Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of John 2:13

And the Jews’ passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem,

Joh 2:13 to Joh 3:36 . The Work among Jews

13. And the Jews’ passover ] Or, the Passover of the Jews. An indication that this Gospel was written outside Palestine: one writing in the country would hardly have added ‘of the Jews.’ It is perhaps also an indication that this Gospel was written after a Passover of the Christians had come into recognition. Passovers were active times in Christ’s ministry; and this is the first of them. It was possibly the nearness of the Passover which caused this traffic in the Temple Court. It existed for the convenience of strangers. Certainly the nearness of the Feast would add significance to Christ’s action. While the Jews were purifying themselves for the Passover He purified the Temple. S. John groups his narrative round the Jewish festivals: we have (1) Passover; (2) Purim (?), Joh 5:1; (3) Passover, Joh 6:4; (4) Tabernacles, Joh 7:2; (5) Dedication, Joh 10:22; (6) Passover, Joh 11:55.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Joh 2:13 to Joh 11:57 . The Work

We here enter on the second portion of the first main division of the Gospel, thus subdivided: The Work (1) among Jews, (2) among Samaritans, (3) among Galileans, (4) among mixed multitudes.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

The Jews passover – The feast among the Jews called the Passover. See the notes at Mat. 26:2-17.

And Jesus went up to Jerusalem – Every male among the Jews was required to appear at this feast. Jesus, in obedience to the law, went up to observe it. This is the first Passover on which he attended after he entered on the work of the ministry. It is commonly supposed that he observed three others one recorded Luk 6:1; another Joh 6:4, and the last one on the night before he was crucified, Joh 11:55. As his baptism when he entered on his ministry had taken place some time before this – probably not far from six months – it follows that the period of his ministry was not far from three years and a half, agreeably to the prophecy in Dan 9:27.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Joh 2:13-17

The Jews passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.

Christs first passover

I. HIS ATTENDANCE AT THE PASSOVER, One of the three great annual festivals which all males were required to attend. None excused but the sick and the disabled. God made the ordinance peremptory, to teach

(1) That His worship and service were the chief things.

(2) That Gods house was to be the centre of the moral universe, and that all nations would flow to it. Christs attendance showed

1. His fulfilling of all righteousness. He came not to destroy.

2. His communion with believers of the Old Testament. Partaking of their sacraments, He declared Himself of one body and spirit with them, just as by instituting sacraments for New Testament believers He declared Himself of one body and spirit with them. Thus Christ is the bond of both dispensations.

3. Himself and His mission to the nation. The promise was that He should come to His temple. Here the people could identify Him if they chose.

II. THE CONDITION IN WHICH HE FOUND THE TEMPLE, AND HIS INTERFERENCE THEREWITH. The market was going on in the outer courts of the Gentiles. The sheep, etc., were sold there to save the inconvenience of individual Jews bringing their offerings from a distance. The money-changers were there, to exchange foreign money for the half-shekel of the sanctuary. The abuse consisted in making Gods house a house of merchandise, in which the priests themselves profited. Christ interfered to show His official assumption and exercise of legitimate authority in His own house. The cattle were driven out, the money-tables overthrown; but the doves ordered to be taken away, so that they might not be harmed. Nothing harmful or cruel was done. In this interference we see His glory as the Son of God and His administrative authority as King of Israel. Unsupported Himself, all fled before Him.

III. THE CONVICTION WROUGHT IN THE MINDS OF SERVANTS (Joh 2:17).

1. We have here the love of Christ, and His earnestness for their salvation and Gods glory: typical of His whole work.

2. Christs example to us.

(1) Our zeal must begin with ourselves.

(2) Must concern itself with Gods honour and mans salvation.

(3) Must be actuated by love. (A. Beith, D. D.)

The temple market

I. THE MARKET.

1. Described. Jerusalem was in all its glory. Its inhabitants were astir in the early morning, enjoying the cool of the day and the excitement of the season. The streets were blocked by crowds from all parts, who had to make their way to the temple past flocks of sheep and droves of cattle. Sellers of all possible wares beset the pilgrim, for the feasts were the traders harvests. Inside the temple space the noise and pressure were, if possible, worse. The outer court was in part covered with pens for sheep and oxen. It was, in fact, the yearly fair of Jerusalem, and the crowds added to the din and tumult, till the services in the neighbouring courts were sadly disturbed.

2. Accounted for. It seems strange that the priests should have permitted it, but the explanation throws light on Christs conduct. The priests made pecuniary profit of it. The sale of doves was almost wholly in their hands, and the rent for the rest was very large. The money-changers were usurers and tricksters, and augmented the priests revenue out of their unlawful gains.

3. Christs indignation was, therefore, natural. He had come fresh from the manifestation of His glory, with all the enthusiasm natural to a Jewish prophet and inspired with His Divine mission, to testify to the nation as a whole where it could be best reached. Behold, then, His Fathers house invaded by a troop of mercenaries and hucksters!

II. THE EXHIBITION OF CHRISTS WONDROUS MORAL POWER. There was no physical power displayed, nor any exciting contention with the profaners of the temple. The scourge was only an emblem of power and chastisement, the sight of which was sufficient, and at which they all unresistingly fled. How could one man effect such a clearance, unknown, a Galilean, with no formal authority, priestly power, or following? It was perhaps due to the solar light of His countenance, behind which was the unspeakable power of perfect holiness (Mat 17:2), which made Him attractive to the virtuous and devout, but awful to mere money-grubbers. They were dumb and helpless, because conscience-stricken, in the presence of Incarnate Righteousness.

III. THE PROFOUND SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS ACT. Spiritual cleansing. The temple may be considered as a symbol

1. Of the heart defiled by selfishness and sin, to be cleansed by the expulsive power of Christs love.

2. Of society or the world, to be cleansed by Christs redeeming grace.

3. Of the Church, to be cleansed from superstition, and worldliness, and bigotry, by truth, purity, and charity. (J. E. Flower, M. A.)

The profaned temple

I. THE SIGN AND ITS APPLICABILITY. The temple a symbol of the temple of humanity, built of living stones. To cleanse this He entered on His ministry; and if He had a right to do the greater work, He had a right to do the lesser.

