Proverbs 1:5-6 HCSB
a wise man will listen and increase his learning,
and a discerning man will obtain guidance–
for understanding a proverb or a parable,
the words of the wise, and their riddles.

A few more things I’ve learned about Proverbs.

1. Like all of the Bible, one can never stop learning. Proverbs were written for youths but also for those who are already wise. (I wonder how many youth pastors teach Proverbs?)
2. All of Proverbs needs to be read to have a good understanding even of those that seem to “stand alone”.
3. Learning the book of Proverbs can help us understand other parts of the Bible that are ‘non-literal’ like the parables of Jesus etc. This is very intriguing.

Regarding #2, I think the best example in Proverbs happen to be two that are right next to each other.

Proverbs 26:4-5
Don’t answer a fool according to his foolishness,
or you’ll be like him yourself.
5 Answer a fool according to his foolishness,
or he’ll become wise in his own eyes.

Many others are spread out. Of course reading the discourse sections many times over is valuable too. Now I understand why Professor Horner’s Bible Reading Plan goes through Proverbs 12 times a year and why many people read one chapter a day all the time. I think if people want to pull one verse out and put it on a plaque and live by it they should understand it within the context of the whole book. I used to think that most proverbs can stand by themselves but now I know better, not to mention realizing they’re proverbs and not hard and fast promises. Myself and others have been very disappointed because of not realizing this.

My favorite New Testament example of Scripture interpreting or qualifying other Scripture is:

Matthew 21:22 HCSB
And if you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer.

1 John 5:14
Now this is the confidence we have before Him: whenever we ask anything according to His will, He hears us. (emphasis added)

And include

Psalm 37:4
Take delight in the LORD, and He will give you your heart’s desires.

for good measure.

For now as I study Proverbs for our small group I plan on going straight through the study guide and I read Waltke’s commentary after I’m done answering the questions for each chapter of the study and doing any other stuff. I’ll read two chapters of Proverbs a day throughout.

As an aside, God is really working in me. Since back surgery, life has been even more difficult than normal. My faith has been tested for the first time in a long time, depression, anxiety, sleep, pain and accepting what my life has become has been much more difficult.

However, God has given me such enthusiasm for studying Proverbs, I want to learn everything I can. God has given me the attitude of what’s described in Proverbs 2 (below). This is obviously God’s doing. And God has been working in my wife so that she has become more supportive as time goes on and loves me for reasons I can’t understand.

I hate my life but love God and my wife. I hope things can get better someday but these circumstances drive me to take refuge in God. I don’t like it but I need to accept it. If you’d like to pray for me, even once, that’s what I need most right now.

Proverbs 2:1-5
My son, if you accept my words
and store up my commands within you,
2 listening closely to wisdom
and directing your heart to understanding;
3 furthermore, if you call out to insight
and lift your voice to understanding,
4 if you seek it like silver
and search for it like hidden treasure,
5 then you will understand the fear of the LORD
and discover the knowledge of God.

Also see:

• Proverbs: Creation in Proverbs
• Proverbs: Fear of the Lord

The fear of the Lord is a mini subject of interest of mine. I’ve always loved this concept. I’ve learned some aspects of it I wasn’t aware of while starting to study Proverbs where fear of the Lord is key (Proverbs 1:7; 9:10).

I think there is some true fear there but it’s not of eternal punishment (1 John 4:18) or any kind of condemnation whatsoever (Romans 8:1). There is fear of displeasing Him as our Father (filial fear) and just plain fear because of how incredibly awesome (in the classic sense) He is. If you were to come into God’s presence I can guarantee you’ll feel fear.

I read the first two quotes below in the introduction to the commentary on Proverbs by Waltke which expresses these things better than I could. I found it at Monergism so I wouldn’t have to type it out and also include a second quote found on the same page.

“fear of the Lord” cannot be understood by studying “fear” and “the Lord” in isolation from each other. The expression is compound. “Fear of the Lord["] involves both rational and non-rational aspects at the same time.

–Bruce K. Waltke from The Book of Proverbs Volume 1, pg. 100

I suppose this is part of the reason I lament the fact that some translations have changed “fear of the Lord” to something like “reverence and awe” which just doesn’t do it. Even the NLT keeps the term because it’s both a traditional term and it explains the concept clearly which is the objective of the NLT, if I can be so bold as to put words in their mouth. Let the fear of the Lord not be diminished!

