Jesus' religious
            temperament was such that he would probably fit into that category of people
            who felt that need--especially if he had some connection to John the Baptist
            (I think he did).

            Take care.

            Respectfully,
            --tom

            Tom Thatcher
            Cincinnati Bible Seminary
            2700 Glenway Ave.
            Cincinnati, Oh 45204
            (513) 244-8172
            tom.thatcher@... <mailto:tom.thatcher@...>
            "the truth will set you free"


            -----Original Message-----
            From: Matson, Mark (Academic) [SMTP:MAMatson@...]
            Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 9:01 AM
            To: johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: RE: [John_Lit] Temple

            Kaare Fuglseth wrote:

            > I must say that I am very sceptical to theories of hidden messages

            > like this one in John.

            Kaare: I am also a but suspicious of "hidden messages" in texts,
            but I see below for a bit more interaction on this particular issue. I
            think Tom Butler may be overemphazing a point, but perhaps there is more
            here than you are willing to allow.

            > The Johannine Jesus in ch. 2:13-22 is clearly supporting the
            temple
            > and John 4 just reflects the fact that the temple was gone. And
            Jesus
            > keeps coming back to both the temple and the synagogues throughout

            > the whole gospel.

            Yes, the temple is a central feature in John's story, not only in
            chapter 2, but also in the Tabernacle stories, chapters 7-9. But in each
            case, while the temple is important, there are interesting twists that
            suggest a redefinition. In the case of chapter 2, the temple destruction is
            predicted and the temple is reinterpreted as Jesus body (2:19-22). This
            seems fairly clear from the text, doesn't it? This is hardly a hidden
            message. In the Tabernacles controversies, Jesus uses temple practices at
            the tabernacle feast (water libation, nighttime candle lighting) to
            illustrate his particular role (rivers of living water, I am the light) to
            redefine the temple practices in a very curious way -- surely one that
            suggests some significant alteration.

            Now perhaps that is all part of a "post resurrection" and "post
            destruction" reflection. But I wonder?

            One intriquing issue that I have pointed to is the curious allusion
            to Zech. 14 in 2:16. Now Zech 14. imagines a time when the temple is
            relatively unimportant -- all of Zion will be holy, the nations will all
            come and bring offerings, all the pots in the city will be holy just like
            the temple. Thus, the "holiness" function of the temple is diminished, and
            Gentiles are allowed into the holy precincts. Sounds pretty radical --
            almost like the early church's understanding that in Jesus the separation
            between Jew and Gentile was demolished. Is there not a possibility this was
            inherent in Jesus' message, and is found in this passage in John?


            > As I see it, the temple was much too important for the ioudaioi of

            > any group that they would abandon it, until they had to. Then, the

            > parting of the ways between what we now call Judaism and
            Christianity
            > is inaugurated.

            But there is a significant body of Jewish literature that suggests
            an anticipation of some radical re-working of temple ideology. Zech. 14,
            discussed above is one (picked up, by the way, in Rev. 21 & 22, where there
            is no temple, but a new Jerusalem only). Ed Sanders points to these
            passages in his discussion of the New Temple and Restoration ideology in his
            "Jesus and Judaism". I think these are compelling passages that suggest
            across a broad range of Jewish writings either a new restored temple
            (following a destruction), or some modified approach to a temple or Zion was
            broadly anticipated. So can we really say that the temple was simply too
            important for any Jews to abandon it. In fact the Essenes seem to have
            abandoned it -- as long as it was practiced in the way it was. They
            probably expected a new temple, but what kind? Would it have been a huge
            stretch to image Jesus reinterpreting this "restoration" eschatology in a
            new way, perhaps one that was interpreted metaphorically?


