John 2:13-17 meaning

There are no apparent parallel accounts of John 2:13-17 in the Gospels. A similar, but likely different, event is found in Matthew 21:12-13, Mark 11:15-17, Luke 19:45-46.

After the wedding at Cana, Jesus spent a few days with His family and disciples at Capernaum (John 2:12). It is not clear how much time passes between that event and the event John is about to describe.

The Passover of the Jews was near, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem (v 13). 

John's description of Passover as The Passover of the Jews, indicates his intended audience includes many Gentiles. The Passover was a major holy day and the Jewish calendar revolved around it. The Law of Moses required males to annually travel to Jerusalem to commemorate the Passover (Deuteronomy 16:16). 

Jesus, in travelling to Jerusalem for the Passover, fulfilled this law. John's Gospel explicitly mentions three Passovers during Jesus's ministry (John 2:13, 6:4, 11:55-57). 

Passover is an annual feast, celebrated on the 14th day of the Jewish month of Nisan, that commemorates God's deliverance of the Jews from Egypt (Exodus 12). 

To learn more about Passover, see The Bible Says article, "The Original Passover."

John elsewhere emphasizes that the Passover Lamb, whose blood spared the firstborns of Israel from the final plague in Egypt (Exodus 12:6-14), anticipated the coming of Christ. John reports that John the Baptist declared Jesus to be the "Lamb of God" whose blood was shed to "take away the sins of the world" and save men and women from death (John 1:29, see also John 19:36, Exodus 12:46). 

Furthermore, Jesus will take the occasion of His final Passover with His disciples to demonstrate how He is the fulfillment of Passover. For more, see The Bible Says article, "Jesus's Last Supper as a Passover Seder."

As Jesus went to Jerusalem, He naturally visited the Temple, most likely to offer sacrifice in accordance with the Law. What He found in the temple courtyards (v 14a) was appalling: 

And He found in the temple those who were selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers seated at their tables. 

The first group of people He found were merchants—those selling oxen and sheep and doves.

These merchants were not selling these animals for agricultural purposes. They were selling them to worshippers for sacrifice at a profit by leveraging Old Testament commandments about sacrifices to their financial gain.

Jews were required to offer sacrifice at the Temple according to their custom and laws. Because the sacrifice was holy, the sacrificial animals had to be "unblemished" (Exodus 12:5, Deuteronomy 17:1). The Law of Moses allowed worshippers to bring their own animals for sacrifice provided these animals met the proper standards. The Law also commanded priests to inspect and ensure that each animal met these requirements before administering the sacrifice (Leviticus 22:18-20). 

During Jesus's era, these laws had been twisted to exploit anyone who wished to worship God through sacrifice. Temple animal inspectors began to abuse their role to reject many animals for sacrifice, knowing that the worshippers would be forced to buy a pre-approved animal from the temple markets for a considerably marked-up price. 

The worshipper would then be forced to pay up or not follow the Law. Previously in Israel's history, the animal merchants set up shop on the Mount of Olives, across the Kidron Valley from the temple. But by Jesus's time they had migrated into the temple itself.

But this was not all. The second group of people Jesus found as He went in the temple were money changers. 

This was another phase of the on-going temple-racket. The Sadducees—the party of priests who controlled and operated the temple—would not accept Roman-issued currency because they bore the image of Caesar. They viewed this currency as blasphemous and a violation of the second commandment: 

"You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth."
(Exodus 20:4, Deuteronomy 5:8) 

Rome forbade their Jewish subjects from printing their own currency. But Rome did allow another type of currency, known as Tyrian shekels, to be in circulation. 

Tyrian shekels were a type of silver coin minted in the city of Tyre, a major Phoenician city in ancient times. These shekels were known for their purity and were widely recognized and accepted for trade throughout the ancient Near East. Tyrian shekels were established long before the Greeks or Romans entered the region, which partly explains why Rome accepted their legitimacy. During the Roman occupation of Israel, the Sadducees accepted Tyrian shekels for temple worship instead of Roman coins. 

Anyone who needed to buy an animal for sacrifice had to exchange their unholy Roman currency for Tyrian shekels. The money changers had set up booths in the temple courtyard, eager to perform this "service" for a fee. The money changers essentially would not "break the change" that the temple-goers would give them. They took exorbitant excess charges off the top, and people were not getting a fair exchange rate.

Moreover, the Sadducees collected an annual "temple tax." Passover was the time when this tax was collected, probably because it was the first festival of the year when every adult Jewish male made pilgrimage to worship in Jerusalem. This collection was set at a half shekel (Exodus 30:13-14)—with the money changers' service charge, it was more.

Thus these practices were examples of how the Jewish priests had twisted something instituted by God to line their own pockets.

