Thanks Daniel - very interesting. I've been doing some thinking on this one (Jesus and the temple, not The Chosen). I'm interested to see that The Chosen pursues a financial and corruption discourse. I'm fascinated by the way Jesus acted as prophet, priest, and king in this event: as prophet, a mini enactment of the destruction of the temple to come; as prophet, disrupting the process and protocol of temple sacrifice; as priest, taking the prophetic stance because he is after all the true temple and true sacrifice, and the one person who can preside over that sacrifice; and as king, riding on a donkey, and doing what only kings (or would-be kings) can do, tear down and build temples (as per David and Solomon etc). The prophet-priest-king dynamic is so powerful and compelling - your thoughts? Phillip Larking
Hi Phillip, great to hear from you! I love this way of looking at it: prophet, priest, and king in the one act. I briefly encountered mentions to Jesus's prophetic role while I was doing this research but didn't engage it fully at the time. I think the reference was to the way that Jesus embodied the righteous indignation of the prophets, which the Jeremiah 7:11 reference alludes to.
We read Walter Brueggeman's "Prophetic Imagination" this semester, which explores prophetic criticising and prophetic energising as the main tasks of the prophet. In this instance Jesus is certainly following in the prophetic tradition of criticism, which is then complemented by many of his other discourses which are energising, offering hope and painting a picture of how things could be. John 4:21–24 springs to mind: "true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth" with no need of the Temple. Interesting that in John the cleansing of the Temple (criticising) happens early (ch. 2), followed by the energising in the rest of the book, whereas in the Synoptics it is largely reversed.
The king aspect is really interesting too; I hadn't considered that. I think my mind hears Temple and goes straight to "priest" 😅 There's an interesting juxtaposition between Jesus having the authority (as king) to tear down the Temple, and then those without authority tearing down the temple of his body (which he raises it up (cf. John 2:19)).
Thanks for your comment; I'll definitely keep an eye out for the prophet-priest-king dynamic going forward (although I'm not sure how deep I'll be going in these "historical context" posts).
Thanks Daniel, nice thoughts. I was listening to something by N T Wright the other day, he said something along the lines of ... the temple was only ever a sign to a greater reality. When that greater reality arrives (Jesus) you don't need the sign anymore ....
Thanks Daniel - very interesting. I've been doing some thinking on this one (Jesus and the temple, not The Chosen). I'm interested to see that The Chosen pursues a financial and corruption discourse. I'm fascinated by the way Jesus acted as prophet, priest, and king in this event: as prophet, a mini enactment of the destruction of the temple to come; as prophet, disrupting the process and protocol of temple sacrifice; as priest, taking the prophetic stance because he is after all the true temple and true sacrifice, and the one person who can preside over that sacrifice; and as king, riding on a donkey, and doing what only kings (or would-be kings) can do, tear down and build temples (as per David and Solomon etc). The prophet-priest-king dynamic is so powerful and compelling - your thoughts? Phillip Larking
Hi Phillip, great to hear from you! I love this way of looking at it: prophet, priest, and king in the one act. I briefly encountered mentions to Jesus's prophetic role while I was doing this research but didn't engage it fully at the time. I think the reference was to the way that Jesus embodied the righteous indignation of the prophets, which the Jeremiah 7:11 reference alludes to.
We read Walter Brueggeman's "Prophetic Imagination" this semester, which explores prophetic criticising and prophetic energising as the main tasks of the prophet. In this instance Jesus is certainly following in the prophetic tradition of criticism, which is then complemented by many of his other discourses which are energising, offering hope and painting a picture of how things could be. John 4:21–24 springs to mind: "true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth" with no need of the Temple. Interesting that in John the cleansing of the Temple (criticising) happens early (ch. 2), followed by the energising in the rest of the book, whereas in the Synoptics it is largely reversed.
The king aspect is really interesting too; I hadn't considered that. I think my mind hears Temple and goes straight to "priest" 😅 There's an interesting juxtaposition between Jesus having the authority (as king) to tear down the Temple, and then those without authority tearing down the temple of his body (which he raises it up (cf. John 2:19)).
Thanks for your comment; I'll definitely keep an eye out for the prophet-priest-king dynamic going forward (although I'm not sure how deep I'll be going in these "historical context" posts).
Thanks Daniel, nice thoughts. I was listening to something by N T Wright the other day, he said something along the lines of ... the temple was only ever a sign to a greater reality. When that greater reality arrives (Jesus) you don't need the sign anymore ....