John Mark Hicks

On Sunday, Jesus had entered Jerusalem triumphantly only to walk into the temple, see everything, and then go back to Bethany apparently frustrated. On Monday Jesus returned to the temple and  angrily cleansed it. On Tuesday, as Jesus taught in the temple courts, the authorities confronted him about his actions, his relation to Rome and his theology. That day Jesus exited the temple in disgust as he saw how the temple system gave status to the rich but oppressed the poor. On his way to Bethany, Jesus sat opposite the temple on the Mt. of Olives and announced a coming judgment against it.

Apparently, on Wednesday Jesus stayed in Bethany, but on Thursday evening he would again go to Jerusalem in order to eat the Passover with his disciples. But Wednesday was a significant day—a day of preparation just as Thursday was a preparation day for the Passover as Thursday evening Jesus would eat a last Passover with his disciples. Within twenty-four hours Jesus would be buried in a tomb.

Wednesday—the day Jesus does not go to Jerusalem—is ominous. The narrative heightens the tension as it begins the passion (suffering) story of Jesus. On a day when Jesus is inactive, his opponents are not. On a day when Jesus is relaxing with his disciples in Bethany, a woman recognizes the foreboding mood and anoints Jesus for his burial. On a day when the “gospel” is proclaimed by this woman, Judas makes a deal to hand Jesus over to the temple authorities. On a day when a female disciple loves Jesus, another (male) disciple betrays him. Wednesday is preparation day for the passion of Jesus.

The narrative emphasizes the action of the woman by situating it between the intent of the authorities to kill Jesus (14:1-2) and the betrayal by Judas (14:10-11). The two book-ends contextualize the woman’s gift and shape our understanding of it.

The temple authorities want to kill Jesus but they fear a riot if they move against him publicly during the festival season Jerusalem is filled with thousands of pilgrims. Presumably they were going to wait till after the Passover or perhaps they were simply looking for a more covert way of arresting him. They seized the opportunity that Judas offered them.

It is very difficult to read the motives of Judas in this “betrayal” in Mark. Judas is one of the twelve (emphasized 3x in Mark 14:10, 20, 43). It is possible that Judas was motivated by money, but it is also possible that Judas was attempting to create a climatic confrontation between Jesus and the authorities. Perhaps he was certain that Jesus would triumph and he never thought that Jesus would actually die as a result of his actions. This would explain his eventual suicide as he bore the guilt of his misconceived plan. Or, perhaps, he was a disappointed disciple who thought Jesus’ judgment against the temple and his rejection of potential revolt against Roman oppression did not fit his idea of a Davidic Messiah. Or, perhaps he was simply greedy and was disturbed by the use of the expensive oil when the woman anointed Jesus. Whatever may be the case (and at this point the text gives us very little with which to work), Judas gave them access to the private movements of Jesus. Consequently, the authorities will be able to arrest Jesus privately in the dead of night rather than publicly at the height of the festival.

Myers (Binding the Strong Man, 359) notes, quite stunningly, that this occasion is a moment when the “politically ‘least’ (women) assumes the position of the ‘greatest’” by anointing Jesus as if she were a prophet anointing a king of Israel (e.g., Samuel anointing Saul and David). She does not anoint his feet, but his head. This is, perhaps, a Messianic anointing. It is actually quite a stunning moment if we read this way.

At the same time, this acts prepares Jesus’ body for burial. It is difficult for us to imagine the fear, excitement and tension that filled Jerusalem during those days. The anger of the temple authorities was probably well-known and their intent may have been surmised by many. This woman recognizes the danger Jesus faces and perhaps anticipates a criminal death for him as criminals generally did not receive a proper burial but were thrown into common graves. She may have even heard Jesus talking with his disciples about his coming death (though there is no record that Jesus spoke of such things after his arrival in Bethany and Jerusalem). Whatever may be the case, Jesus interprets her actions as burial preparation.

Unlike the disciples, who are seemingly oblivious to the dangers Jesus faces in Jerusalem and out of tune with their master’s earlier predictions, this woman anticipates the coming days and recognizes their danger. She alone demonstrates a loving care for Jesus in the midst of his trials about which the disciples are relatively indifferent. She affirms community with Jesus and demonstrates her solidarity with the suffering servant of Israel. The disciples, on the other hand, will shortly desert their master. While the disciples miss the “gospel” in this moment, this woman does not.

Indeed, they—“some of those present”—totally miss the point as their concern is focused on the poor and the extravagance of the gift. No doubt their concern for the poor and extravagance are shaped by their time with Jesus in his ministry, his evaluation of the widow as a victim in contrast to the wealth of other temple contributors, and the tradition that during the Passover the devout share with the poor. These are legitimate concerns, but they are overshadowed by the impending death and burial of Jesus. The woman’s demonstration of loyalty and solidarity, the messianic anointing, and the preparation for burial outweigh, in this moment, gifts for the poor.

Jesus’ statement, often misunderstood as a kind of ambivalence toward the poor, simply recognizes what the Torah does (Deuteronomy 15:11)—there will always be poor. And, indeed, there are always poor because there are always oppressors of one sort or another (though there are other reasons as well why there are poor). The poor are a legitimate concern and disciples should help them whenever they can, but this woman, according to Jesus, seized the moment, saw its import, and acted to love Jesus. She perceived that Jesus’ death was imminent.

This expensive gift is both a tender moment of love and a proclamation. The woman loved Jesus in this anointing and anointed Jesus as proclamation. The significance of the gift is noted by Jesus—the woman will be remembered wherever the “gospel” is preached.

The preaching of the “gospel”—which to this point in the narrative of Mark has been about the good news of the kingdom of God—now involves the meaning of this woman’s loving act. It is the announcement of the suffering Messiah. The one who is anointed as Messiah is also prepared—in the same act—for burial. The gospel, as Mark’s narrative climaxes, also includes the heralding of the death of Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of God. The gospel bears witness to the suffering servant of Israel. The gospel includes both the announcement of the kingdom of God and the suffering of the Son of God.

Haggai’s second oracle comes to Judah on the seventh day of the Feast of Tabernacles, the next to the last day, on October 17, 520 B.C.E. The seventh month is a particularly busy one in Israel’s calendar. Besides the New Moon festival which began every month, the seventh month included both the Day of Atonement and the Feast of Tabernacles. The temple, if rebuilt, would have been the focus of each of those festivals. The timing of Haggai’s oracle may have reflected some disappointment or discouragement on the part of Judah as they struggled to rebuild the temple anew. Perhaps they remembered or longed for the days of temple-based festivals.

Nevertheless, Ezra 3:1-6 indicates that Judah had already begun to celebrate the festivals on the newly rebuilt altar even though the temple had only just begun. It had been less than a month since they had renewed the building project. Perhaps they had only cleared away the rubble, if that. The experience may have been discouraging to many, especially those who remembered the first temple. Perhaps it is at one of the assemblies of the Feast of Tabernacles that Haggai rose up before the people and delivered his message.

The message comes in two parts: (1) Be strong and do not fear for I am with you (Haggai 2:3-5), and (2) God will shake the nations to glorify his house (Haggai 2:6-9). Both parts function to encourage the people to complete the temple because God is going to do something wondrous. Haggai calls them to persevere because God is present among them and God will yet again shake heaven and earth for the sake of his people.