On to the quotes at Monergism:

“Fear of the Lord” entails…an emotional response of fear, love and trust. The unified psychological poles of fear and love come prominently to the fore in the surprisingly uniform way Deuteronomy treats “love of the Lord” and “fear of the Lord” (cf. Deut. 5:29 with Deut 6:2, and Deut 6:5 with Josh. 24:14; cf. Josh. 10:12; 10:20; 13:5). In Isaiah 29:13 Israel’s distorted “fear of me” is rejected precisely because it is made up only of rules taught by men. According to Proverbs 2:1-5, “the fear of the Lord” is found through heartfelt prayer and diligent seeking for the sage’s words. In Proverbs 15:33, “humility” and “fear of the Lord” are parallel terms, and in Proverbs 22:4 “humility” is defined as “the fear of the Lord sort.”

–Bruce K. Waltke from The Book of Proverbs Volume 1, pg. 101 (I added book names in places so that the hover feature will show those verses.)

The true fear of God is a child-like fear. Some of the Puritans used to call it a “filial fear.” It is a combination of holy respect and glowing love. To fear God is to have a heart that is sensitive to both His Godness and His graciousness. It means to experience great awe and a deep joy simultaneously when one begins to understand who God really is and what He has done for us.

Therefore the true fear of God is not a fear that makes a person run away and flee from God. It is a fear that drives him to God. Love for God and fear of Him are, therefore, not at all incompatible. To think that they are is to fail to see the richness of the character of the God we worship. It is to ignore the way in which knowing Him in all of His attributes, and responding appropriately to Him, stretches our emotional capacities to their limit. Scripture portrays the fear of the Lord and the love of the Lord as companion emotions.

–P.J. (Flip) Buys from The Fear of God as a Central Part of Reformed Spirituality

And another angle:

“Even the Christian must fear God. But it is another kind of fear. It is a fear rather of what might have been than of what is; it is a fear of what would come were we not in Christ. Without such fear there can be no true love; for love of the Saviour is proportioned to one’s horror of that from which man has been saved. And how strong are the lives that are suffused with such a love!”

–J. Gresham Machen

Machen (1881-1937) was Professor of New Testament, first at Princeton Theological Seminary, and afterwards at Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia. Published in God Transcendent (1949).
http://www.westminsterconfession.org/introduction-to-the-christian-faith/the-fear-of-god.php

(Inside joke: I get points from Esteban for that one.)

One more in part of a devotional by John Piper:

A Meditation on Psalm 2:11-12

Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and you perish in the way, for his wrath is quickly kindled. Blessed are all who take refuge in him.

“Serve the Lord with fear…”

This command does not cancel out Psalm 100:2: “Serve the Lord with gladness.” Serving the Lord with fear and serving the Lord with gladness do not contradict each other. The next phrase will make that plain (“rejoice with trembling”). There is real fear and real joy. The reason there is real fear is that there is real danger. Our God is a consuming fire (Heb. 12:29). Yes, the elect are safe in Christ. But examine yourself, Paul says, “to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you-unless, of course, you fail the test?” (2 Cor. 13:5). “Therefore let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall” (1 Cor. 10:12). Confidence in Christ is not careless. Our security is rooted in God’s daily keeping, not our past decisions. ” is able to keep you from stumbling and to present you blameless before the presence of his glory” (Jude 1:24). Part of how he keeps us is by awakening the vigilance to rest daily in Christ and not in ourselves.

Also see:
Quote of the Day: To Fear God (Ecclesiastes)

Michael W. Halcomb writes about how College Press has put their entire commentary series online.
Free Commentaries: 25,000+ Pages

Also see:
IVP New Testament Commentary Series Online

I found some interesting resources on Habakkuk after following up on a quote found in Ryken’s Bible Handbook:

God doesn’t always change the circumstances, but He can change us to meet the circumstances. That’s what it means to live by faith.

–Warren Wiersbe, Conclusion to his outline of Chapter 3

You can find these outlines in HTML format at these links:
Habakkuk 1-2:4
Habakkuk 2:5-3:19

The outline is very colorful–literally. Much of Habakkuk is applied to our present day world and New Testament references are noted. There is quite a bit about Reformed theology throughout.

Another resource I happened to find is by Dr. Thomas L. Constable of Dallas Theological Seminary.
Notes on Habakkuk – 2010 Edition

I like this quote he includes which part of why Habakkuk is so interesting.

