Chapter 2
2022 - At the end of chapter 1, the 12 had been chosen, and in 2, this historical recounting continues. This chapter starts with "On the third day...". Looking back to the previous chapter, Jn 1:43 began with "the next day", which is the day the apostles were chosen. So they have been together now as a group for three days and they all go to Cana together.
2023 - Or John is reminiscing about how things came about 60 years before, and is putting things in order without necessarily meaning the very next day. I am pretty sure the other gospels put the choosing of the 12 as occurring over a more extended time. There is probably an argument saying that Greek writing in that time often did things this way without being so completely literal as to mean consecutive 24 hour periods. Recall that in 1:35, John the Baptist sees Jesus. Andrew and the other guy "go home" with Jesus. So they aren't on any kind of journey. So the literal part of this is that Andrew, Peter, Philip and Nathanael were chosen on this day. We don't know exactly where John was baptizing, but it was in the Jordan river somewhere near Bethany. "On the third day..." they are in Cana for a wedding. How far is that? East of Bethany, but in the Jordan, would be right at the area where the Jordan runs into the Dead Sea. Cana is on the West side of the Sea of Galilee. On a modern map, that distance is about a 30 hour walk as best I can tell. So two very long walking days, or three long walking days. Point is, you cannot get there walking in a single day. So...the whole today, the next day, and the third day should be read one day, another day, and yet another day, all pretty close together.
2023 - In the Harmony, these first two chapters of John are pretty much shown as stand alone. They are not correlative exactly to the Synoptics. I note, for the first time really, that John does not tells us about Jesus' baptism, even though he tells us a lot about John and what John was saying at the time. I also note for the first time that the word Cana - the place name - only occurs in the gospel of John. None of the other gospels mention the place. How did I not know that ONLY John records this first miracle? And why would that be???
The wedding at Cana, Jesus' first public miracle, though it came ahead of schedule...as if that is possible. It is here, and presented that way, not so we can think Jesus didn't expect it, or know that it was coming, but so we can see that he was compassionate, and that he responds to our sincere petitions on other's behalf. And perhaps also to demonstrate the commandment to honor our father and our mother. John tells us that Jesus' disciples believed on him because of this miracle. So perhaps here was the real reason. So that those closest to him would have no further doubts about him.
After the wedding, Jesus and his mother and his "brothers and sisters" went to Capernaum for a few days. I quote brothers and sisters because it is translated as that in a footnote in ESV, but does not actually read that way. I think "brothers" here is about those men traveling with Jesus, not his own brothers. It mentions that his mother was at the wedding, and that he and his disciples were invited, but it says nothing about siblings. If his mother and his brothers were there, surely there were women with them also.
2021 - Looked at the interlinear this year. The word translated "brothers" in the KJV, and "brothers and sisters" here, is the Greek word adelphos. This word is a masculine noun. There is nowhere in the KJV where sisters are included. This is an ESV thing. Here is the verse:
12 After this he went down to Capernaum, with his mother and his brothers and his disciples, and they stayed there for a few days. [Jhn 2:12 ESV].
2022 - So...my note is wrong, ESV doesn't translate this word "adelphos" as "brothers and sisters". But it does have a footnote - that constantly repeated footnote, pretty much every single place adelphos is used, and it is used 346 times in the NT - that says "or brothers and sisters", with the long explanation about context.
Note that both brothers and disciples are listed. Based on that, I believe adelphos here refers to his familial brothers. That is what is in view here. This verse is not about whether Jesus' familial sisters traveled with him also on this trip. There is nothing sexist here in the mention of brothers but not sisters. Doesn't say they were not included, so maybe they were, but to insert a feminine noun in addition to the masculine noun that is really there is, in my opinion, adding to the word for modern cultural accommodation. Maybe it isn't, maybe the masculine adelphos in typical written Greek of that time commonly referred to both sexes. But that is not what the footnote says in ESV. The footnote specifically says what it can mean in "New Testament" usage. No examples are given however, to give any weight to that statement. And as I said, in the KJV, translated in a time when cultural accommodation did not include feminist concepts, it isn't translated that way a single time in the NT. It does not belong here.