The first message encourages the leaders and the people to “be strong” (said three times!) No doubt, as the book of Ezra 4 indicates, they experienced some regional opposition to their task. But the primary discouragement seemed to be the meager materials with which they were then rebuilding the temple. The “former glory” of the Solomonic temple far outstripped this present project. So much so, the detractors asserted, that this temple is “nothing.”

In the face of such antagonism, Haggai—by the use of threefold rhetorical device—calls for determined implementation of the rebuilding project. “Be strong!” and “Do not fear!” This (strength and fear) is the language used to encourage Joshua (Joshua 1:6, 7 ,9) among others, but particularly it is what David said to Solomon to prepare him to build the temple (1 Chronicles 28:10, 20). Specifically, the Chronicler tells us that the Lord “strengthened” Solomon and that God was “with him” (2 Chronicles 1:1). Haggai, it appears, again draws on the building of the first temple to encourage its rebuilding. The task before the people is the same that David set before Solomon—build the house of the Lord.

As with David and Solomon, Yahweh is “with” the leaders and people of Judah. This divine presence (“my Spirit”) is covenantal and redemptive. The same God who brought Israel out of Egypt is the same God who will empower Judah to complete their task. The parallel underscores what a significant redemptive-historical moment this is in the history of Judah. God is acting once again. God is not silent and neither is God passive. God is redeeming Judah and giving his presence to his people. Judah will build the temple of “their God” (1:14).

The second message is a divine promise based on that divine presence and God’s redemptive intent. While some detractors complained that the “glory” of this new temple is “nothing” compared to Solomon’s building project, God promises to “shake” heaven and earth once again that this temple’s glory might surpass the glory of Solomon’s temple. That is an astounding hope. Could Judah possibly believe it as they watch this pauper temple rise?

At one level, Haggai promises that he will move heaven and earth to glorify his house. In particular, he will “shake the nations” so that the “desired of all the nations will come.” It appears that Haggai expects that due to God’s powerful movements among the nations that the nations will come and fill the temple with silver and gold. All wealth belongs to God, and he will shake the nations in such a way that they will bring it to the temple for the sake of the glory of this house (Darius, for example, contributed wealth to the temple, Ezra 6:8). This will be a sign that God has given “peace” to his people.

It is important to remember that the nations were moving at this time. Darius had put down a revolt in Babylon in the previous year (521) and in the next year (519) he would put down another revolt in Egypt. The nations are convulsing and the powers are writhing. In the midst of this, God will “shake the nations” so that Judah’s temple will surpass the glory of the Solomonic temple.

One can hear the hopes and expectations of the people in this promise. Nations will honor God’s temple rather than destroy it. Wealth (silver and gold) will decorate the temple once again rather than stripped from it. Judah will experience prosperity and peace as God glorifies his house. And the glory of this house will exceed that of the Solomonic one.

Did Judah ever experience such? Perhaps they did to a certain extent. The Herodian temple exceeded the Solomonic one in size and wealth. Perhaps Haggai simply envisions the renewal of temple activities in a new facility and the glory of redeemed Judah is greater in that sense than the former Israel. Whatever may be the case, Haggai uses this language to encourage Judah to complete their task. They do not labor in vain and their hope is real. God will return to his people, dwell in his temple and Judah will once again enjoy the calendar’s festivals. Judah will again renew the worship of Yahweh in a new temple and experience again the redemptive presence of God. This is not a hollow promise that is only fulfilled 500 years later. Rather, God is with his people even as their land is occupied by imperial powers…whether Persian, Greek or Roman.

But is there more? Does this language lend itself to another horizon beyond what Haggai might himself see or imagine? Some read this as Messianic. The “desired” of the nations may be Jesus and the presence that comes to the temple to bring peace is Jesus himself who himself goes to the temple. When the incarnate God entered the temple, the glory of this second house exceeded the glory of the first house.

But perhaps it is even more than this. Hebrews 12:26-27 quotes Haggai 2:6 in an eschatological context. Though the earth and the nations will be shaken, the kingdom of God cannot be shaken. Perhaps the glory of the temple actually anticipates the final shaking of heaven and earth that will usher in the new heaven and new earth as the fullness of the kingdom of God is realized upon the earth.

However we might understand a Messianic or eschatological application of this text, Haggai’s message to Judah is itself powerful. God is with you, so be strong and do not fear. God will use the nations to enrich his new temple and the glory of God will reside in it just as it did in the Solomonic temple. God will return to his people. God is “with” Judah, so “be strong” and “do not fear.”

Haggai’s first oracle, on August 29, 520 B.C.E., was directed to the governor Zerubbabel and the high priest Joshua as the royal (house of David) and priestly (house of Aaron) representatives of the people. Zerubbabel and Joshua, along with the “whole remnant of the people,” responded to Haggai by beginning work on the temple on September 21, 520 B.C.E. The first oracle began with the date of Haggai’s message and chapter one ends with the date the people resumed work—the two dates function as an inclusio so that reader maintains the intimate connection between the message and the response.

Haggai succinctly summarizes the initial response. The “whole remnant of the people…obeyed the voice of the Lord…and the people feared the Lord.” The remnant obeyed and feared; they “hear” and they “fear.”

Whereas in Haggai’s oracle Yahweh refers to the inhabitants of Judah as “these people,” now Haggai’s narrative describes them as a “remnant” and they embrace Yahweh as “their God.” This is more significant than simply “those who are remaining,” but rather echoes language from earlier prophets who spoke of a “remnant” that would come out of Babylonian exile (Jeremiah 23:3). This is theologically pregnant language for God’s faithfulness to promises of redemption. God always preserves a remnant among the people. Moreover, God promises his presence among the remnant, which is assured in this text.

This remnant is obedient and they feared Yahweh. This language combination is significant in the Hebrew Bible. They “heard” (obeyed; cf. Deuteronomy 12:28) God’s voice through Haggai and “feared” (Deuteronomy 10:12) Yahweh. The term “hear” is used 82x and “fear” 35x in Deuteronomy. The combination has a profound significance in terms of the orientation of the people (used together, for example, in Deuteronomy 13:4, 11; 17:13). While some think that “fear” here may signify that the people were motivated by Haggai’s threats, most think it reflects the larger tradition in the Hebrew Bible of reverence or awe for God. They “feared” Yahweh in the sense that they were now submissive and ordered their lives to God’s wisdom and Torah. As Deuteronomy 4:10 states, “I will make them hear my words, that they may learn to fear me all the days that they shall live.” The remnant is an obedient, God-fearing community in response to Haggai’s message.

God responds to their submissive posture. The central response is another message from Haggai, but it is very brief. It is only two words in Hebrew: “I am with you” (also in Haggai 2:4). Divine presence assures the community that God will commune with his people; it is the redemptive presence of God among them. It reminds the community that just as God was with David and Solomon in the building of the first temple, so God will be with them in its rebuilding. It also reminds the community of their long history with Yahweh:  God was “with” Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and God was “with” Moses and Israel in the Exodus and wilderness. God remains with Israel; Yahweh has not abandoned his people.

This presence, however, is more than communion; it is also empowerment. God “stirred” the spirit of the whole nation—the leaders and the people. This is a divine act which enables Judah to resume the rebuilding of the temple. This is fairly common language in the Hebrew Bible to describe how God ignites and carries through his purposes within the world. For example, God stirred upon Assyrian Emperors (1 Chronicles 5:26), the Philistines (2 Chronicles 21:16), and the Persian king Cyrus (2 Chronicles 36:22; Isaiah 13:17). God moved in the hearts of his people to give them the strength and vision to begin the task.

