Journal: Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
Volume: JETS 65:2 (Jun 2022)
Article: Did It Take Forty-Six Years Or More To Build The Temple In Jerusalem? Reconsidering John 2:20
Author: Andrew E. Steinmann

JETS 65:2 (June 2022) p. 319

Did It Take Forty-Six Years Or More To Build The Temple In Jerusalem? Reconsidering John 2:20

Andrew E. Steinmann*

^* Andrew E. Steinmann is Distinguished Professor of Theology and Hebrew at Concordia University Chicago, 7400 Augusta Street, River Forest, IL 60305. He may be contacted at [email protected].

Abstract: While the standard translation of John 2:20 is endorsed by a large majority of commentaries during the last century, a few voices during the last fifty years have proposed an alternate rendering. This study examines the manifold problems that confront the standard translation of this verse. The results demonstrate that the alternate rendering is superior on syntactical, semantic, and historical grounds. Implications for the dating of Jesus’s ministry are explored.

Key words: dative, aorist, ναός, ἱερόν, Josephus, biblical chronology, temple

In nearly every English version of the Bible, John 2:19–20 reads similarly: “Jesus answered them, ‘Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.’ The Jews then said, ‘It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?’” (ESV). However, a trio of recent English versions offer a possible alternate rendering of the words of Jesus’s opponents. For instance, the footnotes for CSB and ESV suggest, “This temple was built forty-six years ago.” The notes to the NET Bible acknowledge that some favor this rendering, but the NET Bible ultimately rejects it.1 During the last half-century, several scholars have argued for this alternate translation.2 Many are probably unfamiliar with this alternative or any arguments adduced in favor of either the standard translation or the alternative. An examination of commentaries and related works from the recent decades (as well as a few older sources) reveals the issues that prompted these recent suggestions and allows an examination of these two alternatives.

JETS 65:2 (June 2022) p. 320

I. Examination Of Multiple Problems With The Standard Translation

With few exceptions, every commentary in recent years defends the standard translation of John 2:20.3 These works highlight four major issues that commentators identify in their interpretation and defense of the standard translation. The argument is made tha...