            Mark A. Matson
            Academic Dean, Milligan College
            http://www.milligan.edu/Administrative/MMatson/personal.htm

            ---
            Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
            Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
            Version: 6.0.385 / Virus Database: 217 - Release Date: 9/4/2002


            SUBSCRIBE: e-mail johannine_literature-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
            UNSUBSCRIBE: e-mail johannine_literature-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

            PROBLEMS?: e-mail johannine_literature-owner@yahoogroups.com

            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
            http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          • Mary Coloe
            I ve only just caught up with this discussion and will contribute more. I have recently published a book specifically examining the Temple in john. It s God
            Message 5 of 16 , Sep 25, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              I've only just caught up with this discussion and will contribute more. I
              have recently published a book specifically examining the Temple in john.
              It's God Dwells with us: Temple Symbolism in the Fourth Gospel. Liturgical
              press, 2001. In this i traced the various 'locations' of the Divine
              presence in Isral through the Ark, Tent, Temple - then the reaction to a
              royal ideology of Temple in the
              Prophetic, Priestly Tabernacle, Wisdom and Apocalyptic including Qumran to
              show a very gradual movement of religious awareness of where god's presence
              can be found. I then moved into the specific Johannine passages - john 2,
              4, Tabernacles, Dedication.
              I devoted a chapter to Jn 14:2 My Father's house where I argued for a major
              transfer of the Temple to the community of disciples. In this chapter I
              also turned to Zechariah where we get the only designation of who will
              build the Temple -
              Behold the Man whose name is Branch - he will build the Temple of the Lord.
              In this chapter I examined links with the term Branch in Zechariah and the
              Netzer/branch in Isaiah 11.
              this lead to a discussion of the deliberate title the 4th G. gives Jesus in
              the Passion - as THE NAZARENE.
              In examining the Passion I argued that the narrative shows that as one
              Temple is destroyed Jesus the Nazarene Temple builder raises a new Temple
              in his words to the Mother and Beloved disciple.

              If you want to follow this up I can only suggest you read my book and the
              specific arguments that you find there. It is a rich and complex theme and
              I woulsee the Temple as the major Christological image in the Gospel,
              functioning to express Jesus' identity and mission.
              Recent Reviews of my book in Theology, and CBQ have been very favourable.

              In regards to the first question - where the idea came from - I think there
              was much in Jewish theological thinking to prepare the ground as evidenced
              in the Qumran literature.
              The early communities even before 70 had powerful pneumatic experinces
              which is evident in the Pauline writings so that Paul began to speak of the
              Christian person as t living Temple because of this living experience.
              My suspicion is that it is this living pneumatic experience that led to
              firstly Paul and then other writers developing the Temple as an image.
              After 70 the 4th evangelist shaped this experience and theology into a way
              of telling his story of Jesus thus giving this early spirituality and
              theology a narrative form.
              The destruction in 70 was significant, but even prior to this was a sense
              of the Divine presence still in their midst.

              The book says it better and in more detail.
            • Bob MacDonald
              Thank you Mary, Tom, Tom, Horace and Kaare for your comments. Tom Butler speaks of Jesus destroying the temple and replacing the Mosaic liturgy. Dom Crossan
              Message 6 of 16 , Sep 25, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                Thank you Mary, Tom, Tom, Horace and Kaare for your comments.

                Tom Butler speaks of Jesus destroying the temple and replacing the Mosaic
                liturgy. Dom Crossan similarly calls the 'cleansing' of the temple a
                symbolic destruction.

                Tom Thatcher writes: >>Now perhaps that is all part of a "post resurrection"
                and "post destruction" reflection. But I wonder? <<

                I am heartened to see that a pre-destruction rethinking of the temple and
                liturgy seems possible - after all, the folks who live in any generation
                have to have some imagination!

                Mary, I would like to order your book (though perhaps my editor will tell me
                there is one in the local library) but I am very glad to see you take up the
                issue of "powerful pneumatic experiences".

                You wrote: >>My suspicion is that it is this living pneumatic experience
                that led to firstly Paul and then other writers developing the Temple as an
                image. After 70 the 4th evangelist shaped this experience and theology into
                a way of telling his story of Jesus thus giving this early spirituality and
                theology a narrative form. <<

                Having said this, two questions -
                1. do you think that Paul or the Pauline school influenced the Johnnie
                school and the writer of John?
                2. why would the experience of pre-destruction first century persons lead to
                a redevelopment of the temple as an image and the experience of earlier
                generations would not?