Submissive people experience God’s presence among them. They commune with God and God empowers them to fulfill their vocation—the mission God has given them. Judah does not rebuild the temple by their own strength or at their own initiative. God begins the good work in their hearts.

In the same way, God begins in our hearts the good work to which God had called us, and God empowers us to complete the mission to which he has called us (cf. Philippians 1:6).

May the people of God today “hear” and “fear.”  Blessed be the name of Yahweh.

The key question in reading Mark 13:24-37 is its relation to Mark 13:5-23. In the first section Jesus alerted his disciples to a coming conflagration in which they must beware of deceivers and persecutors who will attempt to enlist them in the service of the Jewish revolt of 66-70 C.E. Does Jesus continue this motif in Mark 13:24-37 or does he shift the topic to something beyond the immediate circumstances of the trials of disciples in the 30s-60s C.E.? In other words, does 13:24 introduce a new narrative horizon within the text or does it continue the previous one?

Martin Gustavo, in my estimation, has convincingly argued that a new narrative horizon arises in Mark 13:24 (Biblica 90 [2009] 457-483), and my discussion below is heavily dependent upon his work. The former horizon was an answer to a specific question. The disciples asked when the temple would be destroyed and how they might discern (“sign”) its eventuation. Jesus responded in Mark 13:5-23 with several imperatives (“watch”) and temporal qualifiers (“when you hear…when you see”). The disciples asked when will “these things” happen (13:4) and Jesus advised them about how to act when “these things” happen (13:23). Jesus identified realities that would shape their discipleship as Jerusalem fell and the temple was destroyed. He gave them “road signs” for identifying what was happening and when it would happen so that they would know what to do. Consequently, Jesus exhorts his disciples to endure to the end (13:8, 13) which is the end of the circumstances Jesus is describing, that is, the destruction of the temple. “End” in Mark 13 (the only place where it occurs in Mark) is contextualized by the narrative in which it is found. Jesus is not speaking eschatologically in Mark 13:5-23 but apocalyptically about the fall of Jerusalem. Mark 13:23 effectively ends the conversation about “these things” as if Jesus says, “now I have answered your question.”

This horizon shifts in Mark 13:24. The strong adversative signals this as well as the temporal qualifier: “but…after the tribulation…” Unlike the previous section, there are no imperatives (no second person verbs, “you…”), advice or “road signs” for this next topic. The urgency is gone and the immediacy of the circumstances is now distant. There is no more “when you see…hear” this or that, but instead a general “then” (Mark 13:26). This is a new act in the drama of redemptive history beyond the destruction of Jerusalem.

This new horizon employs startling apocalyptic language (e.g., Isaiah 13:10) and eschatological language about the coming of the Son of Man (e.g., Daniel 7:13-14). Jesus utilizes this language to speak of deliverance. In future days, days beyond the destruction of Jerusalem, when the earth is yet convulsing under the powers of the nations (such as Babylon or Rome), the Son of Man will come to gather his elect. “They” (the elect on the earth) will see the Son of Man coming with his angels and the angels will gather them from the ends of the earth. This ingathering of the elect, alluding to previous such redemptive acts by God in the history of Israel, will climax history itself as the Son of Man comes to fully reign upon the a new earth. Whereas in the previous section (Mark 13:20) God shortened the days for the sake of the elect, in this section God gathers the elect from the ends of the earth (Mark 13:27). This is not that, that is, the coming of the Son of Man here does not refer to the destruction of Jerusalem. Consequently, here Jesus lifts the eyes of his disciples beyond the horror of the destruction of Jerusalem to a future day after that destruction when the Son of Man will fully reveal himself in power and glory before the whole earth for the sake of his elect.

Gustavo argues that Mark 13:28-37 actually offers an interpretative key for seeing the two horizons—one in Mark 13:5-23 and the other in Mark 13:24-27. In the first half of this section (Mark 13:28-31) Jesus provides a “parable about knowing,” but then in the second half provides a “parable about not knowing” (Mark 13:32-37). In essence, Jesus says, “From the fig tree, learn there are signs that ‘these things’ are about to happen, but there are events for which there are no signs as even the Son of Man does not know the day when he will come.”

From the fig tree—a parable about knowing—you can know when summer is near. In the same way, by what Jesus has described the disciples can know when “all these things will happen” (Mark 13:30). “These things” put us back to Mark 13:4 and the question about the destruction of Jerusalem. Jesus predicts that “these things” (the destruction of Jerusalem—or the first horizon of Mark 13:5-23) will happen within a generation.

And, should they doubt whether the temple will be destroyed or not, Jesus reminds them that his word—his prediction—is as certain as the heavens and earth themselves. This is a word which they can believe and upon which they can act with assurance. “When you see…and when you hear…” they should do what Jesus tells them to do.

But there are future events about which no one knows the time, even the Son of Man. The parable of the gatekeeper underscores the point, that is, he does not know when the owner will return. Like the owner, the timing of the Son of Man’s appearance is unknown and indeterminate as far as anyone except the Father knows. The disciples, then, are called to be alert (the word for “watch” in Mark 14:37 is different from the word for “watch” in Mark 14:5, 9, 23). In the former horizon they could “see” when things would happen—they would see the signs, but in this situation they can only remain alert to the sudden arrival of the Son of Man.

The two parables, then, alert us to the two horizons. The fig tree parable suggests that we can know when “these things” will happen, and the disciples are to “watch” and act. But the gatekeeper parable suggests that there is no sign of the coming of the Son of Man and the disciples will joyously receive him but they are not called to act in response to the events.

The differences between the two horizons are organized in the below table.

In the first horizon, disciples “watch and act” but in the second horizon they “wait and receive.” In the first horizon, disciples reject the revolt as identical with the kingdom of God, but in the second horizon they welcome the owner (king) back to his lands (kingdom). The first has already happened, but we yet await the second, the coming of the Son of Man in all his glory and power when he will gather his elect from the ends of the earth.

The king will come home–the Son of Man will come. Consequently, disciples do not align themselves with the nations and kingdoms of this earth. The Son of Man, the owner, will return to his kingdom and disciples await the coming of their king instead of joining other kings in their wars, conquests and violence. Disciples remain alert and attentive to the coming kingdom of God.

Haggai, whose name derives from the Hebrew word for “feast” (hag), delivers this first oracle on the first day of the sixth month in the second year of Darius the Persian Emperor, that is, August 29, 520. The significance of this date is that it is the monthly New Moon festival; this was a holy day in Israel’s calendar (see Numbers 28:11-15). Every new moon, a burnt offering was offered to God as well as a sin offering along with grain and drink offerings. It was a day of assembly in Israel. It also appears to be a day when prophets were often consulted (see 2 Kings 4:23).

We might envision Haggai’s first message delivered to an assembled people who cannot offer sacrifices without a temple. It is New Moon but there is no temple. Haggai addresses this predicament. The text, more specifically, addresses the message to Zerubbabel, the governor and Joshua, the high priest. They represent, however, the people as a whole. They are Judah’s covenantal representatives.

The one for whom Haggai speaks (or, better, the one who speaks through Haggai) is “Yahweh of hosts”—a name that appears fourteen times in this brief book. Originally referring to “Yahweh of armies,” its common usage in the post-exilic period may reflect a strong contrast between the Persian Emperor and Yahweh. It is Yahweh who is Almighty and the ruler of all rather than Darius. Yahweh of hosts reigns, not Darius.