II. THOUGHTS SUGGESTED BY THE SIGN.

1. All men are created to form part of Gods temple. The Divine idea of humanity is an organic whole–Christ the centre, the shrine; human hearts grouped round Him forming the courts. Contrast the ideal with the actual. Yet in the midst of chaos God is working out His purpose, and will not rest till the idea is realized.

2. Men have misused the courts as markets. Commerce is good, but its place is outside the heart, not inside. It defiles when it intrudes on the sanctuary. Yet how hard even in the most sacred seasons to exclude their profane associations. Business for most is more absorbing than God and His will.

3. Christ has power and authority to cleanse the courts.

(1) With His scourge He may drive away the property which usurps His Fathers place.

(2) He may scatter the money-changers money, and leave him at leisure to reflect with out it.

(3) He may speak His orders to those who defile the sanctuary with lighter profanations through judgment and disease.

4. The time will come when the temple shall be purified. In the Revelation we see the design perfected. A city without a temple, because itself is a temple. There shall be gold there, and all the good things of the earth shall be sanctified to Divine uses. (C. A. Goodhart, M. A.)

The purging of the temple

I. APPROPRIATE to

1. The place: the metropolis, the centre of the Theocracy, the predicted theatre of Messiahs self-revelation (Zec 2:10-11; Zec 9:9).

2. The time: at the passover, when the paschal lamb, of which He was the antitype, was about to be offered, and when the vast crowd gathered afforded a favourably opportunity for impressing the national mind and conscience.

3. The condition of the temple: whose forecourt, reserved for the worship of proselytes, was transformed into a market and fair under the pretence of religion–a melancholy, because faithful, picture of the secularization of the Jewish religion by the Pharisees.

4. The character of Him who carried it through. The Fathers Son had a right to purge His Fathers house.

II. SUPERNATURAL. As much so as the turning of water into wine. The manifest insufficiency of the means places it in the same category as Joh 18:6. Its suddenness also surprised, and inward consciousness of guilt paralyzed, the traders. Natural and supernatural causes were thus combined.

III. SIGNIFICANT. Designed to be a revelation to the ecclesiastical authorities of His Messiahship (Psa 69:9; Mal 3:2-6).

IV. SUGGESTIVE. Recalling to the disciples the words of the Psalmist, it confirmed their recently formed convictions.

V. ALARMING. It startled the Sanhedrim, who recognized the Messianic character of the action, but wanted to know whether He was Messiah. Secretly they must have dreaded this. But because He was different from what they expected, they declined to receive Him. They trifled with their consciences by asking for a sign. They preferred the darkness, although the light had now conspicuously dawned. Lessons:

1. The duty and privileges of the ordinances of religion. Christ at the passover.

2. The need of purity and order in the sanctuary–Christ purging the temple court.

3. The danger of a worldly spirit intruding into the domain of religion–the traders in the sacred edifice.

4. The propriety of being zealously affected in Divine service–Christs example. (T. Whitelaw, M. A.)

Christs principles of action

Had Christ appeared as a teacher it would have been a great benevolence: but He would hardly have had so widespread an influence. Teaching was only one part of His task, the other was to ordain a fellowship. So He needed to appear as the reformer of religion. The temple was the centre of religious life: here then the reformation must begin. See then the principles of Christ as a religious reformer.

I. HE DID NOT COME TO DESTROY, BUT TO PURIFY AND FINISH. But why trouble Himself about an institution that was to pass away? (Joh 4:24). The answer is that Jesus did wish to erect the new on the ruins of the old, but since so much depended on the old, this, when reformed, should attach itself to that. We should be like Christ in this, not to destroy but to reform and build up.

II. THE ZEAL OF THE REDEEMER WAS INTENDED TO BANISH EVERYTHING THAT MIGHT ENTANGLE MEN AGAIN IN WORLDLY THOUGHTS AND ANXIETIES. The really devout and upright as well as the frivolous might see no evil nor distracting influence in these things. The temple was large enough. All these arrangements had to do with religious life. Was it not a matter of indifference whether they were carried on within or in the neighbourhood of the temple. Those whose thoughts would be disturbed by them would be disturbed without them. But human prudence is one thing; the judgment of Christ another. Whatever draws men to and keeps men near God must be kept pure and free from desecration. The weakness of the human heart forbids the worldly and the Divine mingling with one another. The germ of the Jewish corruption lay in the mixing of the two. Let then our church, life ordained by that Lord who here cleared the temple, be free from foreign admixture.

III. WHAT RIGHT HAD CHRIST TO ACT IS THIS WAY? Did He not overstep the bounds of His authority. No, according to the free customs of that people and age it was competent to any one to assail anything that was at variance with public law. There was ever scope for honest zeal. Christ found it so, and would have us find it so and lift our voices for what is right and good, to win public opinion to them. We Christians are a priestly people called to keep pure the temple of God upon earth. (Schleiermacher.)

Christ at Jerusalem

We see

I. HOW MUCH CHRIST DISAPPROVES OF IRREVERENT BEHAVIOUR IN THE HOUSE OF GOD. Are there none who bring to church their money, their lands, their cattle, etc.; who bring their bodies only to a place of worship and are almost in all evil, in the congregation (Pro 5:14).

II. HOW MEN MAY REMEMBER WORDS OF RELIGIOUS TRUTH LONG AFTER THEY ARE SPOKEN, and may one day see in them a meaning which they now do not see (Joh 2:19; Joh 2:22). Sermons preached to apparently heedless ears are not all lost and thrown away; nor are texts taught by teachers or parents to children. There is often a resurrection of the good seed sown after many 1Co 15:58; Ecc 11:1).

III. HOW PERFECT IS OUR LORDS KNOWLEDGE OF THE HUMAN HEART (verses 24-25). He saw beneath their superficial faith that they were not disciples indeed. This thought ought to make hypocrites and false professors tremble. They may deceive men but they cannot deceive Christ. But it is a word of encouragement to real Christians. (Bp. Ryle.)