                Bob

                mailto::BobMacDonald@...
                + + + Victoria, B.C., Canada + + +

                Catch the foxes for us,
                the little foxes that make havoc of the vineyards,
                for our vineyards are in flower. (Song 2.15)
                http://bobmacdonald.gx.ca


                -----Original Message-----
                From: Mary Coloe [mailto:M.Coloe@...]
                Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 8:17 AM
                To: johannine_literature@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: RE: [John_Lit] Temple



                I've only just caught up with this discussion and will contribute more. I
                have recently published a book specifically examining the Temple in john.
                It's God Dwells with us: Temple Symbolism in the Fourth Gospel. Liturgical
                press, 2001. In this i traced the various 'locations' of the Divine
                presence in Isral through the Ark, Tent, Temple - then the reaction to a
                royal ideology of Temple in the
                Prophetic, Priestly Tabernacle, Wisdom and Apocalyptic including Qumran to
                show a very gradual movement of religious awareness of where god's presence
                can be found. I then moved into the specific Johannine passages - john 2,
                4, Tabernacles, Dedication.
                I devoted a chapter to Jn 14:2 My Father's house where I argued for a major
                transfer of the Temple to the community of disciples. In this chapter I
                also turned to Zechariah where we get the only designation of who will
                build the Temple -
                Behold the Man whose name is Branch - he will build the Temple of the Lord.
                In this chapter I examined links with the term Branch in Zechariah and the
                Netzer/branch in Isaiah 11.
                this lead to a discussion of the deliberate title the 4th G. gives Jesus in
                the Passion - as THE NAZARENE.
                In examining the Passion I argued that the narrative shows that as one
                Temple is destroyed Jesus the Nazarene Temple builder raises a new Temple
                in his words to the Mother and Beloved disciple.

                If you want to follow this up I can only suggest you read my book and the
                specific arguments that you find there. It is a rich and complex theme and
                I woulsee the Temple as the major Christological image in the Gospel,
                functioning to express Jesus' identity and mission.
                Recent Reviews of my book in Theology, and CBQ have been very favourable.

                In regards to the first question - where the idea came from - I think there
                was much in Jewish theological thinking to prepare the ground as evidenced
                in the Qumran literature.
                The early communities even before 70 had powerful pneumatic experinces
                which is evident in the Pauline writings so that Paul began to speak of the
                Christian person as t living Temple because of this living experience.
                My suspicion is that it is this living pneumatic experience that led to
                firstly Paul and then other writers developing the Temple as an image.
                After 70 the 4th evangelist shaped this experience and theology into a way
                of telling his story of Jesus thus giving this early spirituality and
                theology a narrative form.
                The destruction in 70 was significant, but even prior to this was a sense
                of the Divine presence still in their midst.

                The book says it better and in more detail.


                SUBSCRIBE: e-mail johannine_literature-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
                UNSUBSCRIBE: e-mail johannine_literature-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                PROBLEMS?: e-mail johannine_literature-owner@yahoogroups.com

                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              • Horace Jeffery Hodges
                Bob, unless you re including the Latin poet in your thanks -- ... -- then you must be referring to me. Call me Jeffery. Jeffery Hodges ===== Assistant
                Message 7 of 16 , Sep 25, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  Bob, unless you're including the Latin poet in your
                  thanks --

                  > Thank you Mary, Tom, Tom, Horace and Kaare for your
                  > comments.

                  -- then you must be referring to me. Call me
                  "Jeffery."

