On account of this
This phrase refers to the preceding actions of Jesus in the temple, where He drove out the money changers and overturned their tables. The phrase sets the stage for the confrontation that follows. In the Greek, "διὰ τοῦτο" (dia touto) indicates a causal relationship, emphasizing that the actions of Jesus directly prompted the questioning by the Jews. This highlights the boldness of Jesus' actions and the immediate impact they had on the religious leaders.

the Jews
In the Gospel of John, "the Jews" often refers to the Jewish leaders or authorities rather than the Jewish people as a whole. Historically, this group included the Pharisees, Sadducees, and members of the Sanhedrin. Their role was to maintain religious order and authority, which Jesus' actions directly challenged. Understanding this context is crucial, as it sets up the tension between Jesus and the established religious order.

demanded
The Greek word used here is "ἀπεκρίθησαν" (apekrithēsan), which can be translated as "answered" or "responded." However, in this context, it carries a sense of demanding or questioning with authority. The religious leaders felt their authority was being undermined, prompting a forceful response. This reflects their concern over maintaining control and the perceived threat Jesus posed to their power.

What sign can You show us
The request for a sign is a demand for a miraculous proof of authority. In Jewish tradition, prophets and messengers of God often performed signs to validate their divine mission. The Greek word "σημεῖον" (sēmeion) means a sign or miracle that points to a deeper truth. This request reveals the leaders' skepticism and their need for tangible evidence to accept Jesus' authority.

to prove Your authority
Authority, or "ἐξουσία" (exousia) in Greek, is a central theme in this passage. The religious leaders are questioning Jesus' right to act in the temple as He did. In Jewish culture, authority was derived from lineage, position, or divine appointment. Jesus' authority, however, comes from His identity as the Son of God, a concept that the leaders struggled to understand and accept.

to do these things
"These things" refers to Jesus' actions in the temple—cleansing it of commercial activities. This act was not just a protest against corruption but a profound statement about the sanctity of worship and the true purpose of the temple. Historically, the temple was the center of Jewish religious life, and any disruption was seen as a significant challenge to the status quo. Jesus' actions symbolized a new order and a call to return to genuine worship, foreshadowing His ultimate sacrifice and the establishment of a new covenant.

(18) Then answered the Jews.--Comp. for the meaning of "the Jews" John 1:19; and for their question, Matthew 21:23. The Mosaic legislation contained a warning against the efficiency of the test by signs (Deuteronomy 13:1-3), but it was of the essence of Pharisaism to cling to it (Matthew 12:38; 1Corinthians 1:22). It supplied an easy means of rejecting the moral conviction. A sign can only be evidence to the mind open to read the underlying truth. For "an evil and adulterous generation" it has no voice, and they can, after the feeding of the thousands, still demand "What sign showest Thou?" (John 6:30). There are bigots of incredulity. Knowledge is dependent upon action and will (comp. John 7:17). There is a mental condition which no evidence can convince, for it can always demand more. "If they hear not Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead" (Luke 16:31). . . . Verses 18,19. - The Jews therefore answered and said to him. That which the disciples thought at the very time is here recorded by one who affects at least to know their inmost minds and most confidential meditations and talk with one another. John, at least, saw the rising storm of enmity already hurtling, but says nothing. Nevertheless, as if in reply to the imperial prophetic act (which corresponded with John the Baptist's prediction of One who would come axe in hand), the Jews approached with answer (of., for this use of the word "answer," Matthew 11:25; Acts 3:12; Mark 11:14). The "answer" here is in the form of a question, which shows that they had not recognized the sign he had already given, that this temple was his "Father's house," and that he had solemnly claimed the authority of "Son" over the house. What sign showest thou, because (or, seeing that) thou doest these things? (cf. Matthew 12:38, etc.; John 6:30). Thou art bound to give us some "sign" that thou hast a right to deal thus with established customs and to assume the position of a public reformer. Upon what does thine (ἐξουσία) authority rest? Give us some miraculous proof of these high assumptions, "seeing that (quatenus) thou art doing these things," whose consequences are now so conspicuous. It might be supposed that the extraordinary effect just produced upon the crowd of traffickers was sufficient proof of power, if not of authority. The Jews were within their right in asking for these authentications; but their continuous demand for outward signs is one of the conspicuous features of their character (Matthew 12:38; 1 Corinthians 1:22). In the fundamental nature of a "sign" there is a hint of the true solution of the enigmatical saying which is the first public utterance of our Lord. He gave to the act which he was about to perform the characteristic of a "sign." It would be an outward and visible manifestation of a stupendous spiritual event. This, among other reasons, refutes the modern speculation of Herder, Ewald, Lucke, Renan, and even of Neander, Geikie, and others, that the evangelist was wrong in the explanation of this remarkable saying which he offered in the twenty-first verse. John, who, better than modern commentators can do, ought to have known what the Lord meant, declares that Jesus was speaking of "the temple of his body" when, as the context shows, he was vindicating his right to cleanse the existing temple; and by τὸν ναὸν τοῦτον, "this sanctuary," he was also pointing to and referring in some sense to the temple structure in the midst of which he and the Jews were standing. The commentators have said, "John was wrong, and was led astray by his own fancies. There was no reference to the death or resurrection of Christ. The Lord meant," say they, "as follows: 'Persist in your lawless, irreverent, unbelieving treatment of the temple, and so destroy it. Let it cease by this handling of yours from being a temple, and I will prove my right to cleanse it, and to reform, rebuke, or condemn your immoral practices in it, by building it again, or rather erecting a spiritual temple, a temple without hands, and in three days, i.e. in a short time after you have consummated your impiety, I will complete my restorative work - I will build a new temple and fill it with my glory.'" If John had not appended the twenty-first verse, "Howbeit he spake concerning the temple of his body," the above interpretation would deserve very close attention and perhaps acceptance. But there are sundry difficulties in it, even if the evangelist had not supplied the true key: - e.g. Christ does not say, "I will raise up 'another' temple or a 'spiritual' temple on the ruins of the old;" but "I will raise it up," viz. the temple which I challenge you to "destroy." Though ἐν τρισὶν ἡμέραις, "in three days," is used in this indefinite sense, in Hosea (Hosea 6:2, LXX.), yet it is the accepted term for the period of three days, which counted from the death to the resurrection of the Lord, and which in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew 12:40) is distinctly foretold to be the great "sign" given to that generation. Moreover, from the Jewish misunderstanding of the words which appear in the synoptic narrative, viz. δια, τρίων ἡμέρων, "during three days," the literal character of the time specified had laid hold, not only of the disciples, but of the multitude. Again, the erection of the spiritual temple would not be an outward and visible sign of the grace and authority of the Lord; but rather the great spiritual reality itself - invisible indeed, and requiring signs to manliest and demonstrate its own occurrence and existence. We conclude, then, that the apostle knew better than his critics, and that we are to believe that, when the Lord said to the Jews, Destroy (λύσατε, dissolve, break up) this temple, "he was speaking of the temple of his body," and at the same time linking and identifying the two temples, relating the one to the other so closely that the destruction of his body became ipso facto the demolition of the temple character of the building where they then stood. The temple of stone and gold, of stately decoration and ceremonial, derived all its true meaning from its being the gorgeous crystallization of a Divine idea embodied in his life. The temple had no value save as a meeting place for God and man, where by sacrifice and worship man might approach the Father, who declared himself to be reconciled, long suffering, and yet just. The Lord has come to the temple, but was himself One holier and "greater than the temple." God is manifested in the glory of that holy life, and man is set forth also in Christ's perfect high-priestly approach to and commerce with the excellent glory. The Lord knows that he is the Lamb, and the only begotten Son of God, and he knows also that his death is part of the awful method in which the vast designs of his righteous love will be secured. He has a baptism to be baptized with, and he is straitened until it be accomplished. He anticipates the end. As he said afterwards to Judas, "That thou doest do quickly;" so at this moment he said, Destroy this temple (of my body), and you will destroy therein the temple character of this historic embodiment of a grand prophetic hope; and I will raise it up, viz. - the temple of my body - in three days (not, I will raise it by quiet, unobserved, spirit processes in the souls of men, but) the very temple which you will bring down shall henceforth be the living and eternal temple of all the glory of God and all the possibilities of man. The great bulk of expositors of many types, who do not repudiate St. John's own words, see thus (with more or less of a double reference in it) the first main significance of the enigma. Whether our Lord pointed to his own Person as he uttered these words cannot be determined. It is said by some - If he had done so, all ambiguity would have been removed, and the misunderstanding which followed would have been impossible! Surely the Jews were not usually ready to receive parabolic truth of this kind so readily, and after their fashion were almost sure to misconceive and falsely to misrepresent it. Even the disciples did not see into its meaning until after the Resurrection (ver. 22). How could they? Verily, then, and not till then, was it seen that the sign of the Prophet Jonas had been given to that generation.