According to the Jewish Mishnah, this exploitation appears to have been conducted under the direction of Annas, a former high priest who abused his position to appoint his sons and sons in-laws as treasurers and temple overseers (Talmud. Pesachim 57a:8). The ancient Jewish historian, Josephus, had this to say about Annas: 

"…he increased in glory every day; and this to a great degree…For he was a great hoarder up of money."
(Josephus. Antiquities of the Jews XX.9.2)

These Jewish testimonies display that Annas and his priestly, nepotistic dynasty was known for greedily accumulating wealth from the temple treasury. The House of Annas had multiple family members serve as high priest in the century sixty years before the destruction of the temple—including Caiaphas, his son-in-law, who was high priest the year Jesus was crucified (John 18:13-14). 

Some have referred to this religious racket as "the Bazaar of the Sons of Annas." This implies that Annas was one of the main beneficiaries of the temple booths that ringed the temple courtyards and extorted worshippers through the money changers and through selling sacrificial animals, presumably at high prices (Matthew 21:12, John 2:13-22). 

When Jesus saw those selling sacrificial animals in the temple and the money changers seated at their tables, He became angry. 

And He made a scourge of cords, and drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen; and He poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables (vs 14-15). 

This passage may seem to defy what many people expect from Jesus. It might seem harsh and some may wonder if His response is unjust. We will discuss the integrity of Jesus in the action further in this commentary. 

Jesus makes a whip and drives all those who were selling, as well as the money changers, out of the temple (vs 14-15). That Jesus crafted a whip prior to driving the money changers out of the temple demonstrates that His response was not impulsive but premeditated. His emotions did not get the better of Him; His response was calculated for a constructive purpose. 

Indeed, this is what we should expect, since Jesus was without sin (2 Corinthians 5:21). This is the first indication that Jesus's anger was justified, and His actions appropriate. But it is reasonable to ask the question: why is Jesus so angry? It seems that there are three reasons causing His anger: 

• The Corrupt Spiritual Abuse by the Priests
• The Defilement of the Holy Temple
• The Misrepresentation of God

The first thing Jesus was angered by was the corrupt spiritual abuse from the priests. These practices were the epitome of corruption. The Sadducees were not running an innocent market in the temple. Both the money-changing and the sale of sacrificial animals were fraudulent. All of the animals being sold would have been used as sacrifices to God in the temple. These sacrifices could be offered for various purposes, including to worship God and to atone for sin. 

The excessive fault-finding of the sacrificial animals, the marked-up prices and the service charge for exchanging money were all creating an undue burden for worshippers to follow the sacrificial commandments, and the priests who were supposed to mediate between God and His worshippers were the very ones interfering with these sacrifices. Jesus was angry at how the Lord's priests were spiritually abusing His people for their own selfish gain. 

The second thing that appears to have angered Jesus on this occasion was the way it defiled the holy temple. The temple was holy and to be set apart for worshipping God. And when Annas and his followers repurposed the temple for something other than this holy purpose, they were making it less than what it was. 

And to those who were selling the doves He said, "Take these things away; stop making My Father's house a place of business" (v16). 

Jesus seems particularly angry that this corrupt commerce is taking place in His Father's house. Notice how Jesus described the temple. He referred to it as: My Father's house. 

In Hebrew, the temple was referred to as "Beit Hamikdash," which translates to "the holy house," illustrating its sanctity as the abode of God on earth. When Jesus called the temple, "My Father's house," He was communicating that His Father was God. At the very least, Jewish leadership would have understood Jesus to be claiming that He had a special relationship with God. This was a bold thing to assert. But Jesus was suggesting more than a special relationship with God—for Jesus was God (John 1:1, 14). Jesus was the Son of God (John 1:34, 49). This would not be the last time Jesus would make such a bold assertion or speak of God as His Father.

The specific location of where the money changers and animal vendors were set up also may have factored into Jesus's anger. They took over a particular part of the temple called the "court of Gentiles." The Jerusalem temple was organized in layers. The most sacred spaces were the innermost ones, and it became less sacred, and less exclusive, proceeding outward. Worshippers were allowed into certain layers of the temple based on their identities. 

The court of Gentiles was the outermost layer and the least exclusive because even the Gentiles—the "foreigners in the midst" (Leviticus 19:33-34)—were allowed to pray and worship there. 

Therefore, Jesus may be angry that commerce is taking place in the court of Gentiles because it was depriving the foreigners of justice (Malachi 3:5). It might have been virtually impossible to pray or worship surrounded by the din of coins jingling, cattle lowing, and people negotiating. This is particularly bad because throughout the Old Testament, the Jews are called to witness to the nations about who God is and to show that His ways lead to human flourishing (Isaiah 61:6). This is probably among the reasons that Jesus drives out these corrupt businesspeople so violently, and makes such a strong declaration (vs 14-16).