                  Jeffery Hodges

                  =====
                  Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
                  Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
                  447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
                  Yangsandong 411
                  South Korea

                  __________________________________________________
                  Do you Yahoo!?
                  New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
                  http://sbc.yahoo.com
                • Mary Coloe
                  Bob these are two questions I d like to comment on - Having said this, two questions - 1. do you think that Paul or the Pauline school influenced the Johnnie
                  Message 8 of 16 , Sep 26, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Bob these are two questions I'd like to comment on -
                    Having said this, two questions -
                    1. do you think that Paul or the Pauline school influenced the Johnnie
                    school and the writer of John?
                    My suspicion is direct influence no - that this transformation of Temple
                    language into community was part of the milieu in both Jewish and Christian
                    world of that time - as I noted it is there already in qumran as well as
                    Paul, and post 70's the Rabbi's were engaged in the same questions - how to
                    transfer
                    the meaning of the Temple and its sacrifice to a situation where there is
                    no Temple. The 4th Gospel is part of this late first century theological
                    environment, with the addition of
                    a rich pneumatic experience and the self-conscious reflection on and
                    reinterpretation of the Scriptures guided by the Paraclete.


                    2. why would the experience of pre-destruction first century persons lead
                    to
                    a redevelopment of the temple as an image and the experience of earlier
                    generations would not?

                    From the time of Solomon, there were efforts of reinterpretation.
                    Deuteronomic theology emphasised the presence of God's name - to move away
                    from a too literal sense of God's presence actually dwelling in the Temple.
                    The Priestly tradition spoke of god's Glory. The prophets pleaded for
                    justice as well as Temple worship,
                    the Wisdom tradition spoke of the Wisdom dwelling in Israel, while other
                    used the Targumic terms such as Shekinah, Yichra, - so prior to the first
                    century there were ongoing reflections and reinterpretations of Where can
                    God's presence be found - in Torah, in Wisdom,
                    etc. So the first century responses within Judaism and its various forms,
                    and Christianity did not occur in a vaccuum.

                    Even Pharisaic judaism is taking Temple purity and tyransfering it to daily
                    living (not that I worked on this).
                  • Thomas W Butler
                    On Mon, 23 Sep 2002 17:39:42 -0700 (PDT) Horace Jeffery Hodges ... Jeffery, Thank you for your interest and your questions. Here is a concise summary of my
                    Message 9 of 16 , Sep 26, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment
                      On Mon, 23 Sep 2002 17:39:42 -0700 (PDT) Horace Jeffery Hodges
                      <jefferyhodges@...> writes:
                      > Tom Butler wrote:
                      >
                      > "I have suggested that Jesus replaced every element of
                      > the Mosaic system of worship: the temple, the
                      > festivals of sacrifice and the temple priesthood.
                      > That is what I call the sub-plot, the hidden story in
                      > the Fourth Gospel."
                      >
                      > I'd be interested in hearing more about this. Do you
                      > mean that Jesus in John's Gospel is physically the
                      > temple, that he is the site of sacrifices, that he is
                      > the sacrifice itself, that he is all of the temple
                      > festivals, and that he is the priesthood, too? Say
                      > more.
                      >
                      > Jeffery Hodges


                      Jeffery,
                      Thank you for your interest and your questions. Here is a
                      concise summary of my theory regarding the sub-plot of the
                      Gospel According to John. For a more detailed presentation,
                      see my book Let Her Keep It, to which I have referred on this
                      list before.

                      The Fourth Gospel makes extensive use of signs, most of
                      which are names, words, symbols borrowed from the Septuagint
                      version of the Pentateuch. (I have a concordance of terms found
                      in both the Pentateuch and the Fourth Gospel. Let me know if
                      you would like to receive a copy of it.)

                      Since much of the Pentateuch concerns the temple, the
                      festivals of sacrifice and the temple priesthood, it is not surprising
                      that many of the signs used in the Fourth Gospel are borrowed
                      from Mosaic texts relating to those three categories of scripture.
                      To save space and reading time, I'll present each category
                      separately.