Parallel Commentaries ...


On account of this,
οὖν (oun)
Conjunction
Strong's 3767: Therefore, then. Apparently a primary word; certainly, or accordingly.

the
οἱ (hoi)
Article - Nominative Masculine Plural
Strong's 3588: The, the definite article. Including the feminine he, and the neuter to in all their inflections; the definite article; the.

Jews
Ἰουδαῖοι (Ioudaioi)
Adjective - Nominative Masculine Plural
Strong's 2453: Jewish. From Iouda; Judaean, i.e. Belonging to Jehudah.

demanded,
Ἀπεκρίθησαν (Apekrithēsan)
Verb - Aorist Indicative Passive - 3rd Person Plural
Strong's 611: From apo and krino; to conclude for oneself, i.e. to respond; by Hebraism to begin to speak.

“What
Τί (Ti)
Interrogative / Indefinite Pronoun - Accusative Neuter Singular
Strong's 5101: Who, which, what, why. Probably emphatic of tis; an interrogative pronoun, who, which or what.

sign
σημεῖον (sēmeion)
Noun - Accusative Neuter Singular
Strong's 4592: Neuter of a presumed derivative of the base of semaino; an indication, especially ceremonially or supernaturally.

can You show
δεικνύεις (deiknyeis)
Verb - Present Indicative Active - 2nd Person Singular
Strong's 1166: A prolonged form of an obsolete primary of the same meaning; to show.

us
ἡμῖν (hēmin)
Personal / Possessive Pronoun - Dative 1st Person Plural
Strong's 1473: I, the first-person pronoun. A primary pronoun of the first person I.

to prove
ὅτι (hoti)
Conjunction
Strong's 3754: Neuter of hostis as conjunction; demonstrative, that; causative, because.

Your [ authority ] to do
ποιεῖς (poieis)
Verb - Present Indicative Active - 2nd Person Singular
Strong's 4160: (a) I make, manufacture, construct, (b) I do, act, cause. Apparently a prolonged form of an obsolete primary; to make or do.

these things?”
ταῦτα (tauta)
Demonstrative Pronoun - Accusative Neuter Plural
Strong's 3778: This; he, she, it.


John 2:18 NIV
John 2:18 NLT
John 2:18 ESV
John 2:18 NASB
John 2:18 KJV

John 2:18 BibleApps.com
John 2:18 Biblia Paralela
John 2:18 Chinese Bible
John 2:18 French Bible
John 2:18 Catholic Bible

NT Gospels: John 2:18 The Jews therefore answered him What sign (Jhn Jo Jn)