Habakkuk is a unique book. Unlike other prophets who declared God’s message to people this prophet dialogued with God about people. Most Old Testament prophets proclaimed divine judgment. Habakkuk pleaded for divine judgment. In contrast with the typical indictment, this little book records an intriguing interchange between a perplexed prophet and his Maker.

–Ronald J. Blue, “Habakkuk.” In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament p. 1505

And of course there is John Hobbin’s blog Ancient Hebrew Poetry which starts out here:
The Book of Habakkuk: An Introduction
I think you can find the rest via Google.

I plan on buying Bruce Waltke’s two volume commentary on Proverbs. Would anyone want to dissuade me from buying this and getting something else? I want something that’s very complete and won’t leave me wanting. I can’t afford any others in addition to this.

I love the book of Colossians and there are and will be quite a few more commentaries coming out on this. Someday after I’ve done some other things like looking further into the OT and reading more of Calvin I’d like to study Colossians as in-depth as I can.

If you’re interested and haven’t seen it, here is a review by Review by David Schrock at The Gospel Coalition Reviews of a commentary/exposition of Colossians and Philemon by Michael F. Bird

I’m still a little dizzy about the back surgery thing and haven’t been posting as much lately.

For some reason I had about $11 of eBay bucks that had to be used today. I’ve got enough books for a while but couldn’t think of anything else I needed. So I looked through my Amazon wish list and found The Book of Psalms: A Translation with Commentary by Robert Alter which has been mentioned a lot on blogs and is highly praised. The cost with shipping was $14.89 and I only had to pay $2.60. Did I do good? What do you think of this book?

I know this is a highly regarded work. What I’d like to know is if I would be more satisfied with a good multi-volume commentary or this which includes a unique translation. Is the commentary mainly on the translation? What I would like is a good commentary but Barnes and Noble has a great price on this which would be an economical solution and I have gift certificates for them. (My relatives don’t know how to buy one from Amazon but I’m thankful to have these.)

I found a page on F.F. Bruce:
Frederick Fyvie Bruce

This includes a lot of PDF files. Especially interesting to me right now is the wisdom literature since we’re studying Ecclesiastes in our small group. Be sure to notice there are other pages for later sections of his life.

I’m considering these:

• The Book of Acts (New International Commentary on the New Testament) by F.F. Bruce
• The Acts of the Apostles (Pillar New Testament Commentary) by David G. Peterson
• Acts (The NIV Application Commentary) by Ajith Fernando

F.F. Bruce is tried and true. The Peterson is new and I’m having a hard time getting a feel for it from the reviews. I like the series having commentaries on John, Ephesians, James and the epistles of John. I have one NIVAC that I don’t really like but the one on Revelation by Keener is fantastic. The one on Acts is actually longer than the one by F.F. Bruce which is a good thing. The commentary by Fernando might give more of a non-Western perspective too. I can only afford one.

Any comments?

I like this succinct explanation of fearing God in Eaton’s commentary on Ecclesiastes:

The way of safety is to fear God. In the wisdom tradition the ‘fear’ of God is the awe and holy caution that arises from realization of the greatness of God: ‘Splendour… terrible… majesty… power… justice… righteousness… Therefore fear him.’ (Job 37:22-24)

–Michael A. Eaton, Ecclesiastes pp. 122-123

Ecclesiastes 8:12-13
But even though a person sins a hundred times and still lives a long time, I know that those who fear God will be better off. 13 The wicked will not prosper, for they do not fear God. Their days will never grow long like the evening shadows.

and earlier he says:

…in the Lord’s Prayer … the twin truths that God is ‘Father’ but ‘in heaven’ guard against craven fear on the one hand and flippancy on the other.

pg.99

Ecclesiastes 5:7
Talk is cheap, like daydreams and other useless activities. Fear God instead.

If you like commentaries as I do, and you could only get a commentary on one Old Testament book other than Genesis or the wisdom literature, which one would it be and why if you care to take the time to tell.

I’m thinking Isaiah or Jeremiah and I’m leaning toward Jeremiah because there are many questions I have about it.

Also, if you would insist on recommending Psalms or Proverbs, please let me know what one(s) you like.

I have Genesis and Ecclesiastes covered and I know I want commentaries on Psalms and Proverbs. With a low budget I’m trying to decide what other one I’d eventually like to get. I think the Treasury of David is very good for the Psalms and it’s free.