                      The Temple
                      The author(s) of the Fourth Gospel present(s) a clear, un-
                      ambiguous connection between the Temple in Jerusalem and
                      the Body of Jesus.
                      Jn. 2: 13-24: Jesus drives out the money changers and the
                      cattle, sheep and doves that were being sold in the temple,
                      saying, "Take these things out of here! Stop making my
                      Father's house a marketplace!"
                      He refers to the temple as his Father's (God's) house.
                      The origin of this sign is Gen. 28: 16-22 in which Jacob
                      exclaims " ... This is none other than the house of God and
                      this is the gate of heaven." He then anoints the stone upon
                      which his head had been resting while he dreamed, and
                      declares "... this stone, which I have set up for a pillar, shall
                      be God's house ..."
                      To reinforce this link to the Mosaic source of the sign, the
                      narrator of the Gospel tells the reader that the disciples
                      remembered Ps. 69: 9, which has its origin in Nu. 25: 10-13.
                      (The material link being the rare term zhlos -zeal.)
                      Jn. 2: 18-19 "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.'" A reply the Jews
                      did not understand. The narrator explains in vs. 21 "But he
                      was speaking of the temple of his body."
                      First the author(s) of the Gospel acknowledge(s) the Mosaic
                      source, authority and meaning of the sign, then transfer(s) the
                      meaning of that sign to Jesus. In this case, the house of God,
                      represented in the Mosaic tradition by Jacob's anointed stone,
                      is now represented by the (anointed?) body of Jesus.
                      The zeal which God recognized in Phinehas, leading to the
                      granting by God to Phinehas and his descendants a covenant
                      of perpetual priestood, is now recognized by the disciples in
                      Jesus. The disciples see this zeal as a sign authorizing Jesus
                      to cleanse the temple. The Jews do not.

                      Yours in Christ's service,
                      Tom Butler

                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Thomas W Butler
                      Hello Bob, I hope you won t mind if I respond to the question that you posed to Mary. As you know, I approach the issue of the temple from a different
                      Message 10 of 16 , Sep 26, 2002
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hello Bob,
                        I hope you won't mind if I respond to the question that you posed
                        to Mary. As you know, I approach the issue of the temple from a
                        different perspective.

                        On Wed, 25 Sep 2002 19:23:52 -0700 Bob MacDonald <bobmacdonald@...>
                        writes:
                        > (snip)
                        > 1. do you think that Paul or the Pauline school influenced the
                        > Johnnie school and the writer of John?

                        My suspicion is that the influence would be the other way around:
                        that the Johannine school influenced Paul (not only the Pauline
                        school).

                        While the dating of the Fourth Gospel is still a matter of debate, it
                        seems to be generally accepted (as far as my understanding goes)
                        that the Johnannine school probably existed long before the text
                        of the Gospel was "published" in the sense that it was made
                        available to persons outside of the school. Prior to that time,
                        while the school was still in existence, I believe the Fourth Gospel
                        was a work in process.

                        Of particular interest and relevance to our current discussion of
                        the temple / body of Jesus is the developed theology of Paul in
                        which he identifies the Church as the Body of Christ. I would
                        argue that the progression of that idea starts (as I have shown
                        in the message I have posted today) in the Torah with the Ladder
                        Dream of Jacob (ie: the dream that there is a place on earth
                        where one can find God - the House of God). That dream is
                        replaced in the Fourth Gospel with the idea that the body of
                        Jesus replaces the Temple in Jerusalem as the place on earth
                        where one can find God. Then Paul develops the idea further
                        in his resurrection theology, identifying the growing Christian
                        Church as the living Body of Christ in the world. There appears
                        to be a logical progression of the idea that supports my
                        contention that the influence of the Johannine community on
                        this idea preceded the developed theology of Paul.

                        > 2. why would the experience of pre-destruction first century
                        > persons lead to a redevelopment of the temple as an image
                        > and the experience of earlier generations would not?

                        As I indicated in an earlier post, some of the first century pre-
                        destruction theologians (like the Essenes) perceived the Herodian
                        Temple to be defiled (as can be seen in some of the Qumran
                        texts - ie: the commentary on Habakkuk where the High Priest is
                        called "The Wicked Priest.)"