Transition

It is impossible not to feel the change which at this point comes over the narrative.

I. There is A CHANGE.

1. Of place: Jerusalem and Cans.

2. Of occasion: the passover and the marriage feast.

3. Of manner of action: the stern Reformer and the sympathizing Guest.

II. THE SPIRITUAL LESSONS WHICH THE TWO SIGNS CONVEY ARE ALSO COMPLEMENTARY.

1. One represents the ennobling of common life and the other the purification of Divine worship.

2. One is a revelation of the Son of peace, the other a revelation of the Christ, the Fulfiller of the hope and purpose of Israel. (Bp. Westcott.)

The desecration of the living temple

Alas! that even in the restored and consecrated temple of mans soul, scenes are at times enacted, of which the sacrilege in the Jewish temple was but a feeble emblem. It is a desecration, Dot of a material building but of Gods spiritual house–the merchandise, not of sheep and oxen but of sins. The pollution is not in the outermost court of the Gentiles, but in the inmost sanctuary where God delights to dwell–in mans heart. Too often is there rebellion, even in the believers soul, against the authority of the Lord; and giving to Him a divided heart. Too often are the living temples thronged with carnal things, earthly affections and desires. Too often is the lowing of oxen and the bleating of sheep heard, and the tables of the money Changers planted, within the precincts of Gods house. Alas! how often is the silent and solemn devotion of the believers heart distracted by the noise of conflicting passions, and its purity defiled by low and grovelling affections. Holy thoughts and desires, like the poor, despised Gentiles, are turned out of their proper place, and thrust into a corner. Oh, this is monstrous incongruity. Have you not here a temple which you have sacrilegiously profaned; and has not your passion for sordid gain and worldly occupation so entirely engaged and absorbed you, that all your feelings and faculties seem to be expended on earthly vanities, and your affections settled down to the dust? You profane that which God has made holy–that which He has set apart for Himself, and where He would delight to dwell. My house shall be called a house of prayer, but ye have made it a den of thieves. (W. Chalmers, M. A.)

Money changers

in the temple are those who pursue secular interests in the church; and Gods house is made a house of merchandise, not only by those who seek to obtain money or praise, or honour by means of holy orders, but by those also who exercise the sacred ministry, or dispense sacred gifts, with a view to human rewards and not with simplicity of intention. (Bp. Wordsworth.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 13. And the Jews’ passover was at hand] This was the reason why he stayed but a few days at Capernaum, Joh 2:12, as he wished to be present at the celebration of this feast at Jerusalem.

This was the first passover after Christ’s baptism. The second is mentioned, Lu 6:1. The third, Joh 6:4. And the fourth, which was that at which he was crucified, Joh 11:55. From which it appears,

1. That our blessed Lord continued his public ministry about three years and a half, according to the prophecy of Daniel, Da 9:27. And,

2. That, having been baptized about the beginning of his thirtieth year, he was crucified precisely in the middle of his thirty-third. See Martin.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

Concerning the Jewish passover we have once and again spoken in our notes on the other evangelists. The institution of it was Exo 12:1-51. It was to be solemnized yearly in the place which the Lord should choose, according to the law, Deu 16:6. Christ, though he was not naturally subject to the law, yet to fulfil all righteousness, and to redeem his people from the curse of the law, Gal 4:5, kept the passover yearly, taking also advantage from the conflux of the people to Jerusalem at that time, to make himself and his doctrine more known. None of the other evangelists make mention of more than one passover between the time of Christs baptism and death: John plainly mentions three, one here, another in Joh 6:4, the last, Joh 18:39; and some think that he mentions another, though more obscurely, Joh 5:1. Our Lord was at them all.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

And the Jews’ passover was at hand,…. That feast which was kept on the fourteenth day of Nisan, in commemoration of the Lord’s passing over, and by the houses of the Israelites, when he slew the firstborn in Egypt: and it is called the Jews’ passover, because they only were obliged to keep it: nor was it obligatory upon the Gentiles; and, besides, was now abolished when John wrote this Gospel, though still retained by the Jews. And moreover, John was now among the Gentiles, and for whose sake he penned this Gospel; and therefore so distinguishes this feast, which was typical of the Christian passover, or of Christ our passover that is sacrificed for us. This was the first “passover” after Christ’s baptism, which is generally thought to have been about half a year before; though so much time cannot be made out from the scriptural account; for from his baptism, to his return out of the wilderness to John, were forty days; and from thence, to his coming to Cana, four or, five days more; and perhaps he might be seven days in Cana; for so long a wedding was usually kept; and his stay at Capernaum was but a few days; all which do not amount to above eight or nine weeks at most: the second passover after this, is, by some, thought to be the feast mentioned in Joh 5:1, and the third in Joh 6:4, and the fourth and last, at which he suffered, in Joh 18:28. The Evangelist John is the only writer that gives an account of the passovers after Christ entered on his public ministry; by which is known the duration of it, which is generally thought to be about three years and a half. “Three years and a half”, the Jews say a, the Shekinah sat upon the Mount of Olives, expecting that the Israelites would repent, but they did not; and this seems to be the term of time for disciples to learn of their masters: it is said b, one came from Athens to Jerusalem, and he served “three years and a half” to learn the doctrine of wisdom, and he learned it not.

And Jesus went up to Jerusalem; not alone, but his disciples with him, as appears from Joh 2:17, to keep the passover as he had been wont to do, and as the law required; and he being under the law, as a son of Abraham, and the surety of his people, it became him to fulfil all righteousness, ceremonial, as well as moral, and which he strictly observed. He is said to go up to Jerusalem, because that stood on higher ground than the low lands of Galilee, and was the only place where the passover might be kept; see De 16:2.

a Praefat. Echa Rabbati, fol. 40. 4. b Echa Rabbati, fol. 44. 4.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

The passover of the Jews ( ). The Synoptics do not give “of the Jews,” but John is writing after the destruction of the temple and for Gentile readers. John mentions the passovers in Christ’s ministry outside of the one when Christ was crucified, this one and one in 6:4. There may be another (5:1), but we do not know. But for John we should not know that Christ’s ministry was much over a year in length.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

The Jews ‘ passover. On John’s use of the term Jews, see on 1 19. So it is used here with an under – reference to the national religion as consisting in mere ceremonies. The same hint underlies the words in ver. 6, “after the Jews ‘ manner of purifying.” Only John mentions this earliest passover of Christ ‘s ministry. The Synoptists relate no incident of his ministry in Judaea, and but for the narrative of John, it could not be positively asserted that Jesus went up to Jerusalem during His public life until the time of His arrest and crucifixion.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

1) “And the Jews’ passover was at hand,” (kai engus en to pascha ton loudaion) “And the passover of the Jews was at hand,” or approaching, Exo 12:14. John mentions the passover three times and each time used the phrase 11 of the Jews,” because he wrote for many who were not familiar with Jewish religious customs, Joh 5:6; Joh 6:4; Joh 11:55.