There is a real sense in which the book of Ecclesiastes, then and now, is pre-evangelism. It disrupts the comfortable existence of people who are thinking that they are moving toward a meaningful and satisfying existence outside of Christ. The writer says, “I have been there; I have done that. I did it better and to a higher degree. I rose higher, I massed more, I built more than you will ever dream of doing, and I found it to be nothing more than a chasing after wind. It is all ultimately meaningless; trust me.” He says the meaning is in God, but he does not know how to explain that further. We do, because Christ has become man. Christ has become flesh, and we can turn people away from the vain pursuits that will lead them ultimately to depression and despair and say, “There is real meaning, but it is not going to be down that pathway.”

–Dr. V. Philips Long, Psalms & Wisdom Literature, Covenant Theological Seminary

Although God commanding war isn’t something I really struggle with to the point of shaking my faith, even though it seems extremely unfair to us and the thought of violent loss of life is extremely bothersome, I found this article very helpful.
How Could God Command Genocide in the Old Testament?

Edited: 9/26/09 for clarity

Matthew 4:19 NIV
“Come, follow me,” Jesus said, “and I will make you fishers of men.”

Matthew 4:19 France
He said to them, “Come and follow me, and I will send you out to fish for people.”

This famous verse is one of the most difficult in the NT to translate satisfactorily in a way which reflects modern sensitivity to the ‘exclusive’ effect of a generic masculine. Not only has the traditional masculine phrase ‘fishers of men’ become firmly entrenched in Christian usage, but any nonmasculine rendering also loses the echo (in English, not in Greek) of the preceding clause, ‘for they were fishermen.’ Nevertheless, the attempt must be made if we are to avoid the sort of misunderstanding which reputedly caused Fishing for Men (a paperback on evangelism) to be listed among recent publications in the Angling Times, while a young woman of my acquaintance was disappointed to discover that the same paperback was not a guide to dating. Simply to add ‘and women’ invites the response, ‘What about children?’ I adopt the TNIV rendering as the least unsatisfactory.

–R.T. France, Matthew, footnote on pg 144

Matthew 5:22-24 TNIV
But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca, ‘ is answerable to the Sanhedrin. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.
23 “Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother or sister has something against you,
24 leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to that person; then come and offer your gift.

The ‘brother or sister’ (adelphos) of vv. 22-24 is probably to be understood as a fellow disciple rather than a literal family member, a similar concern with good relationships among fellow disciples will be the theme of the fourth discource in ch. 18, where the term adelphos will recur in Matthew 18:15, 21, 35; cf. Matthew 12:46-50 for the concept of Jesus’ ‘family’ of disciples. It would, however, be pedantic to suggest that Jesus’ ruling applies only to relations with fellow disciples and not to people in general; Matthew 5:44-47 suggest otherwise.

–R.T. France, Matthew, pg 200

When I read commentaries I often wonder if the commentator sometimes goes too far in analyzing what the Biblical author was saying and the form and structure they were supposedly using to say it.

I always keep in mind the idea below. It was nice to see it articulated in this way as I read it a few days ago. I like the part at the end about amazing its author.

There is a sense that any analysis of any book of the Bible is an imposition. The biblical writers did not use headings and sub-headings, let alone chapters and verses. They present their material with no modern aids. Presumably, however, they knew what they wanted to say, and, evidently, did not write in a totally random manner. By all means let us seek to illumine the main shape of their argument. but let us constantly beware of the danger of imposing on any book a rigid pattern that would amaze its author.

–Michael A. Eaton, Ecclesiastes

I’ve been having a difficult time the last few days and especially today. I like this post that I put on another blog and thought I’d post it here.

I sense that people often feel a need to be right and one way to exercise this is to give advice to those who are suffering so that they can fix them. Then if they get better they can feel good about how they were right. Two problems with this is that it makes the sufferer feel like they are seen as not as smart as those who don’t suffer as much because much of the “advice” is already known by the sufferer and in fact the sufferer usually knows much more about the subject than the person giving the advice! People don’t always suffer because of lack of knowledge.  It also shows that we can forget that although we can help each other, God is ultimately the who heals, who decides a person’s fate and who is always right.