                        [1QpHab 1.3; 8.9; 9.9; 11.4 - see Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls
                        ed. James Charlesworth, The Anchor Bible Reference Library,
                        Doubleday, 1992, p. 142]

                        Charlesworth takes pains to explain that this view was a minority
                        view, even in the pre 70 CE period. Prior to that the view of the
                        Jewish world was that the Temple was a holy place, the House of
                        God. There was, in other words, no need to "redevelop" the
                        concept of the temple when the temple was seen as holy. The
                        reason (prior to its physical destruction) to "redevelop" the idea
                        was that the temple located geographically in Jerusalem had
                        been defiled, through the influence of an evil High Priest. That
                        picture is certainly painted by the Fourth Gospel, when the
                        High Priest replaces the atonement sacrifice (two rams) with
                        the body of Jesus (John 11: 50-53) and in so doing, violates
                        the principle established by the sign given to Abraham (Gen. 22:
                        12-13) to end the practice of human sacrifice.

                        Yours in Christ's service,
                        Tom Butler

                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • John Lupia
                        Dear Mary: Unfortunately, I have not yet had a chance to see your book. Having Fr. Frank on your dissertation committee assures me the work is solid. I can
                        Message 11 of 16 , Sep 26, 2002
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Dear Mary:

                          Unfortunately, I have not yet had a chance to see your
                          book. Having Fr. Frank on your dissertation committee
                          assures me the work is solid. I can only assume at
                          this point in time that you make the distinction
                          between NAOS and hIERON, and show the syllogistic
                          iconographical transfer for NAOS (Jn 2:19-21) from the
                          "Holy of Holies" of a building of stone to the body of
                          flesh in the person of Jesus. I look forward to
                          reading your thesis.

                          With warm regards,
                          John

                          =====
                          John N. Lupia, III
                          501 North Avenue B-1
                          Elizabeth, New Jersey 07208-1731 USA
                          Phone: (908) 994-9720
                          Email: jlupia2@...
                          Editor, Roman Catholic News
                          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Roman-Catholic-News

                          __________________________________________________
                          Do you Yahoo!?
                          New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
                          http://sbc.yahoo.com
                        • Mary Coloe
                          John I do make a comment on these terms in a footnote on 73. hieron and naos can refer to the entire Temple as well as the inner sanctuary but hieron can also
                          Message 12 of 16 , Sep 26, 2002
                          • 0 Attachment
                            John I do make a comment on these terms in a footnote on 73. hieron and
                            naos can refer to the entire Temple as well as the inner sanctuary but
                            hieron can also be used for pagan shrines. According to the TDNT a clear
                            distinction is not possible but I thin that in the LXX and the 4G the terms
                            are used with precise meaning.
                            For the Jews the two terms are indistinguishable but in v. 20 the 4G it is
                            used to speak of the body of the pre-existent Word who has tabernacled in
                            human history and so can rightly be called the new Temple/House of God.
                          • Horace Jeffery Hodges
                            Dear Tom, Thanks for the further elaboration. I may have to have the library order your book so that I can see your argument in more detail. One question,
                            Message 13 of 16 , Sep 26, 2002
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Dear Tom,

                              Thanks for the further elaboration. I may have to have
                              the library order your book so that I can see your
                              argument in more detail.

                              One question, though: Do you only rely directly upon
                              the Old Testament (whether LXX or MT) or do you also
                              rely upon the Old Testament as refracted through
                              Second-Temple writings?

                              Best Regards,

                              Jeffery Hodges

                              P.S. Yes, I'd be happy to have your concordance.