2) “And Jesus went up to Jerusalem,” (kai anebe eis lerosoluma ho lesous) “And Jesus went up into Jerusalem,” in Judea, from Capernaum in Galilee, Jerusalem is 2,500 feet above sea level and is at an higher altitude than Capernaum some 75 miles to the north. His disciples also went up with Him as indicated Joh 2:17.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

13. And the passover of the Jews was at hand; therefore Jesus went up to Jerusalem. The Greek words καὶ ἀνέβη, may be literally rendered, and he went up; but the Evangelist has used the copulative and instead of therefore; for he means that Christ went up at that time, in order to celebrate the passover at Jerusalem. There were two reasons why he did so; for since the Son of God became subject to the Law on our account, he intended, by observing with exactness all the precepts of the Law, to present in his own person a pattern of entire subjection and obedience. Again, as he could do more good, when there was a multitude of people, he almost always availed himself of such an occasion. Whenever, therefore, we shall afterwards find it said that Christ came to Jerusalem at the feast, let the reader observe that he did so, first, that along with others he might observe the exercises of religion which God had appointed, and, next, that he might publish his doctrine amidst a larger concourse of people.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

EXPLANATORY AND CRITICAL NOTES

Joh. 2:12. Capernaum.Cod. , B, read , i.e. the kaphar or village of Nahum. Two sites especially have been fixed upon as the best representatives of the ancient Capernaum. The ruins at Tell Hm are now considered to have the best claim to represent the Saviours city. His brethren.The controversies which have raged round this subject have centred on the question of the perpetual virginity of Mary. Setting aside the conjecture of Jerome, that these brethren were in reality first cousins, children of Mary (the wife of Cleophas, Joh. 19:25), sister of our Lords mother, as incapable of being sufficiently proved, there are two positions which should be noted:

(1) that of Helvidius, that the brethren are actual brothers, the sons of Joseph and Mary; and

(2) that of Epiphanius, that these brethren were children of Joseph by a former marriage. But as the latter position rests for its proof only on the statement of an apocryphal gospel, those who do not feel it necessary to maintain the somewhat sentimental notion of Marys perpetual virginity will be shut up to accept the position of Helvidius. Indeed in this casual mention of our Lords brethren may be found an indirect confirmation of His recognition of the sanctity of lawful marriage. Dr. Reynolds well says: Christ, who honoured marriage by His first display of miraculous power, and this at the suggestion of His own mother, and in the society of those who passed undoubtedly as His brothers, would not feel that the faintest shadow of a shade fell on the lofty purity of His mother by this hypothesis. (But see Hom. Note on Joh. 7:3.)

Joh. 2:12-13. These verses furnish us, in connection with Joh. 2:20-21, an important time-note (vide in loc.). It was the first year of our Lords public ministry, i.e., according to the best authorities, A.D. 28, and in that year the 15th Nisan fell on March 30th. Caspari gives the following dates: Baptism by John, February 1st (about); return to Bethania, forty days later (about March 12th); Cana, March 15th; Capernaum, March 17th; Jerusalem, March 29th (14th Nisan).

Joh. 2:14-16. The same or a similar fact is narrated by the Synoptists on the occasion of the last passover (Mat. 21:12-16, etc.). Here, then, there are three cases possible: either the Lord performed the cleansing of the sanctuary twice, or He did so only once at the beginning of His ministry; or, finally, only once, but at the end of His ministry. No slight grounds may be adduced in favour of the repetition. The cleansing of the sanctuary was a symbolical act, by which our Lord represented that which He desired, and at which He aimed; it was thus entirely in place at the very outset of His public ministry, and equally so at the close of His labours. Probably John and Andrew alone accompanied our Lord to Jerusalem on this occasion, the other disciples remaining in Galilee until their final call (Luk. 6:13). Thus we can understand why John alone narrates this first cleansing, and the Synoptists only the second. A reason why John especially accompanied Him on this occasion may be found in Joh. 18:15 (vide Introduction). At these great feasts a stock-market was held in the court of the Gentiles; and it may be that the moneychangers were driven even into the court of the people of Israel, which was held to be almost as sacred as the sanctuary. Changers of money, who exchanged current and foreign moneys for the sacred half-shekel, in which alone the customary annual temple tax required from every adult Israelite could be paid. A scourge of small cords. = a cord made of bulrushesfrom the litter scattered about the court. And He said to those who sold doves, etc.Our Lord did not wish to cause the traders any loss. This traffic was necessary; but it was not to be carried on in His Fathers house. The reason why our Lord was not interfered with in this striking and bold action was the fact that all the pious, and even the ceremonial Israelites, secretly acknowledged that He was right. Temple here = , i.e. especially the outer courts, not , the sanctuary.

Joh. 2:17. The zeal of Thine house shall eat Me up (Psa. 69:9).Westcott points out here, on the occasion of the first public act of Christ, as throughout St. John, the double effect of the act on those who already believed, and on those who were resolutely unbelieving. It is written. instead of the simpler . not in reference to Christs passion, but to His present burning, consuming desire for His Fathers honour, and the honour of His Fathers house.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Joh. 2:13-17

The cleansing of the temple.The incident recorded in these verses occurred on the first visit of the Redeemer (during His public ministry) to Jerusalem at the passover feast. Hitherto His teaching had been confined to the rural district of Galilee. Among the quiet Galilean villages, or at most in some of the towns situated on the margin of the inland lake, He had preached the word of the kingdom gently and lovingly to those who had ears to hear, and had manifested His glory in miracle, so that the faith of His disciples was strengthened and confirmed. But the passover was nigh, and, in accordance with the customs of the law, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. And there in this incident He began to unfold the spiritual nature of His office and work, experiencing in consequence the first open symptoms of antagonism from the rulers of the Jewish people.