Haggai’s message easily divides into two halves as each section begins with “Thus says Yahweh of hosts” (1:2, 7). The first section (Haggai 1:27-6) begins with a description of the situation (no house for Yahweh but paneled houses for the leaders) and ends with a call to “consider your ways.” The second section (Haggai 1:7-11) begins with a call to “consider your ways” and ends with a description of the situation (a drought upon their land). Each section has a dialogue, that is, Yahweh responds to what the people are saying (1:2; 1:9b), an exhortation to “consider” (1:5, 7), and a description of the impoverished condition of the people (1:6, 11).

Whose house lies in ruins (1:2-4)?
Consider your ways (1:5-6).
Consider your ways (1:7-9a).
Whose land experiences drought (1:9b-11)?

Just as God’s house lies in ruins (hareb), so also the land lies under a drought (horeb). The two are connected; so, “consider your ways.”

“These people,” Yahweh says, don’t think it is time to build “the house of Yahweh.” It is significant that Yahweh does not say “my people” but “these people.” This is a common expression in the prophets when God distances himself from the orientation of Israel (cf. Isaiah 7:16; 8:11). Yahweh feels dishonored and ignored because the temple still lies in ruins even after it was begun in 537 B.C.E. Over sixteen years later it is as if the work has not yet even started. We might imagine the divine tone here with the opening “these people…”

“These people” think that is not yet time to build the temple of God. Throughout history, and in our own lives, we have procrastinated answering God’s call because we have thought it better to wait. “It is not yet time,” we tell ourselves. God hears the dialogue of the people and rejects it. It is not a matter of timing, God notes, but one of priorities.

Haggai contrasts the house of God with the houses of (presumably) Zerubbabel and Joshua since it is unlikely that the common folk would have paneled houses. Haggai contrasts the luxury of the leader’s homes with the ruins of Yahweh’s house. This attention to their own homes rather than God’s says something about their priorities. The leaders enjoy luxury at the expense of God’s own dwelling. One might hear in this the echoes of David and Solomon who thought it a shame that they would have a house and God did not. Zerubbabel, from the house of David, is called to emulate his ancestors and rebuild the temple.

When Haggai calls them to “consider,” he uses a verb unique to him in the Hebrew Bible (and he uses four times—1:5, 7; 2:15, 18). We may variously translate it as mediate, ruminate, reflect. The word calls for introspection and consideration of the circumstances in which they find themselves. In the words of Aretha Franklin, “you better think about what you are trying to do me?”

If they consider their circumstances, they will recognize that everything is woefully inadequate. Their wages are insufficient for their spending. They wear clothes but are still cold. They plant but harvest little. They eat but are still hungry. They never have enough. God, in effect, says, “How’s that working for you?” No temple, no serenity; no temple, no satisfaction. Why? Because God has been placed on the backburner of your lives.

In the second section (1:7-11) the echoes of David and Solomon become clearer as Yahweh calls Judah to action. Rebuild the house. No doubt this involved using the stones of the ruins but explicitly they are told to replace the wood that was burned in the Babylonian destruction of the temple.

Significantly, Yahweh tells them why the temple is important. They should build God’s house “so that” Yahweh “may take pleasure in it and be honored” or glorified. Temple is not about stroking God’s ego. Rather, it is about God’s pleasure. God enjoys the communion, the fellowship, the gathering of his people. Going to temple—going to “church” (assembly)—enriches God’s joy as God communes with his people. In this God is glorified and honored. God is no mere spectator when his people assemble but a participant in the active communion among the gathered.

Consider what you are doing, Yahweh says. You expect much but receive little. Build the temple and enjoy God’s presence once again. Build the temple, honor God and God will renew the land. For just as the house of God lies in ruins (hareb),, so your land lies under a drought (horeb).

Palestine depends on fall and spring rains to plant and harvest the crops, but the summer crops would die without the morning dew. Judah presently experiences a drought because there has been no morning dew throughout the summer. While they had hoped for a rich harvest (“much”), they will harvest little because of the drought (horeb). Why? Because the house of God lies in ruins (hareb),.

Haggai is only known outside this small prophetic work in the history of Ezra (5:1-2; 6:14). Along with Zechariah, Haggai encourages the rebuilding of the temple which is completed in 515 B.C.E. The oracles of Haggai are specifically dated to the second year of the Persian Emperor Darius which is 520 B.C.E.

The Persian context is important. Cyrus (d. 530 B.C.E.) defeated the Babylonian Empire in 539 B.C.E. who then employed a religio-political strategy that permitted exiled peoples to return to their homelands and rebuild their religious sanctuaries. Judah, exiled in Babylon, was given permission to exercise this option in 539-537 B.C.E. When Cyrus died in battle, his son Cambyses became Emperor. After securing his position, he also conquered Egypt in 525 B.C.E. which was his father’s dream. While away in Egypt, Babylon revolted and Cambyses died en route to quell the rebellion. Darius, his leading general, assumed the reins of Emperor and put down the revolt in 522-521 B.C.E. In 519-518 B.C.E., Darius would put down another revolt in Egypt. This is the same Darius whom the Greeks would defeat at Marathon on the plains outside of Athens. Darius’s son, Xerxes (486-465 B.C.E.), would also attempt an occupation of Greece in 480-478 B.C.E. but he was defeated at Salamis.

This history is the setting in which Haggai prophecies. World powers are quaking—a revolt the year before his oracles in Babylon and a revolt in Egypt the year after. Judah is like a small province caught between competing world powers—a mouse between two cats. Judah is a powerless, backwater Persian province little larger than many US counties. The world powers surround them, and we wonder what a prophet of Yahweh might say in such a situation.

Haggai’s favorite name for God is “Yahweh of Hosts” (used 14 times). Yahweh has his own armies; he commands the cosmic armies that rule the earth as the messengers of Yahweh. The Persian Emperor may think he reigns over the earth, but the Hebrew prophet knows it is actually Yahweh who does.

Haggai’s oracle calls Judah to their vocation as worshippers of Yahweh, promises blessing in the execution of their work, and calls for purity as Yahweh’s people, priests and king. Haggai’s four oracles focus on their present circumstances of failed harvest and contrasts that with the blessing of a rebuilt temple which will become again the instrument of God’s presence among them. The four dated oracles, plus a narrative response to the first, are:

1. Oracle One, dated August 30, 520 B.C.E. (1:1-11).
2. Narrative Response by Judah, dated September 21, 520 B.C.E. (1:12-1:15).
3. Oracle Two, dated October 27, 520 B.C.E. (2:1-9).
4. Oracle Three, dated December 18, 520 B.C.E. (2:10-19).
5. Oracle Four, dated December 18, 520 B.C.E. (2:20-23).

Boda (NIV Application Commentary on Haggai) argues that each of the oracles comes on a festival day in Judah when one would expect assemblies, sacrifices and celebration. But since there is no temple, there are no festivals. This may even be reflected in Haggai’s name which derives from the word for “feast” (hag).

1. Oracle One: first day of the month, a New Moon Offering, anticipating the harvest of grapes and figs.
2. Oracle Two: the twenty-first day of the month is the “penultimate [seventh]day of the Feast of Tabernacles” (Boda, 118) which celebrates the ingathering of the harvest.
3. Oracles Three & Four: a temple rebuilding ritual three months after the beginning of the work common in the Ancient Near East.

The public festivals were occasions for Haggai’s preaching. But they were also moments within the rhythm of Israel’s calendar and life that pointed toward blessing and hope. Israel will yet again celebrate the redemption of God at the temple festivals just as they had done in the past. God seeks to renew his relationship with his people and give them a future despite the recent ugly past.