From Still Higher For His Highest by Oswald Chambers
January 20

Temperamental-the way a man looks at life. My temperament is an inner disposition which influences my thoughts and actions to a certain extent, i.e., I am either pessimistic or optimistic according to the way my blood circulates. It is an insult to take the temperamental line in dealing with human beings-”Cheer up, look on the bright side”; there are some types of suffering before which the only thing you can do is to keep your mouth shut. There are times when a man needs to be handled by God, not by his fellow men, and part of the gift of a man’s wisdom is to know how to be reverent with what he does not understand.

Job 2:13
Then they sat on the ground with him for seven days and seven nights. No one said a word to him, because they saw how great his suffering was.

I think Oswald Chambers had a good knowledge of what I call “real psychology” as opposed to our typical psycho-babble. (That’s not the main topic of his devotionals though.) D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones is another one who was ahead of his time in this regard.

Revelation 3:15-17 NIV
I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! 16 So, because you are lukewarm–neither hot nor cold–I am about to spit you out of my mouth. 17 You say, ‘I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked.

I was always slightly puzzled by what these verses mean but never really looked into it until I read about it in Craig Keener’s commentary on Revelation.

Regarding verse 15, although it may be well known to most of my readers, who are generally more well educated in things Bible than I, Jesus is referring to the water temperature and quality or lack thereof in Laodicea, the church He is addressing here.

Keener writes:

Laodicea lacked its own water supply, having no direct access to the cold water of the mountains or the hot water of the nearby springs in Hierapolis to the north. In contrast to its claims to self-sufficiency (Rev. 3:17), it had to pipe in its water; though much of the aqueduct from the south was underground, nearer the city it came through stone barrel pipes, thus remaining vulnerable to any intended besiegers who wished to cut off the city’s water supply. More important, this water had grown lukewarm by the time of its arrival.

Other sources speak more about how displeasing this water was.

NLT Study Bible:

neither hot nor cold: The hot springs in Hierapolis were famous for their healing qualities. Colosse was equally famous for its cold, refreshing springs. In contrast, the water available in Laodicea was smelly and lukewarm. Such water is distasteful; Jesus was saying that the church’s indecisive commitment to him was revolting.

ESV Study Bible:

The waters of the nearby Lycus River were muddy and undrinkable, and the waters flowing by aqueduct from hot springs 5 miles (8 km) away were lukewarm when they reached Laodicea. Likewise, Jesus found his church’s tepid indifference repugnant. Cold and hot water represent something positive, for cold water refreshes in the heat, and hot water is a tonic when one is chilly.

So in mentioning the hot and cold water Jesus wasn’t speaking to their spiritual zeal or lack. And it doesn’t make sense that Jesus would rather they be spiritually cold than lukewarm. He’s not saying, “Pick a side, any side, as long as you commit to something.” Or that He would rather we be willfully cold towards Him as a way of showing some sort of truthful integrity if we aren’t very thrilled about how we feel about God at the moment.

What Jesus is saying is much more shocking. As Keener puts it,

In today’s English, he is telling the self-satisfied church in Laodicea: ‘I want water that will refresh me, but you remind me instead of the water you always complain about. You make me want to puke.’

The Laodiceans, who prided themselves on their wealth and self-sufficiency (Rev. 3:17) didn’t even have water that tasted good and Jesus used this to illustrate their spiritual self sufficiency and pride, and how He felt about it.

I was wondering if puke was a little overboard.

Thayer: to vomit, vomit forth, throw up, i. e. to reject with extreme disgust,

Louw-Nida: Since a term meaning ‘to vomit’ often carries somewhat vulgar connotations, ἐμέω in Re 3.16 has frequently been translated as ‘to spit out of my mouth.’ It is also possible to interpret ‘to vomit out of the mouth’ as an idiom meaning ‘to reject.’

It seems to me that a disservice is done when translations water this down (no pun intended). Most popular translations use spit. Among those that I looked at, the HCSB, LITV, Mounce Sr. (Interlinear), NET, NKJV, The Message and WEB use vomit. The Geneva Bible and King James use spewe and spue. (I think they were ahead of their time.)

Further reading:
The Letter to the Church in Laodicea at Ligonier Ministries

The late Alan Cole, in the introduction to his commentary on Mark has a section about women. I’d like to outline what he says and start off with a quote he writes at the end of the section, which is just as true today as when he wrote it.