Consider, first, the incident itself, and then its general and individual lessons.

I. The incident.On reaching the holy city the Saviours steps were soon directed to the temple; and there He found a state of things utterly intolerable. The temple area appears to have been divided into three enclosures or courts. In the inner enclosure lay the temple building itself, with the court of the priests surrounding it; beyond that was the court of the people; and then, divided off from that by what was known as the middle wall of partition, lay the court of the Gentiles. It was in the last of these enclosures that the traffic which led to this incident was carried on. It was no doubt meant for the convenience of the people. At the passovertide tens of thousands of Jews from every country almost in the then known world thronged the holy city. It was necessary for them to exchange their foreign moneys for current coin, etc.; hence the tables of the money-changers. Then, considering the immense number of sacrifices offered at the feast, in addition to those required for the daily and ordinary sacrifices, the necessity for a kind of stock market was undoubted. But it certainly showed how little real reverence the Jewish leaders had for the worship of God when they permitted all this to go on within the enclosures of the temple area. And it needs only a slight acquaintance with exchanges and cattle markets to conceive how every sight and sound, how the turmoil within the sacred precincts, must have hindered the worship of Gods house. Then all this was done in the court of the Gentilesthe nearest point to the temple the Gentiles could reach. Thus not only was their space curtailed, but what must have been the feeling of earnest men among them when they observed this buying and selling, chaffering and trading, in the courts of that house which was to be an house of prayer for all nations? The Gentiles were admitted to the court named after them so that they might become attracted to the religion and worship of Jehovah. But what was there in that clamouring, chaffering crowd, bleating of sheep, etc., to lift their thoughts heavenward? What likelihood was there that in that scene of traffic the prayer of Psalms 67. would be answered? We do not wonder, then, that Jesus, consumed with the zeal of His Fathers house, should have acted as He did. Making a scourgeprobably of materials lying scattered aboutHe drove the animals out of the court, overturned the tables of the money-changers, producing silence and order where formerly noise and confusion had prevailed. Notice should be taken of the language used by the Saviour in doing this action. When a boy in that same temple, while sitting among the doctors, hearing, etc. (Luk. 2:46), He had declared that He was about His Fathers business. In this incident He showed the source of His authority in asserting that the temple was His Fathers house. Here we have His distinct and clear claim from the beginning of His ministry to be the divine Son and the Messiah. The Jewish leaders well knew He meant to assert this claim. Hence their demand for a sign, some miraculous or extraordinary manifestation of the power He professed to wield. In this question we seem anew to detect Satan, the adversary, attacking Christ as he did before on the pinnacle of the temple: If Thou be the Son of God, etc. (Mat. 4:6), give an evident sign of your divine Sonship, and the people will believe and follow. But in this very incident, had they not been blinded, those Jews might have found the sign they desired. The Messiah had suddenly appeared in His temple to be as a refiner and purifier, etc. (Mal. 3:3). And the rejection by those men of such comings in mercy, etc., ushered in the day when His judgments were made manifest in the withdrawal of their privileges as a race.

II. The spiritual meaning of the incident.The ministry of our Lord was not ended at His ascension. His work on earth was in a great measure the opening and typical prelude of His work as mediator in heaven. He still

Pursues in heaven His mighty plan,
The Saviour and the Friend of man.

He still sits as a refiner and purifier of silver; still the prophetic promise holds good that He shall come suddenly to His temple to purge and purify. He has done so, and will do so until the end. See how true this is in the history of the Church. It was not long after His ascension that the warning voice again was heard. In the case of the Church at Laodicea, and others of the Churches in Roman Asia, we hear Him saying, Take these things hence. Then those who disregarded the warning voice had their light as Christian Churches quenched, just as the Jewish temple and worship were destroyed and the disobedient people scattered. Later in the Churchs history, when new empires had risen on fallen Romes broad foundations, there followed for the Church a long period of outward prosperity. But along with this much of evil was mingled. The world and the worlds traffic and pleasure penetrated even to the inner sanctuary, whilst the noise and clamour of it all drowned the voice of praise and prayer, crushed down the aspirations of devotion and worship. Therefore the great Purifier again appeared, and in the turmoil and overturning of the Reformation period He swept away much of the worldliness and materialism which was hindering the Churchs spiritual life, awakening men to a higher spiritual life and purer worship. He is ever watchful. He has the same zeal now for the purity of His Fathers spiritual temple. His fan is in His hand, etc. (Mat. 3:12). When Churches become selfish, material, worldly, forgetting their true mission, let them beware! To-day outward success is greatly soughtincreasing numbers, overflowing coffers. The world is stealing in on the Church in many ways. There is much danger of the spiritual life being neglected through men being engrossed in this material progress. Then the Lord may have to come in judgment to purify before He can come to bless.

III. Lessons of the incident.This incident brings personal and individual lessons. There is but one temple in the universe, says Novalis, and that is the body of man. Ye are the temple of God (2Co. 6:16), said St. Paul. In these bodies of ours, when our life has been yielded to Christ, Gods Holy Spirit dwells. Let Christian people beware lest they fall into the careless and irreverent conduct of the Jewish priests, and permit the sacred precincts to become a mart of business, a den of thieves, of sinful thoughts, feelings, etc., so that the noise of the worlds voices overpowers the accents of devotion. Into our churchesthose places sacred to worshipno sounds of the worlds business, etc., should be permitted to come. So should it be with Christian people as with reverent hearts they bow in Gods holy house of prayer. Their public and private worship should be as far as possible free from the inroads of the business of life. Our Redeemer in this also gave us an example that we should follow in His steps (Joh. 4:15; Mat. 14:23, etc.). But how often is the worship of Gods house profaned with worldly thoughts, vain imaginations, etc., and prayer stifled in its very inception! And is not the heartthe temple of God for the individualoften so crowded with other things that the sounds of the world predominate, and the voice of God is unheard and unheeded in the multitudinous roar? There is no true holy of holies in such hearts. To those in such case spiritual worship is unknown. They are immersed in the traffic of the market-place, warehouse, etc. The sights and sounds of places of amusement are oftener before them than the sanctities of worship. Let Christian people be jealous for the honour of Gods spiritual house, the Church; and let that temple be not profaned which He hath chosen to dwell inthe temple of a broken and contrite heart, etc.