                              =====
                              Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
                              Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
                              447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
                              Yangsandong 411
                              South Korea

                              __________________________________________________
                              Do you Yahoo!?
                              New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
                              http://sbc.yahoo.com
                            • Thomas W Butler
                              Hello Jeffery, The fastest and least expensive way to acquire my book is to order it directly from me. It is available on Amazon.com and through Borders
                              Message 14 of 16 , Sep 27, 2002
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Hello Jeffery,
                                The fastest and least expensive way to acquire my book is to order
                                it directly from me. It is available on Amazon.com and through
                                Borders Books, but there is a delay and they have inflated the price.
                                If you ask your librarian order a copy, feel free to give him / her my
                                e-mail address. I suspect the cost will already be inflated by the
                                cost of shipping.
                                I have relied primarily upon OT material. However, the Dead Sea
                                Scrolls do offer some different perspectives than one finds in the
                                Mosaic texts, so I am not opposed to considering such material.
                                My intent is to show that the writer(s) of the Fourth Gospel took
                                the very Greek words that are used in the LXX as oracles. Those
                                writers used that precise language as signs that allowed them to
                                make reference to a larger meaning than the words, at first glance,
                                appeared to carry.
                                Note that I am not suggesting that any meaning that a
                                contemporary reader might imagine is permitted. I am using
                                what others call a material connection between texts. The
                                meaning in the OT context is often quite clear and the word
                                that functions as a sign is frequently a rare word or a word that
                                is being used in an unusual way to convey a specific meaning.
                                Here is a copy of my concordance of Mosaic and Johannine
                                signs (attached). I'd be interesting to hear what you think of it.

                                Yours in Christ's service,
                                Tom Butler

                                On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 23:11:44 -0700 (PDT) Horace Jeffery Hodges
                                <jefferyhodges@...> writes:
                                > Dear Tom,
                                >
                                > Thanks for the further elaboration. I may have to have
                                > the library order your book so that I can see your
                                > argument in more detail.
                                >
                                > One question, though: Do you only rely directly upon
                                > the Old Testament (whether LXX or MT) or do you also
                                > rely upon the Old Testament as refracted through
                                > Second-Temple writings?
                                >
                                > Best Regards,
                                >
                                > Jeffery Hodges
                                >
                                > P.S. Yes, I'd be happy to have your concordance.
                                >
                                > =====
                                > Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
                                > Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
                                > 447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
                                > Yangsandong 411
                                > South Korea
                                >
                                > __________________________________________________
                                > Do you Yahoo!?
                                > New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
                                > http://sbc.yahoo.com
                                >
                                > SUBSCRIBE: e-mail johannine_literature-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                > UNSUBSCRIBE: e-mail johannine_literature-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                >
                                > PROBLEMS?: e-mail johannine_literature-owner@yahoogroups.com
                                >
                                > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >

                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • Bob MacDonald
                                Dear list as I look back over the summer s postings, there was a lot about flesh and blood and the words of John 6:53. I am looking forward now to a real
                                Message 15 of 16 , Oct 5, 2002
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Dear list

                                  as I look back over the summer's postings, there was a lot about flesh and
                                  blood and the words of John 6:53. I am looking forward now to a real lesson
                                  in Christology from Paul Anderson's book, but I have just finished Covenant
                                  of Blood, Circumcision and Gender in Rabbinic Judaism by Lawrence Hoffman
                                  and I found it a remarkable book on the subject of blood and symbolism in
                                  Judaism.

                                  As a result, I have written both an essay revealing the astonishing
                                  similarity of Jewish and Christian symbolism around wine and blood and a
                                  story segment set in the year 20 in Zippori, a town about 4 miles from
                                  Nazareth.

                                  If anyone is interested, you will find the essay at
                                  http://bmd.gx.ca/understanding_the_content_of_wor.htm; the story is linked
                                  at the foot of the page - it is really an integral part of the essay.

                                  Thanks for all your teaching.

                                  Bob

                                  mailto::BobMacDonald@...
                                  + + + Victoria, B.C., Canada + + +

                                  Catch the foxes for us,
                                  the little foxes that make havoc of the vineyards,
                                  for our vineyards are in flower. (Song 2.15)
                                  http://bobmacdonald.gx.ca
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.