In the Temple
The ‘Olivet Discourse’ is the last recorded block of Christ’s teachings. It was given on the Mount of Olives following a series of confrontations with the Temple authorities. His controversies with the religious leaders of Israel set the stage for his trial and execution. What transpires began in the Temple, but ends on Calvary.
Because of the treachery of the Temple authorities,
as well as the failure of the nation to produce the required “fruit,”
Jesus declared that the “kingdom of God will be taken away from you and
given to a nation producing its fruit,” a judicial pronouncement that
pointed to the coming judgment of the Temple - (Matthew 21:43-44).
Since the first hour when he entered
Jerusalem, the Messiah of Israel experienced ever-growing conflicts with the
leaders of Second Temple Judaism.
THE WIDOW’S MITE
His last act in the Temple occurred while
he was “seated over against” the Treasury. The clause translates the
Greek preposition katenanti, a rare term in the New Testament that
occurs once more in the next paragraph. And not coincidentally, when Jesus was
“sitting over against the Temple on the Mount of Olives.”
- (Mark 12:41-44) – “And taking his seat over against the treasury, he was observing how the multitude was casting in copper into the treasury, and rich men were casting in much. And there came one destitute, a widow, and she cast in two mites, which are a farthing. And calling near his disciples, he said to them: Verily, I say to you, this destitute widow more than they all have cast in, of those casting into the treasury; for they all, out of their surplus, cast in, but she, out of her deficiency, all, as much as she had, cast in, the whole of her living.”
The poor widow provides a contrast with the
preceding paragraph when Jesus chastised the “scribes” who, for a
pretense, “devoured widows’ houses.”
From his position, sitting “over against” the Treasury, he warned that the “scribes” would receive a “more surpassing judgment,” just as later while sitting “over against” the Temple, he pronounced the destruction of the Temple.
There were thirteen trumpet-shaped
receptacles in the treasury near the court of women for depositing
offerings. Jesus observed this impoverished woman donating two copper coins
or lepta, small coins worth about a sixty-fourth of a denarius each.
A single denarius was
equal to the daily wages of a day laborer. For all intents and purposes, her
gift was worthless, infinitesimally small.
She gave a freewill offering that she was
not obligated to give. She could have given half or just one of her two small
coins, and still, she would have given “more” than the rich, for “they
all out of their surplus gave, but she out of her deficiency, all as much as
she had, the whole of her living.”
TEMPLE JUDGED
Then Jesus left the Temple complex for the last time. His departure symbolized
his final break with the religious authorities of Israel. The entire complex
was enormous, covering approximately one-sixth of the city.
- (Mark 13:1-4) - “And as he was leaving the temple, one of his disciples said to him, ‘Teacher, see what manner of stones and what manner of buildings!’ And Jesus said to him, ‘Are you beholding these great buildings? In nowise shall there be left here a stone upon stone, which shall in any wise not be thrown down.’ And as he was sitting on the Mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew were questioning him privately, ‘Tell us, when these things shall be, and what will be the sign when all these things are going to be concluded?’”
In Mark's gospel aacount, the disciples are admiring
the great and beautiful stones used to build the complex. The irony is that
Jesus has just praised the widow who gave out of her deficiency, yet the disciples
are judging according to the ways of man.
He responds to their admiration of the
Temple by asking, “Do you behold these great buildings? In nowise will
there be left here a stone upon stone.” In the Greek text, Jesus
uses the demonstrative pronoun houtos or “these,” and
here it is emphatic.
Jesus uses the very words of his disciples
in his pronouncement, “buildings” and “stone.” The only antecedent
in the paragraph for “these” is the Temple complex, therefore, the only
Temple to which his words can possibly refer is the one that was standing in
his day. Grammatically, it cannot refer to any other structure.
The summit of the Mount of Olives was
higher than the walls of the city and would have afforded an excellent
view overlooking the Temple buildings, including the inner sanctuary.
His posture of “sitting” points to his authority. The prediction of the Temple’s demise prompts the disciples to ask - “When these things shall be, and what [will be] the sign when all these things are going to be concluded?”
Once again, the English term “these
things” translates the Greek demonstrative pronoun houtos, and it
can only refer to the predicted destruction of Herod’s Temple. Thus, at least
in part, the discourse that follows concerns events that will precede the
destruction of the Temple, and that occurred as predicted in A.D. 70.
The disciples ask him two questions.
First, when (pote) will the destruction of the Temple
occur? Second, what will be the “sign” (sémeion) when all these
things will be “completed.”
“Completed” translates the
Greek term suntelō, meaning “to complete, to bring to an end, to
conclude, consummate.” This suggests the Temple’s destruction is foreshadows something
additional, though the two events are closely related.
Regardless, his pronouncement cannot refer
to any Temple other than the one standing in his day. Any attempt to make this
a judicial pronouncement on a yet future Temple violates the literary context
and the grammatical structure of the Greek sentence.
Thus, his ‘Olivet Discourse’ opens with a
judicial sentence on the Temple by Israel’s own Messiah.