Haggai assures Judah that God has not forgotten them and God intends to bless them even as the world powers around them contest each other’s reigns. Despite the chaotic surroundings of the world powers, God will reign in Judah. Ultimately, God will restore honor and glory to Judah, the dwelling-place of God, and to the Davidic house. God is not finished with Israel.

If Judah was wondering God yet loved them as they returned from exile, Haggai provides a resounding “Yes.” At the same time, Haggai calls them to their covenantal responsibilities as the people of God.

With the people of Judah, we must ask ourselves, “Will we heed the call of God for renewal, worship and life in covenant with Yahweh?”

From the day of his triumphal entry into Jerusalem where he saw everything that was happening in the temple through his cleansing of the temple and confrontation with temple authorities to his exit from the temple in disgust has led Jesus to this moment in Mark 13. Instead of sitting on the Mount of Olives and facing the temple to announce its deliverance (which many rebels and prophets, in the dark days of 66-70 C.E., thought Zechariah promised [Zechariah 14:4-6]), Jesus announces divine judgment and the temple’s destruction.

The “great buildings” of the temple will become rubble—“every one of them will be thrown down” (Mark 13:3). When several of the disciples from the intimate core of Jesus’ life—Peter, James and John with the addition of Andrew, Peter’s brother—spoke privately with Jesus, they asked: “when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are about to be fulfilled?”

In response, the Markan narrative uses an apocalyptic sermon to transition the story from the end of Jesus’s ministry to the beginning of the passion of Jesus. The sermon about the destruction of Jerusalem is the final word of Jesus on the temple authorities (which was prefigured in the parable of the vineyard owners in Mark 12:1-12). But more importantly it is an exhortation for Mark’s readers who are tempted to align themselves with the Jewish rebels in 66-70 C.E. As Ched Myers heads a section in his Binding the Strong Man (p. 331), “The revolt is not the kingdom.” Jesus-followers do not buy into the kingdom (nationalistic) aspirations of the rebels or their violent methods. Rather, to subvert Roman oppression, disciples follow Jesus to a cross rather than take up take up a sword. Disciples, Jesus urges, do not listen to the war rhetoric of nationalism but embrace the peacemaking of the kingdom of God.

Mark utilizes apocalyptic imagery and language, drawn from the Hebrew Scriptures (particularly Daniel) and other apocalyptic literature (good vs. evil dramas portrayed in symoblic imagery) that had emerged in the previous century, to picture this divine judgment and the chaos in which nations and sin involve humanity. This “little apocalypse” (also known as the Mt. Olivet discourse) describes God’s judgment of Jerusalem by the Romans but also envisions God’s deliverance of his elect. There are (apparently) two vistas in the text—the vision of Rome’s defeat of the Jewish insurrection and the vision (promise) of divine salvation from all oppression, violence and injustice.

Though highly contested, it appears that Jesus’ apocalyptic sermon falls into two distinct sections. The first (Mark 13:5-23) is focused on the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 C.E. The second (Mark 13:24-37) seems to look beyond the immediate crisis to an eschatological (“last days”) one.  Consequently, the first section references a cataclysmic event (destruction of Jerusalem) which, however, is not the end. The second section announces the end of the “last days” as an eschatological reality that follows the destruction of Jerusalem. The destruction of Jerusalem, as a significant event within God’s history with Israel, becomes a historical anticipation of the eschatological end (“last days”) itself. At least, this is one way of reading. Others, like N. T. Wright and preterists of different sorts, read the whole of Mark 13 in the light of the destruction of Jerusalem.

The fervor, excitement and fear that surrounded the Jewish revolt in 66-70 C.E. is perhaps beyond our imagination. Nevertheless, it is important to situate ourselves in that historical moment in order to appreciate the language Jesus uses in this apocalypse. Here is a summary of some of the significant events:

1. The revolt began in Jerusalem in June 66 C.E.
2. Cestus Gallus, the Roman Legate of Syria, marched on Jerusalem in November 66 C.E. to put down the revolt. Though he occupied parts of the northern city, he could not take the Temple Mount itself. He retreated to the coast and his army was decimated  by Jewish guerilla activity.
3. Jewish rebels declared the liberation of Jerusalem and Palestine. Many interpreted this as a sign of God’s favor and the coming of the kingdom of God.
4. Rome (Nero) sent Vespasian, with several legions, to put down the revolt. Beginning in Galilee in May 67 C.E., he marched to the walls of Jerusalem in June 68 C.E. But his campaign suddenly ended when he returned to Rome due to potential civil war in the capital city (Nero had died and there were competing Emperors).
5. Jewish rebels saw this as a divine intervention—God had saved the temple once again.
6. When Vespasian became Emperor, he sent Titus to lay siege to Jerusalem which began in April 70 C.E. and was successful by October 70 C.E. Throughout the siege, many “prophets” interpreted various phenomenon as signs of God’s imminent deliverance of the city, but it never came. Jerusalem fell and the temple was destroyed.

Understanding the historical moment brings Mark 13:4-23 alive. The text not only breathes the atmosphere of 66-70 C.E. but it also contains guidance for believers living in the midst of those trying days—a tribulation which had not been seen previously except in the days of Jeremiah when Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the Solomonic temple. Jesus uses apocalyptic (and hyperbolic) language to describe how horrible those days would be–nothing like it before or after.  This language is not intended to convey a fact (that is, no other day is so terrible as this one) but to ev0ke emotion, awe and watchfulness.

The structure of Mark 13:4-23 illuminates Jesus’ intent and functions as an exhortation or paransis.  His disciples are called to “watch” and they are expected to act when they hear or see something. This section is tied to the experience of the disciples regarding the destruction of the temple.  The following structure indicates the tightness of the literary unit.

Watch (blepete)! There are false Christs who deceive (13:5)

“When you hear….” (13:7) about wars, earthquakes and famines….

Watch (blepete)! They will persecute you (13:9)

“When you see…” (13:14) the abomination that causes deslotion…

Watch (blepete)! There are false Christs who deceive (13:23).

The Jewish insurrection generated an ardent expectation that the Messiah would appear. This gives teeth to Jesus’ warning that others would come and claim to be the Messiah (“I am he”). They are deceivers. Myers (p. 332) is correct to understand these deceivers in the context of “wars” where “nation will rise against nation.” Jesus is not warning against false miracle workers or diviners but rather against revolutionary militarists. When the disciples “hear” about “wars” (revolts, revolutions), those voices anticipate the first rumblings of the Jewish revolt. The deceivers will interpret the earthquakes and famines as signs of the final battle for the end. But Jesus assures them that this is not the end but only “birth pains” that shake the world prior to the “end.” The disciples should not fear or “be alarmed.” While the events “must happen,” disciples do not participate in them nor do they fear them or worry about them.

Yet their very non-participation endangers them. Jesus told his disciples to “watch” (literally, see) for the deceivers (13:5) but also “watch” (see) for the persecutors (13:9). Jewish rebels and those who support the rebellion will pursue peacemakers and disciples will suffer for their opposition to violence. The disciples do not proclaim a “gospel” that serves Jewish nationalism but rather is good news for all nations. This is the “gospel of Jesus Christ,” the good news of the kingdom that characterized Jesus’ ministry. The kingdom of God is good news, but the Jewish revolt is not and neither is the Roman claim that the Emperor is “gospel” for the Empire. Only the ministry of Jesus, which embodies the kingdom of God, secures redemption, peace and justice.