2022 - Apparently I get twisted off about this footnote on a regular basis. I think asking why both adelphos and mathetes are included is a good question. Brothers and disciples. So if this does not mean his brothers - other sons of Mary - then what does it mean? Those traveling with him who were spies and hooligans as contrasted with disciples? Those who were just curious and had the free time to travel from Cana to Capernaum just because they thought something was going on? Why separate Jesus' entourage in such a way? No. His mother went also. His Mom, his brothers, and his disciples. I will give you that disciples almost certainly included women, and I get this from the context over and over again, but the footnote is NOT about mathetes, which I think often includes women, but is about adelphos, which I think ALWAYS means exclusively males. I will keep an eye out for where this word includes women. I don't think it is here.
Jesus goes to Jerusalem for the Passover. This is the first Passover he attends after beginning his ministry. When they get there, traders, and vendors - sellers of livestock, and foreign exchange brokers, had their little "booths" - I'm thinking about events like the State Fair - where they were doing business. They were there to make money, but they were set up inside the temple itself. Jesus gets angry about this, drives them out, makes a mess. John quotes a scripture about "Zeal for your house will consume me." This is Psa 69.9.
MSB notes explain more about these merchants. People came from all over the world to be at Passover. They came so far that it was not convenient for them to bring their unblemished sacrificial animals with them. Local livestock dealers seized this opportunity to sell sacrificial animals at a high markup. Also, this was when most people paid the annual temple tax. This tax had to be paid in specific coinage, which those traveling from far away would not have had. So the money changers put them into the right currency for a fee. An extravagant fee. Their "customers" have no choice but to pay it. And to pay the high markup on the lambs. The Jews have turned worship into a business.
The temple officials demand that he show them his credentials giving him the authority to run off the merchants. They were likely kicking back a percentage to the priests. The credentials they demand are miracles. They want a demonstration of Jesus' authority in the form of a sign from God endorsing him. They do not believe who he is. Jesus says to destroy the temple and he'll raise it in three days. He meant his own body, but again, they are too literal, since they don't believe.
MSB note says that John talks about a temple cleansing at the beginning of Jesus' ministry while Matthew and Luke put it at the end. MSB says the facts surrounding these events makes it plain that they cannot both be resolved into one cleansing. Therefore, Jesus cleansed the temple on two occasions.
2021 - The whole "destroy this temple and in three days" verse - 2:19 - also does not show up early in Jesus' ministry in the other gospels. In those, Jesus says this during his last Passover in Jerusalem. John's gospel explains what Jesus meant by these words. It is almost as if some of Jesus quotes were well known but still not understood. Perhaps Jews who refused to believe in Christ still used such misunderstood quotes from Jesus to say that he could not have been the Messiah. The Messiah would never claim he could do something like that. So John - who was there the day Jesus said this - tells them first hand what Jesus meant by that quote, and that he did something far more miraculous than putting up a building in three days.
2022 - We saw beginning in vs 1:29, that John is giving us time stamps. The next day, the next day (35), the next day (43), and the third day, (2:1). But in 2:12, he lets us know that he is no longer trying to be precise as to time. In 2:12, they went down (he doesn't tell us whether this was one day or several, but it was about 15 miles, so almost certainly took two days at least. Ten they stayed there a few days. So John has come unstuck so far as precisely laying out a timeline. Note that we have cleansing the temple, Nicodemus, Jesus' baptism, and then the woman at the well all here right together. No timestamps are given at all. Even so, I think these stories are probably chronological - we can't really be certain. It seems to me most likely that Jesus cleansed the temple twice. But this first time was so early in his ministry that few even knew who that guy was. The next time, EVERYONE who saw it knew who it was and so remembered what he said about it. I think this is the most likely scenario.
Vss 23-35 are sort of a "note" from John about this time in Jerusalem. Jesus apparently was doing a lot of miracles/healings while he was in Jerusalem. And because of those miracles, many believe in Jesus. But they believe in the miracles, not in the man. They crave the "blessing" but not the "blesser". They recognize the miracles as real, but do not connect them with the fact that Jesus is the Messiah. Then the last part...Jesus doesn't need anyone to tell him who is infatuated with the signs vs who is a true believer. Jesus already knows and recognizes them individually. Only Jesus could do something like this. He required no witnesses.
2022 - This verse:
23 Now when he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Feast, many believed in his name when they saw the signs that he was doing. [Jhn 2:23 ESV]. The phrase "believed in his name". I think it is stated this way to show that many saw the miracles and considered that Jesus was something special. A prophet like those of old or something along those lines. I don't think that many called him Christ at this early point, and that is John's point. They began to talk about this man Jesus and to wonder whether or not the miracles were real, but they surely knew that something was going on. They believed in the name of Jesus as some also believed in the name of John the Baptist, who was also seen as a prophet, after a long absence of prophets.