The third reason Jesus was angered by Annas's repurposing of the temple into a personal place of business was that it was giving people the wrong impression about who God is. The impression the Jewish leaders gave both Jews and Gentiles was that they do not matter much to God. The people have to jump through hoop after hoop as soon as they arrive at the temple. And this may have angered Jesus because the exact opposite is true of God the Father, and therefore of His Son as well. 

Rather than put up obstacles for people to approach, God is the one who initiates relationship with human beings (John 3:16, 1 John 4:10). Moreover, God does this not because of what He can get, but simply because of His love (1 John 4:7-9). As Paul says, "you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ" (Ephesians 2:13).

Moreover, Jesus's decisive actions illuminate that the priests are not doing their assigned job. God assigned the tribe of Levi the task of teaching His Torah—that is, instruction/law (Deuteronomy 33:10). The term Torah refers to the body of teaching that the LORD gave to Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Deuteronomy 1:5). 

However, several centuries before Jesus appeared, God said through the prophet Hosea that He gave Israel/Judah "ten thousand precepts of My law," yet they regarded the instruction as strange (Hosea 8:12). That is apparently still the case during the time of Jesus. 

The Levites/priests were assigned to be God's instructors and representatives. So when they failed to do their job uprightly, their bad example was particularly damaging—both to their own people and to the visitors among them. They were supposed to be examples to lead people to love one another and create mutual benefit. Instead, they became examples of greed and exploitation. 

Thus, it is also likely that in turning over the tables, Jesus is presenting Himself as the second Moses, the prophet God promised who would speak His word directly to Israel (Deuteronomy 18:18). In a way, Jesus is tearing down idols made by the priests, just as Moses destroyed the golden calf fashioned by his brother Aaron, the man from whose lineage the Levites came (Exodus 32:2-4, 19-20). 

Before continuing further, it is worth noting that John's Gospel seems to suggest that Jesus cleared the temple during the first Passover of His ministry. Matthew, Mark, and Luke each overtly indicate that Jesus cleared the temple during the final Passover of His earthly ministry. Overlaying the Gospels together, it seems most likely that Jesus cleared the temple on two separate occasions with two or three years in between.

John pauses his narrative at this point and states that the disciples remembered a quotation from Psalm 69:9, perceiving that Jesus's behavior matched and fulfilled that description: 

His disciples remembered that it was written, "Zeal for Your house will consume me" (v 17). 

The most likely time that His discipled remembered this was sometime after Jesus had risen from the dead. This very well could have been one of the "Aha!" moments that the disciples had after Jesus explained how He had fulfilled what was written of Him in the Law and the Prophets (Luke 24:25-27, 35, 44-45). 

This Old Testament quotation comes from Psalm 69. Psalm 69 is a messianic psalm. It prophesies of the Messiah's suffering and salvation. John's reference actually comes from the first half of Psalm 69:9. John's reference not only demonstrates the fiery zeal that Jesus displayed when He cleansed His Father's House, it also demonstrates Psalm 69's prophetic prediction that one of the reasons the Messiah will suffer is because of His zeal for His Father's house. 

Indeed Jesus's righteous anger clearing the temple of merchants and money changers gives probable cause for the Sadducees' murderous animosity toward Him (see Matthew 22:23-33). It could be that Annas's coffers suffered a major loss when Jesus cleared the temple (not only once, but seemingly twice) during Passover, one of the most lucrative seasons for his corrupt scheme. 

Thus, Annas's disdain for Jesus might have stemmed from Jesus publicly confronting the corrupt practices taking place under his supervision, thereby threatening his income, prestige, and power. 

Jesus's zeal for His Father's house led to His crucifixion where Jesus became the propitiation for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:2). 

The full verse of Psalm 69:9 is:

"For zeal for Your house has consumed me,
And the reproaches of those who reproach You have fallen on me."
(Psalm 69:9)

The original Psalm is written in the past tense, and the Hebrew literally reads, "Zeal for your house has torn me apart" (Psalm 69:9). In other words, it is an early hint that Jesus the Messiah will proceed with His mission at great cost to Himself. 

Moreover, this passage also portrays Jesus as the fulfillment of another important Messianic prophecy from the Old Testament: Malachi 3:1-5. In that passage, God warns corrupt Jewish leaders that He "will suddenly come to his temple" to bring "judgement," but also to "refine" and "purify" them (Malachi 3:1-4). 

At the time Malachi wrote his prophecies, roughly 350 to 500 years before Christ's birth, the problem was much the same as Jesus observes here: the religious leaders have not been faithful to their call and have instead led the nation into sin and spiritual decline. Therefore, that prophecy clarifies the constructive purpose behind Jesus's behavior in this episode: to refine and purify His people.