[W]omen take their natural place as followers of Jesus alongside men, with no special comment, in this the first story of Jesus* and his earliest disciples. Mark is sometimes described as a ‘primitive’ gospel, but this attitude shows true Christian maturity and naturalness of approach, to which it is hard to feel that we have attained today, in spite of all our artificial striving for it. Perhaps the simplicity of the Spirit brings more balance than all the complicated theological argument on either side, with their ‘special pleading’, that we so often hear today.

* meaning “the earliest Christian gospel”

• Jesus had a close group of women followers, several of whom are named in Mark — Mary Magdalene, Mary, mother of James and Joses, and Salome, for instance (Mark 15:40; 15:47; 16:1).
• A young girl, daughter of Jairus, raised from the dead, is the first recorded miracle that Jesus performed (Mark 5:23). She was addressed as ‘talitha’, ‘child’ (Mark 5:41). The girl’s mother was called in to witness her resurrection along with her father which shows a “thoughtfulness and consideration for women rarely seen in the ancient world.”
• On the way to the house of Jairus Jesus healed a woman of a long-standing hemorrhage. She was addressed as ‘daughter’ (Mark 5:34); also signifying she was saved and forgiven her sins. Her faith is singled out for praise by Jesus (Mark 5:34). Mark records these as matter of fact without comment.
• Jesus was identified as ‘Mary’s son’.
• Jesus saw women and men equally as God’s creation (Mark 10:6) and demanded that women, as much as men, should be protected in marriage, disagreeing with the Pharisees interpretation of the law of Moses regarding divorce (Mark 10:11).
• Jesus rebuked the disciples when they tried to deny mothers from bringing their children to Him for a blessing.
• Jesus saw the giving up of sisters, mother or wife as great a sacrifice for the kingdom as giving up brothers or father (Mark 10:29).
• Jesus seemed to have special concern for mothers with young children who would be living during the trials of the end times (Mark 13:17).
• A woman anointed Jesus’ head with costly perfume at a meal that took place at Simon the leper’s house (Mark 14:3). “Wherever the Good News is preached throughout the world, this woman’s deed will be remembered and discussed.” (Mark 14:9)
• The women disciples stayed and watched Jesus while He was on the cross (and some say women are emotionally weaker?).
• Women disciples were witnesses to both his death and resurrection even though Jewish law wouldn’t accept the testimony of women as evidence.

Addendum: Coincidentally, there have been quite a few posts on women’s issues lately. I just want to be clear in that this post isn’t in response to any of them. I just happened to have this in the hopper for a while. I will say though that in his actions and words, Jesus was a feminist as far as advocating equality for women without needing to explicitly say so, as Mark demonstrates. It should be obvious.

Photo © Jeff at Scripture Zealot

I noticed a few interesting points in this portion of the Gospel of Mark. There are ironically more details in Mark’s usually concise account of events.

Mark 11:11 HCSB
And He went into Jerusalem and into the temple complex. After looking around at everything, since it was already late, He went out to Bethany with the Twelve.

If he was angry at this point, Jesus held it until the next day. He didn’t just burst on the scene and start driving people out in a sudden fit of rage.

Mark 11:15-17 HCSB
They came to Jerusalem, and He went into the temple complex and began to throw out those buying and selling in the temple. He overturned the money changers’ tables and the chairs of those selling doves, 16 and would not permit anyone to carry goods through the temple complex. 17 Then He began to teach them: “Is it not written, My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations? But you have made it a den of thieves!”

This wasn’t a political or revolutionary act but it was a demonstration of Jesus’ wrath (Rev. 6:16)–his anger at using His house for pilfering and even using it as a shortcut for those who lived nearby (“would not allow anyone to carry merchandise through the temple courts”)! As always, He is perfectly sane even though “He is not a tame lion” as C.S. Lewis said of Aslan and which our culture often betrays.

It’s also interesting that he used this as an opportunity to teach (v. 17). He didn’t just ransack the place and then storm out of there.

R. Alan Cole in his commentary on Mark states:

The Greek verb edidasken, taught (i.e. ‘continued teaching’), implies a deliberate teaching programme adopted by Jesus rather than a casual pronouncement, uttered in the heat of anger, amid the justification for his action, as any rabbi would. The Scripture quoted by him is Isaiah 56:7, telling how foreign proselytes will one day be welcomed to the temple. It is noteworthy that Jesus here quotes only the clause in Isaiah about prayer, and omits that about offering sacrifice, for he himself was soon to be the sacrifice that would unite Jew and non-Jew in one (John 11:51-52).