And he went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold therein, and them that bought; saying unto them, It is written, My house is the house of prayer: but ye have made it a den of thieves. And he taught daily in the temple. But the chief priests and the scribes and the chief of the people sought to destroy him, and could not find what they might do: for all the people were very attentive to hear him.
-Luke 19:45-48
The cleansing of the Temple appears in all four Gospels; this event is of great significance in Christian thought. At the time, Jesus’ disciples, who did not yet understand His impending crucifixion and resurrection, interpreted it as a sign of the same kind as the triumphal entry on Palm Sunday. They believed that Jesus’ purification of the Temple indicated He would openly take up the mantle of Israel’s king, and begin the Messianic Age, ruling from Jerusalem. Consider these verses from Malachi.
Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the LORD, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts. But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner’s fire, and like fullers’ soap: and he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness. Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the Lord, as in the days of old, and as in former years.
-Malachi 3:1-4
But the leadership, mostly Sadducees, was unwilling. Jesus would go on to fulfil His mission, but the Temple would be destroyed and Israel’s exile prolonged. It is important to remember in all of this that the Temple was a reminder of past glories and a symbol of hope for the future. In the days of Solomon, the Shekinah Glory, the Presence of God, dwelled in the Holy of Holies.
And it came to pass, when the priests were come out of the holy place, that the cloud filled the house of the Lord, so that the priests could not stand to minister because of the cloud: for the glory of the Lord had filled the house of the Lord. Then spake Solomon, The Lord said that he would dwell in the thick darkness.
-1 Kings 8:10-12
But the Glory departed.
Then the glory of the Lord departed from off the threshold of the house, and stood over the cherubim. And the cherubim lifted up their wings, and mounted up from the earth in my sight: when they went out, the wheels also were beside them, and every one stood at the door of the east gate of the Lord’s house; and the glory of the God of Israel was over them above.
-Ezekiel 10:18-19
The Glory had not returned when the Temple was rebuilt in the time of Zerubbabel and his successors. But the LORD Himself came on the day that Jesus entered the Temple. He proclaimed that His body was a temple, that it would be destroyed and rebuilt on the third day, a reference to His crucifixion and resurrection (John 2:19-22).
All Along the Watchtower 
What do you make of the chronological point of the cleansing? Is it early in Jesus’ ministry as John records three different Passovers?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Not to try to answer for Nicholas, Phillip, but it seems to me that it is the one, same passover of the Jews, just as the Eucharist is the one, same sacrifice (Passover) for us Catholics. At the seder the Jewish father always said this:
Exodus 13:8 Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSVCE)
8 And you shall tell your son on that day, ‘It is because of what the Lord did for me when I came out of Egypt.’
He did not speak in an historical sense but in a real presence of that historical Passover. This is brought up quite well in the video I just posted by Dr. Brant Pitre. If you did not read the book, this video is the next best thing . . . and a good entry to think upon during Holy Week.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Also, you find this in Jewish writings: “In every generation a man must so regard himself as if he came forth himself out of Egypt, for it is written… [Exod 13:8]. Therefore we are bound to give thanks….” (Mishnah Pesahim 10)
LikeLiked by 2 people
I believe John is reporting the same event as the Synoptics, but has placed it at the start of his Gospel for theological and literary reasons. If we accept that John’s Gospel was written later than the Synoptics, then it is reasonable to assume that John is treating his audience as familiar with that material. His Gospel is intended as a deeper commentary on the significance of Jesus’ life, whereas the others are biographies, and biographies tend to be linear in their chronologies (except when foreshadowing or alluding to something that the audience is already expected to know, because it is already famous – e.g. Winston Churchill’s “we will fight them on the beaches”).