Yet, the disciples, like John the Baptist and Jesus, will be handed over to persecuting and executing authorities. The disciples will not be saved in this moment but they will find themselves arrested, tried, flogged and potentially executed. As Jesus-followers, they follow him to the cross. And this proclamation of the gospel will bring the good news to all nations. “The blood of the martyrs,” as Tertullian wrote in the late second century, “is the seed of the church.”

This political and external pressure on the Christian community will create internal dissension. Families will be torn apart as children rebel against their parents who are then executed; brothers will betray brothers and some will die. “Everybody” will “hate” the disciples because they do not participate in the nationalistic fervor of the Jewish rebellion and they Romans suspect they are Jewish insurrectionists.

“When you hear” about wars, Jesus counsels calm, determination and faith. “When you see” the abomination of desolation, Jesus counsels them to act, that is, to flee to the mountains. They are to flee rather than fight! Disciples should leave Jerusalem because what is about to happen is so cataclysmic that it is incomparable or unimaginable. The counsel to flee is urgent—leave without your cloak and don’t enter the house to take anything. The counsel to flee is desperate—pregnancy will be a hindrance rather than a blessing in that moment. Pray that this will happen in the summer because swollen streams and cold in the winter rainy season would hinder their flight.

But what is it that they might “see”? What is the trigger for flight? Mark is not explicit; he is intentionally cryptic. The reader must discern his meaning which assumes some context, narrative or worldview that informs interpretation. Further, there is a reason Jesus and Mark are not very explicit—their language was treasonous. Too explicit and Mark’s Gospel would have created extra difficulties for believers with a copy.

The “abomination of desolation,” dependent upon Daniel 9:26, 11:30-32 and 12:11, triggers flight. In Daniel this language describes the destruction of the sanctuary by pagans (Gentiles) along with the cessation of sacrifices. It appears that Jesus counsels his disciples to flee Jerusalem when they see Roman armies approaching who will actually fulfill the words of Jesus that not one stone of the temple buildings will be left upon another.

Though cataclysmic and devastating on an unimaginable scale, Jesus assures the disciples that it will be brief. God will shorten those days for the sake of the elect. When the Roman armies arrive to lay siege to Jerusalem, the end of the temple is near and it won’t take long.

But will not God intervene, perhaps at the last moment, to save the temple? False messiahs and false prophets will interpret signs and claim miraculous interventions to that effect, but the words of Jesus remain—the temple will be destroyed. Consequently, Jesus again (the third time!) tells them to “watch” (see). The disciples have been properly warned and now they must “watch and pray” for the coming trial.

Don’t be deceived. The temple will fall. Don’t join the ranks of the rebels but suffer the hardship of a Christ-follower. Jerusalem will fall. Watch but don’t be afraid and don’t worry. God has shortened the days so that the trial will be brief.

I wonder what Jesus might counsel today when many of his disciples are urged to embrace nationalism, participate in war-making, and submit the good news of the kingdom to the good news of an empire.  It has happened repeatedly thorughout the history of the church–from Constantine to Nazi Germany.  The agenda is often still the same though the players, purposes and circumstances change.

May God have mercy.

My Wednesday evening class–about 25 of us on average–have walked through Zechariah together. We began in January and finished Zechariah 14 last week (May 16). They are a patient bunch! It has been an exciting ride. The good news present in Zechariah is tailored for a disappointed people. Their hopes, dreams and expectations had not been fulfilled. Though returned to the land, they still lived in exile in several senses (especially under pressure from the surrounding nations and existing as a backwater province of the Persian Empire).

While we noted the Messianic and Eschatological (“last days”) allusions and hopes throughout the book, it was important to read the whole before offering any definitive interpretations. In particular, the question is what the promises and when and where will they find their fulfillment? Before moving to that question, first, a brief summary of Zechariah 9-14.

Summary of Zechariah 9-14

The basic theme is the establishment of the reign of Yahweh over the whole earth (14:9), inclusive of the house of David and Jerusalem as God’s dwelling place (12:7-9) to which the nations come (14:16-19). This will involve the deliverance of Israel from exile and oppression through restoration to their land (9:1-8, 14-17; 10:6-12) while at the same time defeating the nations that oppose God’s reign (12:4-5). Both the nations and the worthless shepherds (leaders) of Israel are judged (10:3; 11:4-6). Israel will be cleansed (13:1-6) and Jerusalem plundered (14:1-2). In the process of this establishment of Yahweh’s reign, his appointed leader (the Messianic shepherd from the house of David) is received (9:9), rejected (11:4-17; 12:10) and then reappears (12:7-9) to inaugurate the fullness of the reign of God over the whole earth. On that day—when Yahweh stands on the Mount of Olives—there will be no night, no drought, no curse, and no barriers to entrance into Jerusalem (14:4-15). On that day, the nations will come to Jerusalem to worship and everything will be inscribed “Holy to the Lord” (14:16-21).

Interpretative Options

It is difficult to reduce different ways of reading Zechariah 9-14 to brief summaries. Hopefully these summaries are generally accurate though particular representatives may vary to one degree or another. In general, I see six major ways of reading Zechariah 9-14 in terms of attempting to answer the questions of what, where and when.

1. The text addresses a contemporary situation that the prophet expects to be resolved in his own context. Consequently, the text might be read as a piece of Jewish nationalistic hopes that might find expression in the Maccabean period or some failed hope in the Persian or Hellenistic periods. (Historical Criticism)
2. The text is fulfilled in the ministry and passion of Jesus who comes as Messiah to cleanse and liberate Israel.  However, this liberation is not a nationalistic one but rather the renewal of Israel that establishes a community inclusive of the nations. Consequently, the passage is fulfilled in the Church and there are no Jewish nationalistic hopes entailed. (Amillennialism)
3. Including point 2, the text also describes the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 C.E. by the Romans and the resultant expansion of the Church throughout the world (nations). The New Jerusalem is interpreted as the Church. (Preterism)
4. Without denying 2 or 3, the text also describes a historical period of the Church prior to the second coming of the Messiah where the Church triumphantly reigns in the world—a kind of Golden Age of the Church which will precede the second coming of Christ. (Postmillennialism)
5. Though there is some sense in which 2 & 3 are true, the text ultimately describes the last days when God will revive nationalistic Israel and it will come under attack from the nations. But God will deliver Israel by the second coming of Christ and inaugurate a thousand-year reign upon the earth from Jerusalem with a rebuilt temple. (Premillennialism)
6. Understanding 2 and 3 as the first or initial stage of (“already”) fulfillment, the text also anticipates the (“not yet”) new creation when God will recreate the heavens and earth as new and the New Jerusalem will descend to the new earth within which God and Christ will reign forever with the resurrected saints. (New Creationism)

Hermeneutical Lens for the Early Church

As a Christian reader of Zechariah and one committed to the story narrated in the Gospels and Epistles, it is important for me to hear how the New Testament reads Zechariah 9-14. Mark Black, my colleague at Lipscomb University, wrote his dissertation on how the Gospels read Zechariah 9-14.  He summarized his conclusion in this way:

“What the early church discovered after being led to Zech. 9-14 is a whole eschatological schema which involved the sending of the messiah; his subsequent rejection, suffering, and death; the repentance, cleansing, and restoration which would follow the death; and the resurrection of the saints which would follow in the messianic kingdom.” (Mark Black, “The Rejected and Slain Messiah Who Is Coming with His Angels: The Messianic Exegesis of Zechariah 9-14 in the Passion Narrative” [Ph.D., Emory University, 1990], 239.)