Having considered why Jesus was angered by the commerce He observed in the temple, we may also further consider why it was right for Him to be angry. Indeed, some have objected to Jesus's behavior in this passage on moral grounds, saying that it contradicts His own teachings, such as those found in the Sermon on the Mount. 

To be clear, Jesus was right in responding as He did. 

For one thing, to argue that Jesus did not follow His own principles presumes that there is a moral standard that transcends God Himself, which would mean God is not God. Such a presumption is erroneous. Setting that aside, Jesus's behavior at the temple is consistent with God's goodness and His behavior throughout scripture. 

First, God is particularly forceful in stating that He will judge false teachers and leaders who abuse their authority over His people (Malachi 3, Ezekiel 34). Jesus warned of false teachers and commanded His followers not to follow those whose words did not match their actions (Matthew 7:15-20). Scripture also promises a great reward for those who exercise good spiritual leadership over God's people (1 Peter 5:1-4). 

Second, people tend to mistake niceness for a biblical virtue when it is not. Niceness is rooted in self-seeking; it is behavior chosen to avoid discomfort and gain acceptance from others. God is not nice. God is love (1 John 4:8). Love is superior to niceness. Love is rooted in grace and truth. Jesus created grace and truth (John 1:18). Love requires self-sacrifice and courage. 

Here at the temple, Jesus demonstrates the biblical virtue of courage. In the Bible, courage is often associated with great faith. For example, the courageous though otherwise morally-challenged Old Testament character Sampson is lauded for his faith (Hebrews 11:32). Conversely, in Revelation, John describes cowardice as a reprehensible vice deserving of the lake of fire (Revelation 21:8). 

It was a courageous act on Jesus's part to clear out the temple. His actions infuriated the money changers and those who were selling, as well as the religious leaders. To do such a thing He must have been more concerned about the truth than about His own comfort. The strength of His response shows that He is not a pretender who is in it for His own pleasure. He is here for the order of God's house. He is likely to cause Himself suffering by doing this and yet He does it anyway. As indeed the quotation of Psalm 69:9 in verse 17 suggests, zeal for His Father's House will consume Him or tear Him apart. Jesus, who knew what the scriptures prophesied of the Messiah's suffering, was aware that His actions in the temple could, or even would, lead to His suffering and death.

Moreover, this was not the only occasion where Jesus exhibited courage in the face of pressure from the religious leaders for the good of others. Jesus regularly offended the religious leaders with His parables (Mark 12:12). He openly chastised them (Matthew 23). He even coined a term for them. He called them "hypocrites," which was a Greek term for an actor. That is, He called the religious class to account for honoring God with their mouths, while their hearts and actions showed that they were far from Him (Isaiah 29:13, Matthew 15:7-9). 

In addition, Jesus's strong response displays the goodness of God's justice. Some might ask, "How can a loving God punish anyone?" Or, "How can a loving God be angry?" The answer is rooted in the reality that love requires choice, and real choice opens the possibility for evil. God designed the world with physical as well as moral laws. He tells people what is in their best interest, then allows them to choose (Genesis 2:16-17, Joshua 24:15, Galatians 6:8). 

When people choose sin, they reap negative consequences (Romans 1:14, 26, 28, 6:23). Moreover, if there is to be justice in the world, then evil must have a consequence. Yet God amazingly resolves love and justice through the sacrifice of Himself on behalf of the entire world (John 3:16, Colossians 2:14)—as the second half of Psalm 69:9 predicts: "the reproaches of those who reproach You have fallen on me."

In His covenant/treaty with Israel, God set forth the negative consequences that would incur if they disobeyed His instructions (Deuteronomy 28:15-63), and the blessings they would gain if they followed them (Deuteronomy 28:1-14). Many of these consequences were the natural results of God's design for the world. For example, if Israel followed idolatrous pagan ways, which promoted the strong exploiting the weak, the land would naturally suffer from violence and conflict. Yet God also promised to intervene directly when His people went astray, as in this episode where Jesus cleanses the temple. In each instance, He has the best interest of His people at heart, as nothing can separate us from God's love (Romans 8:38-39). 

Constructive results ultimately require destruction of the evil which stands in the way. Divine wrath and justice are constructive, removing that which corrupts God's good design. If God were ambivalent to evil, He might be considered "nice," but He would be neither good nor loving. Yet a God who is angered by corruption and other evils, and who vows to put a stop to it, is good and loving and worthy of praise. Thus, following God requires people to trust that He is working with their best interests at heart, even though that will involve uncomfortable refining (Luke 3:16b-17, Romans 8:28).