HOMILETIC NOTES

Joh. 2:15. On the peace-breakers lies the burden of war.

1. Shall we consider the superficial objection as to whether it was right or not to disturb the honest trade of those people, since animals for the temple sacrifices were indispensable, and to pour out the exchangers money without concern as to whether any of the pieces should be lost? Or shall we reply to the opinion that the indignation seen in Christs eye and the scourge in His hand seem to indicate the presence of passionateness?

2. If a breach of the peace took place, the blame lay on the shoulders of the temple authorities. If the order of the house was to be maintained, who could better carry out the doing of it than the Son in the Fathers name? Here certainly there is no passionateness, but on the contrary holiness, and a merciful, sympathetic heart for souls in danger. Here we find reformative action in the footsteps of Jeremiah the prophet (Jer. 7:2-11). Here is the angel of the covenant foretold by Malachi (Mal. 3:1-5). Here is the obedience that eighteen years previously had asked, Must I not be about My Fathers business? (Luk. 2:49).Dr. R. Kgel.

Joh. 2:17. The zeal of Thine house.The disciples who heard Jesus had also heard Him speak of the heavenly ladderHimselfon which the angels of God should ascend and descend. They had been witnesses of the wondrous change of water into wine at His command. Thus so little were they perplexed at the action of our Lord, that they saw in it the fulfilment of the Psalmists words, The zeal of Thine house, etc. (Psa. 69:9).

Joh. 2:15-17. The distinction of this incident from the similar incident recorded in the Synoptists.I. The Synoptists narrate a cleansing of the temple as having taken place on the day of the triumphal entry into Jerusalem before the last passover (Mat. 21:12; Mar. 11:15 ff.; Luk. 19:45). Of such an incident there is no trace in St. John (Joh. 12:12 ff.), and curiously the Synoptists have no trace of an earlier cleansing. It has been supposed that the event has been transposed in the synoptic narratives owing to the fact that they give no account of the Lords ministry at Jerusalem before the last journey; but a comparison of the two narratives is against the identification.

1. The exact connection of the event is in each case given in detail.

2. There is a significant difference in the words used to justify the acts (Joh. 2:16; Mar. 11:17).

3. In the record of the later incident there is no reference to the remarkable words (Joh. 2:19) which give its colour to the narrative of St. John, though the Synoptists show that they were not unacquainted with those words (Mat. 26:61; Mar. 14:58).

II.

1. There is no improbability in the repetition of such an incident. Both were connected with the revelation of Jesus as Messiahfirst when He claimed His royal power at the entrance of His work, and again at the close.
2. In the interval He had fulfilled the office of a simple prophet. In the first case, so to speak, the incident was doubtful; in the second it was decided. Hence the difference in details, e.g. the force of the addition a house of prayer for allnations in prospect of the Passion and His rejection by the Jews, which has no place in the first incident, when He enters as a son His Fathers house. Again, the words a house of merchandise are in the second incident represented by its last issue: a den of thieves. John records the incident which occurs at the beginning of Christs ministry, because it was the first crisis in the separation of faith and unbelief. The Synoptists, from the construction of their narratives, included the later incident; and as the latter was virtually included in the former, St. John does not give it.A bridged from Westcott.

ILLUSTRATIONS

Joh. 2:14-15. Christ cleansing His Church.For us this cleansing of the temple is a sign. It is a sign that Christ really means to do thoroughly the great work He has taken in hand. Long ago had it been said, Behold, the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to His temple; and He shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver. He was to come to sift the true from the false, the worldly and greedy from the devoted and spiritual. He was not to make pretence of doing so, but actually to accomplish the separation. To reform abuses such as this marketing in the temple was no pleasant task. He had to meet the gaze and defy the vindictiveness of an exasperated mob; He had to make enemies of a powerful class in the community. But He does what is called for by the circumstances: and this is but a part and a sample of the work He does always. Always He makes thorough, real work. He does not blink the requirements of the case. We shrug our shoulders and pass by where matters are difficult to mend; we let the flood take its course rather than risk being carried away in attempting to stem it. Not so Christ. The temple was shortly to be destroyed, and it might seem to matter little what practices were allowed in it; but the sounds of bargaining and the greedy eye of trade could not be suffered by Him in His Fathers house: how much more shall He burn as a consuming fire when He cleanses that Church for which he gave Himself that it might be without spot or blemish? He will cleanse it. We may yield ourselves with gladness to His sanctifying power, or we may rebelliously question His authority; but cleansed the house of God must be.Dr. Marcus Dods.

Joh. 2:17. True zeal.Let us take heed we do not sometimes call that zeal for God and His gospel which is nothing else but our own tempestuous and stormy passion. True zeal is a sweet, heavenly, and gentle flame, which maketh us active for God, but always within the sphere of love. It never calls for fire from heaven to consume those that differ a little from us in their apprehensions. It is like that kind of lightning (which the philosophers speak of) that melts the sword within, but singeth not the scabbard; it strives to save the soul, but hurteth not the body. True zeal is a loving thing, and makes us always active to edification, and not to destruction. If we keep the fire of zeal within the chimney, in its own proper place, it never doth any hurtit only warmeth, quickeneth, and enliveneth us; but if once we let it break out, and catch hold of the thatch of our flesh, and kindle our corrupt nature, and set the house of our body on fire, it is no longer zeal, it is no heavenly fireit is a most destructive and devouring thing. True zeal is an ignis lambens, a soft and gentle flame, that will not scorch ones hand; it is no predatory or voracious thing: but carnal or fleshly zeal is like the spirit of gunpowder set on fire, that tears and blows up all that stands before it. True zeal is like the vital heat in us that we live upon, which we never feel to be angry or troublesome; but though it gently feeds upon the radial oil within us, that sweet balsam of our natural moisture, yet it lives lovingly with it, and maintains that by which it is fed; but that other furious and distempered zeal is nothing else but a fever in the soul.R. Cudworth.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

CLEANSING OF THE TEMPLE

Text 2:13-17

13

And the passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.