LikeLiked by 1 person
BXVI and Fulton Sheen in their treatments of Jesus in biography present the three Passovers and the Temple cleansing as different events, which is why I asked thoughts here on the topic. In my mind, the Synoptics use, especially Luke, the journey to the mountain top of Jerusalem for the Passion. If Jesus is presented in Jerusalem earlier in the narrative it takes away that motif; however, is it possible for Mark to be motivated for theological reasons and Matthew and Luke to have elaborated on their source? Of course, this depends on your position of Gospel priority.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The message will be tailored to various audiences as well, which has often been said. Luke seems to emphasize the break with the religious authorities and the exile of Israel more than Matthew, and this fits with Acts and the Pauline literature: Luke is underlining Paul’s point that Israel has been set aside until the full number of Gentiles has come in. Matthew, on the other hand, seems less intent on provoking the Jews to jealousy, and instead pursues the fulfilment of prophecy approach more than Luke does. This makes sense as Luke’s audience cannot be expected to have the same level of familiarity with the Tanakh as Matthew’s (if the hypothesis of their different audiences is correct – problems with circular reasoning here). John, more than the others, is emphasizing Jesus as the Angel of the Lord, which is why his Gospel draws a lot on the theophanies of the Torah (although you need to be well-versed to spot these because he doesn’t directly reference or quote the passages as much as Matthew does). If we treat Mark as an amanuensis, to some extent, for Peter, and as “the first on the scene”, then his emphasis seems to be on getting the essentials down. This has a bearing on the Olivet Discourse: if Mark thought it was worth putting in his Gospel, then he/Peter thought it was important.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Your comment actually reminds me of a thought of mine during the Passion account at Mass this last Sunday.
It’s interesting in Mark’s account in the garden that he doesn’t name who cut the ear off of the servant. If this is Peter’s account, is Peter ashamed and did not include? If Mark is the man who ran away naked, wouldn’t he know? Is Mark protecting Peter’s reputation, something that John would have witnessed and realizes he doesn’t need to do in his account?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I suppose these questions are unanswerable, but it is an interesting hypothesis. The inclusion of embarrassing material generally is a good argument that the Gospels were not fabricated, since in the Mediterranean world, it would be unwise to include these things. We have to be careful not to retroject our values of modesty and honesty onto that culture. We have those concepts precisely because Christianity won.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nicholas, I am sorry to have stepped on your post by posting the video of Dr. Brant Pitre although it is, in its own way, of similar importance about what Christ was doing . . . from a Jewish perspective. Hopefully, you will find this video very interesting as I did.
LikeLiked by 1 person
No problem, Scoop. I’ll have a look at them in a second. In any case, it is good to have as many contributors as possible, since it is difficult for any one of us to commit to posting every day.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, I didn’t see your post until it was too late. Anyway, they sort of go together if you have a mind or eye to see it in this way.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Scoop, I’ve recently been reminded of the “three days of darkness” prophecy: do you know of any good books from both Catholic and Protestant authors dealing with this topic?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m no expert as the prophecy came from personal revelations. http://www.ewtn.com/v/experts/showmessage.asp?number=326829
There is a lot of speculation and what comes with that is a lot of misinformation as well. Some have it that Padre Pio predicted this as well . . . which many debunk. The most famous of these apparitions is probably that of Garabandal as these seers are still alive and the vision has not been approved by the Church . . . and likely won’t unless, as they claim, they warn the world just before it happens and then, of course, it MUST happen for the vision to be approved. So any of the books about the prophecy of Garabandal may be a good place to look. Hope that helps.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I simply don’t have everyday ideas… ha!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Three days of darkness. (;-D Well, now you Marys are getting into a fun area. Some real stuff to talk about. Some Marys have gone into depth on that subject, which I only hear about maybe two yrs ago. The account goes like this………Catholics have to stock up on candles that have been blessed by your costumed holymen. otherwise the candle wont give light. Its going to be dark for three days, pitch black, but these catholic candles will give light. Then, the Mary worshiper puts something on the front door…I forgot what it was…its supposed to do something…..I forgot. Here’s the good part: after the three days are over and light returns, all the evil people and protestants will be gone from off the earth. Hows that for a good story?
LikeLike
Cleansing the temple. Jesus saw all the money makers in his house of worship and flew into a rage. he put a quick end to that. Now that account reminds me of a news story I read about a yr ago. In Rome, there are lots of shops all over the place selling any little things mainly to tourists. They were selling these official Vatican things, some kind of document or another, something to hang on your wall to say that you have been to the Vatican. Something like that. Plus pictures and Vatican postcards and of course the ever present graven images of your choice. Ive been there and have shopped in those stores. Well anyhoo, the Vatican retailors who sold official Vatican trinkets were feeling the pinch. These poachers were cutting into the vaticans action. So, the church that Christ founded sent their bully boys to break up these poachers. You know how it goes.
When I went thru the Vatican, I don’t remember paying a fee to get in. I was with a group of kids from my school.But now there is a nice little price to pay to go see the headquarters of the church that Christ founded. I think the Holy Ghost felt it was time to adjust for inflation. One of the first attractions when you walk in the door is a big statue of Jupiter. The CC renamed it Peter. the guide said the reason Jupiters shoe was all worn away was because of centuries of the faithful slobbering on its foot. No idolatry there.
LikeLike