Early Christians used Zechariah 9-14 as a lens through which to understand and interpret the story of Jesus. They saw him as the triumphal king riding into Jerusalem on a donkey, but also the rejected shepherd who was pierced (killed). They also saw Jesus as the king who would inaugurate the reign of Yahweh upon the earth and return to deliver Jerusalem from the nations. They saw Jesus as both a historical (one who rode a donkey into Jerusalem and was killed by the authorities) and an eschatological (one who would bring the “last days” and ultimately the fullness of the Messianic kingdom) figure–though we don’t want to make that distinction a radical one.

The two charts below identify Gospel and Revelation texts that (1) understand the story of Jesus in the Gospel through the lens of Zechariah 9-14, and (2) understand the eschatological goal (“the end”) through the lens of Zechariah 14. The first chart establishes that early Christians believed the ministry and passion of Jesus were “fulfillments” of Zechariah 9-14.  The second chart establishes that Revelation understood Zechariah 14 in particular as “fulfilled” in the age to come, that is, the new age of the new heavens and new earth in the New Jerusalem.

I advocate interpretative option six though not with any absolute certainty. It seems to me that, though the drama began with the ministry and passion of Jesus, the ultimate hope in Zechariah 9-14 is yet future. In the New Creation, the living water of the New Jerusalem will nourish the earth and the nations will come to Jerusalem to worship–a time of healing for the nations.  The name of God will be inscribed on every forehead. God will reign over the whole earth from Jerusalem.

Zechariah 9-14 and the Story of Jesus[1]

Zechariah 9-14 and Revelation

Reading Zechariah 9-14 with Two Vistas:

1. The first vista is the ministry, passion and resurrection of Jesus (first chart). The church understood that Zechariah 9-14 was enacted in some form in the story of Jesus. This inaugurated the “last days” (the eschatological age).
2. The second stage is the second coming of Jesus to bring the New Jerusalem to the new earth under the new heavens as anticipated in Revelation 21-22 (second chart). This consummates or ends the “last days” (the eschatological age).

After Jesus cleansed the temple, he was incessantly confronted by temple authorities and other leaders within the Jewish community. They peppered him with questions hoping he might say something that might undermine his popularity with the people or endanger his life from the Romans. Eventually, however, they backed off, and now Jesus becomes more proactive. He goes on the offensive.

This section is the backend of the “temple narrative” which began when Jesus entered the temple on the day of his triumphal entry, looked around and went back to Bethany (Mark 11:1-11). The next day he exercised his kingdom authority by clearing the temple of exploitive merchandisers. Now at the end of this narrative, where Jesus is teaching in the temple courts, Jesus asserts his authority and compares his ministry with the temple authorities. In other words, the Son has come to assess how the vineyard is being run and his judgment is that the authorities should be replaced. This involves, ultimately, purifying the temple, that is, the destruction of the temple (Mark 13) and building a new one (resurrection).

This section (Mark 12:35-13:3) hangs together as Jesus’ proactive judgment against the temple complex. The discussion of Psalm 110 (Mark 12:35-37) asserts his authority over the temple, the contrast between the scribes and the widows asserts his judgment against the ruling class (Mark 12:38-44), and the announcement of the temple’s destruction asserts his judgment against the temple itself (Mark 13:1-3). There are several literary clues that connect these three episodes into one story, one judgment, which justifies the cleansing of the temple that occurred on the previous day.

The first episode, the question about Psalm 110, answers the temple authorities’ original question in Mark 11:28: “by what authority are you doing these things”? In other words, who gave you the right to cleanse the temple? Jesus’ response is essentially that while the Messiah is a descendent (“son”) of David, the Messiah is also much more, that is, he is David’s “Lord.”

Psalm 110 was often read in a Messianic way by Second Temple Judaism. The question Jesus raised is the juxtaposition of two assertions: (1) Psalm 110 is Messianic and (2) the Messiah is a “son of David.” Psalm 110 is an enthronement Psalm. The exalted king will reign until all enemies are crushed and the nations are judged. Further, he will function as a priest like the royal Melchizedek in Genesis 14. Psalm 110 envisions a royal priesthood that defeats the enemies of God as a warrior King.

By quoting Psalm 110, Jesus asserts his Messianic authority to judge God’s enemies, including the temple authorities. Thus, he has authority to cleanse the temple. He does this not only as David’s son, but also David’s Lord. The enthronement scene, which is interpreted elsewhere in the New Testament in terms of the resurrection and ascension of Jesus to the right hand of God, envisions the reign of the Messiah in a new temple which is the temple of Jesus’ own resurrected body. Jesus is more than a son of David; he is (will be) the resurrected Lord of the earth who defeats all the enemies of God, including death. By quoting Psalm 110, Jesus anticipates his own resurrection and thus the rebuilding of the temple in his own body.

The second episode employs a strong contrast between wealth and poverty. It is difficult to decide whether Mark 12:38-40 is an independent saying or whether it should be closely aligned with Mark 12:41-44. I assume that they contextualize each other, that is, Mark combines these in order to strengthen the contrast between the wealthy, favored scribes and the poor, oppressed widows.

The scribes are described not only as those who are noticed and “first,” but also those who “devour widow’s houses.” Their dress (usually long white robes) identified them, their prayers were long to demonstrate their knowledge and erudition, and they were noticed (greeted) in the marketplace. They were the center of attention and they were honored with “first place” (proto). They were “first” in the synagogue (protokathedrias) and at meals (protoklisias). Culture exalted them and everyone wanted to appear with them.

But they exploited widows! What does Jesus mean by this statement? Within the narrative it prepares us for the contrast between the rich and the widow, but it also alerts us to Jesus’ critique of the temple complex. The temple economy, in some way, exploited widows; it placed a burden on widows that oppressed them.

How did the temple complex exploit widows? Some suggest that scribes were often given trusteeship over widow’s estates. Since women could not administer it for themselves, scribes were given the task. This, of course, had tremendous potential for abuse. Others, and this seems more likely, suggest that the contrast between abuse and prayers indicates that this was a temple problem. Perhaps the excessive costs of maintaining the temple devoured the resources of the poor. The economy of the temple, then, is Jesus’ point of attack just as it was when he cleansed the temple. The temple was supposed to be a house of prayer rather than a means of economic exploitation.

This exploitation is illustrated in the contrast between the contributions of the wealthy out of their abundance and the meager contribution of the poor widow. Read in this way, the story about the widow is not so much a praise for how the poor give all they have but rather a lament that the temple economy exploits such widows while the rich give out of their abundance (cf. Wright, CBQ [1982], 262]. When Jesus sat “facing” the temple treasury—which consisted of thirteen trumpet-shaped chests in the Court of Women—this signals that he intends to scrutinize (etheorei) this economic activity.

The Jesus’ saying, emphasized by calling his disciples to him (their first appearance since Mark 11:27) and introduced by “Amen” solemnity, draws a stark contrast between the many rich who give out of their abundance and the single poor widow who gives out of her poverty. The rich given abundantly, but the widow gives everything, which is nothing more than the smallest valued coins in Palestine. Practically, she gives nothing but yet she gives everything. The rich continue to be rich but the widow now has nothing. The temple complex, a place of prayer, devours widows! The widow is a victim of the system that imposes duties on her for the sake of supporting the temple complex. The economic system oppressed the widows while it empowered and gave status to the rich. Churches and televangelists do the same when they extract gifts from the poor to support their wealthy structures.