14

And he found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting:

15

and he made a scourge of cords, and cast all out of the temple, both the sheep and the oxen; and he poured out the changers money, and overthrew their tables;

16

and to them that sold the doves he said, Take these things hence; make not my Fathers house a house of merchandise.

17

His disciples remembered that it was written, Zeal for thy house shall eat me up.

Queries

a.

What is the passover of the Jews?

b.

Why were oxen, sheep and doves being sold in the Temple? Why were money changers there?

c.

How was Jesus able to cleanse the Temple unresisted?

Paraphrase

Now the time for the passover of the Jews was near and Jesus left Capernaum and went up to Jerusalem. There, in the temple courts, He found some who were selling, for sacrificial purposes, oxen, sheep and doves. He also found some who had set up their change-making enterprise in the temple and were sitting, conducting their business there. Jesus made a whip of ropes and drove the sheep and the oxen out of the temple courts. Then he scattered the money of the money-changers, turned over their tables, and said to the ones who were selling the doves, Carry these things out of here! Stop making my Fathers house a market place! His disciples then remembered what had been written in the Scriptures, Zeal for thy house will consume me.

Summary

Jesus goes up to the Passover to worship. He finds the Temple being desecrated, and he manifests His wrath at such hypocrisy. His disciples interpret it as a fulfillment of messianic prophecy.

Comment

The majority of commentators agree that this cleansing of the Temple is the first of two such incidents in the ministry of Jesus. The very nature of Johns gospel would indicate this. (a) John writes to fill in what the other Gospel writers have omitted. He omits some events of greater significance than the cleansing of the Temple, i.e., the transfiguration, the birth of Jesus, etc. Would it fit Johns pattern then to repeat what all three of the other writers record (cf. Mat. 21:12-13; Mar. 11:15-18; Luk. 19:45-46)? (b) John is the most chronological of the four. Why would he violate all of his chronology and insert here at the beginning of Jesus ministry an event which the other three definitely place at the last Passover of His ministry? (c) John gives the most detailed account of the last Passover of the four writers. If John is merely repeating the Synoptical cleansing, why did he not put it in his detailed account of the last Passover? (d) Again, in all three accounts of the second cleansing the Jewish rulers are represented as seeking to destroy Jesus. There is no mention of such an intensified animosity here in Johns account of the first cleansing of the Temple.

Jesus left Capernaum, some 680 feet below normal sea level, and traveled up to Jerusalem, some 2500 feet above sea level, When people are said to be going up and down by the Gospel writers, it is meant that the people are going up and down in altitudenot in a north-south map-wise manner. The Lords reason for going to Jerusalem was that the time for the Passover was near, We shall deal with the details of this feast in later chapters. Here it will be sufficient to notice only a few significant things connected with the Passover: (a) it was one of three feasts which every male Jew above the age of twelve must attendthe other two being the Feast of Tabernacles and the Feast of Pentecost; (b) Passover was the most important of all the feasts; (c) it commemorated the Israelite deliverance from Egyptian bondage, and more specifically the passing over of the death angel (cf. Exo. 12:1-51; Exo. 13:1-22); (d) the feast was to be held on the fourteenth day of the month Nisan (corresponding to our April); and, (e) many sacrifices were required for those who worshipped at the feast (Num. 28:16-25).

Great multitudes of Jews attended the Passover. Jews from all over the civilized world made pilgrimages to Jerusalem for this feast. Josephus, in his account of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., tells us that there were approximately 3 million Jews in the city when Titus the Roman general besieged it at Passover time. This Jewish historian adds that some 260,000 lambs were slain that year during the one week of the Passover celebration. Remember, also, that a great number of oxen would be sacrificed that week.
We begin now to get a picture of the magnitude of the scene which greeted Jesus as He entered the city of David, Some three million people there for the Independence Day celebration of the Jewsall crowded into Jerusalem until her very walls were groaning. People slept on the housetops and in the courtyardsanywhere they could find a place that was reasonably safe from robbers. The Law of Moses provided for the people to bring their own animals (if they had any) to the Passover. They were to present them to the priests for approval and subsequent sacrifice on the worshippers behalf. Most of the worshippers preferred to purchase a suitable animal (one without spot or blemish) at the feast. This was much more convenient than bringing their own animal. Money-hungry priests had taken advantage of this attitude and they abused their authority to approve or disapprove the sacrificial animal until they had cornered the market! It is probable that had the worshippers gone to the trouble to present a lamb of his own flock the priests would have rejected it as unfit for sacrifice. The peoples only recourse then was to purchase an animal from the vending stalls of these racketeers. Of course, with such a complete control of the market, the racketeers would be able to coerce exorbitant prices from the starving populace. One commentator says the Sadducees made a profit of about $300,000 each year from this market. It is also said that, at one time, the price of a pair of doves was about four dollars when they were really worth only about a nickle a pair. The people were being fleeced in the name of religion.

The changers of money also had a racket. Every male Jew above 20 was required to pay a Temple tax (cf. Exo. 30:11-16; Mat. 17:24-27) of a half-shekel. Only Jewish coinage was acceptable for the taxGentile money was polluted. Everyone who did not have Jewish money was obliged to get it changed. This afforded another means of extortion for the Jewish rulers.