In the third episode, Jesus exits the temple which alerts us to the conclusion of the controversy narrative (Mark 11:27-12:44). His exit may be interpreted as an act of disgust as if he is done with the temple. He does not return to it in Mark’s narrative. This disgust contrasts with the marvel of his disciples who are impressed with the size of the Herodian stones and the beauty of the temple complex.

But Jesus is in no mood to revel in the beauty of the buildings. Jesus recognizes their “greatness,” but he is unimpressed. He knows the future of these stones. The Herodian temple will be destroyed. Jesus announces the divine judgment to his disciples. Just as in the days of Nebuchadnezzar, so in the days of Roman oppression, the temple is given over to destruction. God will judge the tenants of his vineyard and destroy the temple.

Exiting the temple and crossing the Kidron Valley to ascend the Mount of Olives, Jesus sat opposite the temple. The narrative stressed the determined attitude of Jesus. He sat facing (katenanti) the temple (Mark 13:3) just as he sat facing the temple treasury a few moments earlier (Mark 12:41). This is a dramatic moment in the Markan narrative. He “faces” the temple—he looks it in the eye, discerns its evil and repudiates it.

It is a settled conviction. Judgment is coming. He has prefigured it in the cleansing of the temple, he announced it through the cursing of the fig tree, and now he will tell his disciples the story of temple’s horrid end.

This is the climax, as well as the conclusion, of message of Zechariah.It is the “mountain top” of Zechariah.

The first half of Zechariah promised God’s return to Jerusalem through the rebuilding of the temple (Zechariah 1-8; cf. 2:5). The eight visions promised renewal and prosperity for Judah and Jerusalem. But it also envisioned a time when the nations would live among the children of Jacob and know Yahweh (cf. Zechariah 2:11). The first half ends with nations coming to Jerusalem to know God (Zechariah 8:20-23).

The second half of Zechariah describes a day when Ephraim and Judah will fully inherit and inhabit the land promised to Abraham (Zechariah 9-14). Though Yahweh refines and purifies Israel through judgment, ultimately Yahweh will come to Jerusalem, defeat the nations and Yahweh will reign over the whole earth. This second half of Zechariah ends on the same note as the first half as the nations come to Jerusalem to know God (Zechariah 14:16-19).

In particular, on that day—an apocalyptic, eschatological day—Yahweh will pour out grace on Israel (12:10), rid the land of idolatry and false prophets (13:2, 4), stand on the Mount of Olives to level the hills of Judah and exalt the holy hill of Zion (14:3-5), rid the creation of darkness (14:6-7), water the land with a river flowing from Jerusalem (14:8-9), and reign “over the whole earth” (14:10). With the nations (evil) defeated and Jerusalem secured, Yahweh invites the “survivors from all the nations” to rest in the divine presence (14:16-21).

The survivors, presumably those who turned to God in the preceding drama, will make an annual pilgrimage to Jerusalem “to worship the King, Yahweh Almighty.” The whole earth now worships the God of Israel. This even includes Egypt (Zechariah 14:18). The echoes of the Exodus and the plagues upon Egypt in Zechariah 14:12-14 are now transformed into the gracious invitation and hope that Egypt will participate in the worship of Yahweh. This is a total reversal—Egypt comes to Jerusalem!

The climactic rhetoric of Zechariah 14:16-21 pictures a celebrative festival at Jerusalem to which the whole earth is invited. In fact, the specific feast is identified—it is the Feast of Tabernacles. Sometimes called the “feast of booths” because Israel lived in tents during the feast as a reminder of their wanderings in the wilderness, the festival was a time of rejoicing and gratitude.

The Feast of Tabernacles celebrates God as both Creator and Redeemer. Worshiping the Creator, the Feast rejoices over the fall harvest and thus acknowledges God as the provider of that harvest (Deuteronomy 16:13-17). But the Feast also anticipates the fall plantings and a harvest from the winter crop (which is celebrated at Pentecost). Consequently, the festival may have employed water rituals that involved prayers for rain as rain is necessary for the survival of crops in a land without irrigation (cf. John 7:38). Yahweh provides the rain (not Baal!). Rain was even necessary for Egypt since a drought in the southern highlands would prevent the flooding of the Nile. Rain here, however, may only symbolize the blessings of God in the land since living water now flows from Jerusalem itself. Whatever the case, the Festival expresses gratitude to the Creator who provides in this new day just as God did in the wilderness and as God did in creation.

The feast also celebrated Yahweh as Redeemer. For Israel the Feast of Tabernacles reminded Israel that God had delivered them from Egypt (Leviticus 23:39-43). Israel was freed from Egyptian slavery and now the whole earth has been liberated from the rule of the nations. The nations, though they exist presumably as ethnic groups, no longer reign; Yahweh reigns.

During the time of Nehemiah and Ezra, the Torah was read during the Feast of Tabernacles (Nehemiah 8:14-18). This not only informed the worshippers but it was also a renewal of their covenant with God. Just as Israel heard the law and agreed to keep it at Mount Sinai (Exodus 24), so at the Feast of the Tabernacles Israel again renews their allegiance to Yahweh alone. Astoundingly, now the nations will hear the law, enter into covenant with God and worship Yahweh. They will now participate in and become part of the story of Israel.

That day is a new day. When Egypt and all the nations come to Jerusalem, it is a new day. This newness spreads throughout the whole of life. “Holy to the Lord” becomes the common inscription, not only on the High Priest’s head plate (Exodus 28:36-38), but upon every cooking pot in the temple, even every pot in Jerusalem and Judah itself.

The Feast of Tabernacles involved fellowship offerings where the sacrifices offered were eaten at a meal by the worshippers (pictured in this text as boiled in the cooking pots). The need for cooking utensils would have been huge (the temple had an eating area for the priests, cf. Ezekiel 46:21-24), and every cooking utensil is deemed holy, that is, dedicated to the Lord. This is actually the breakdown of sacred and secular. When Yahweh reigns over the whole earth, everything is “Holy to the Lord.”

And the unclean become clean. Just as in creation there was no distinction between ritually clean and unclean animals, so in this new day there are no unclean animals. This is expressed by the opening note that even the “bells of the horses” will be inscribed “Holy to the Lord.” The horse, according to Leviticus (11:1-8), is an unclean animal, but it is no longer. On this day, it is holy to the Lord.

As the whole of Jerusalem and Judah is identified as “Holy to the Lord,” it is expected that nothing unholy would be found there. Consequently, “on that day, there will no longer be a Canaanite in the house of the Lord Almighty.” The term “Canaanite” might refer to the ethnic group that Israel displaced in the Joshua Conquest, but it is more likely referring to a merchant class. This epitaph was used to describe (dishonest?) traders (cf. Hosea 12:7; Zephaniah 1:11; Zechariah 11:7; Isaiah 23:8; Prov. 31:24) and here used to refer to merchandisers within the temple complex. In other words, (dishonest?) traders will no longer participate in the temple business. There is no need; God will provide. Everything is “Holy to the Lord.”

The new day will sanctify all of Jerusalem and Judah. The nations will come to worship Yahweh and celebrate God’s goodness as Creator and Redeemer. Unclean will become clean, and everything is deemed “Holy to the Lord.” Everything belongs to Yahweh since Yahweh reigns over the whole earth.

When will these things be? Or, are they now? Or, have they already been?  Next post, please.