There are two Greek words used in the New Testament which are translated temple. One word (hieron) signifies the entire building with its precincts, or some part thereof; the other word (naos) usually means the inner sanctuary of the Temple. John uses the former word (hieron) here. Most scholars think that the animal markets were in the court of the Gentiles. This was the outermost precinct of the Temple. The rulers would most likely set up their markets here, not wishing to desecrate the courts where only Jews were allowed. Jewish pride shows its haughty contempt for the Gentiles by bringing the stench and filth of the animals into the court of the Gentiles. One writer describes the scene thusly: And this was the entrance court of the Most High! The court which was a witness that that house should be a House of Prayer for all nations had been degraded into a place which for foulness was more like shambles and for bustling commerce more like a densly crowded bazaar; while the lowing of oxen, the bleating of sheep, the babel of many languages, the huckstering and wrangling, the clinking of money and of balances (perhaps not always just) might be heard in the adjoining courts, disturbing the chant of the Levites and the prayers of the priests! (Farrar, The Life of Christ, pp. 445ff). It was not merely the presence of the animals that was offensive to the Lord. His righteous ire was aroused because of the dishonest merchandizing and the desecration of the only place the Gentiles might seek the presence of God, Men seeking God (cf. Joh. 12:20) were denied His presence! We would do well to search our own practices as the people of God today. Is there anything in our livespride, carelessness, irreverencethat keeps the seeking stranger from the presence of God? Remember the wrath of the Lord as he displays it here against such action, Compare also Mat. 23:13.

Zealous for His Fathers house and His Fathers children, Jesus deliberately fashioned a whip from some rope-like pieces of twisted reeds. Then He quickly and decisively drove the animals out as the traders were fleeing from His countenance. In almost the same motion He turned and began upsetting the tables of the money-changers. It was a scene of bedlam; the animal traders trying to control and protect their propertysheep and oxen running helter-skeltermen shouting and swearingbankers on their hands and knees greedily scurrying after the tinkling coins as Jesus went from table to table overturning them. The Lord then issued two thundering commands: Take these things out of here! . . . Stop making my Fathers house a market place! The word translated house of merchandise is the Greek word emporiou, from which we have the English word emporium. The Jews were literally making Gods holy Temple an animal emporium. It was a scene so suddenly violent that the disciples were fearing for the Lords safety, and they remembered an appropriate prophecy of Scripture, Zeal for thy house will eat me up. Another interpretation is that the disciples saw further manifestation of the Deity of Jesus in this incident and remembered the Messianic prophecy of Psa. 69:9. Why not apply both interpretations to the utterance of the disciples? They recognized His fulfillment of the Messianic prophecy, but on the other hand they feared that His fanatic zeal would eventually bring about His death. The Greek word for zeal is zelos from which we also get the word jealous. Christ was very jealous for His Fathers housethat it not be made a shelter for unrighteousness.

There are those who would have us believe that Jesus struck the men with His scourge of cords. It is true that the Lord revealed holy anger at the conduct of these men, but striking them with a whip would not be in keeping with the character of His teaching. His answer to Pilate would seem to preclude such physical combat on His part . . . if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight . . . but now is my kingdom not from hence. (Joh. 18:36). Compare also His instruction to Peter concerning taking up the sword (Mat. 26:51-56). His only use for the whip was to drive out the dumb beasts, for they could not respond as He would have them to His spoken commands. In the second cleansing of the Temple the hucksters fled before His righteous countenanceHe brandished no scourge there. The awesome manifestation of His glory drove the men outjust as it was manifested to the officers who could not arrest Him because never man so spake (cf. Joh. 7:45-46).

The public ministry of our Lord begins with explosive suddenness. No doubt the multitudes, along with the disciples, were electrified. Some of the multitude might even have recalled the prophecy, Behold I send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, will suddenly come to his temple . . . But who can abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? . . . and he will purify the sons of Levi . . . (Mal. 3:1-3). The rulers were probably so surprised and so shamed that they were not able to grasp immediately the significance of this manifestation. Nevertheless, they counterattacked at once, touching off a controversy that grew and increased in fierceness until they were satisfied with nothing less than His death. This was the beginning of a struggle that continued for three years. The rulers would hardly let it rest for a moment. They followed Jesus wherever they could, seeking ever to ensnare Him . . . to destroy Him. The world hated Him because He testified of it, that its works were evil (Joh. 7:7).

Quiz

1.

Give three reasons for believing that this is the first of two recorded instances where Jesus cleansed the Temple.

2.

What was the Passover feast to commemorate?

3.

About how many people attended the feast in Christs day?

4.

How were the animal traders taking advantage of the worshippers?

5.

Why were the money-changers there?

6.

Where was this merchandizing probably taking place?

7.

Do you think Jesus struck the men with His scourge? Explain.

8.

Give two Old Testament prophecies connected with this incident.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(13) And the Jews passover was at hand.Here, again, we are on common ground with the earlier Gospels. They place a cleansing of the Temple at the close of our Lords ministry at the only Passover which comes within the scope of their narrative. The subject has been dealt with in Notes on Mat. 21:12 et seq. (Comp. also Introduction: The Chronological Harmony of the Gospels, p. 35) The careful reader will not fail to observe the graphic touches peculiar to this narrativethe money-changers sitting, the sacrificial animals, the making of the scourge, the money poured out, the order to remove the doves which could not be driven out. We feel all through in the presence of an eye-witness. It is worth remembering that on the eve of the Passover the head of every family carefully collected all the leaven in the house, and there was a general cleansing. He was doing in His Fathers house, it may be, what was then being done in every house in Jerusalem. The remark will be seen to have an important bearing on the question of the repetition of the cleansing.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

20. JESUS GOES TO JERUSALEM, AT PASSOVER, AND PURIFIES THE TEMPLE, Joh 2:13-25 .

By his baptism Jesus was externally inaugurated in his office; by his temptation he proved his internal fitness; by his miracle at Cana he showed forth his glory to his own circle of disciples; and now he proceeds to make his announcement to the nation at the FIRST PASSOVER of his ministry. His method is to claim a Lordship over the temple of God, sustained by miracles, reserving his profounder teachings for the earnest inquirer awakened by his miracles. Joh 2:13 to Joh 3:21.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

13. Jews See note on Joh 1:19. It is universally agreed among evangelical commentators that there were two cleansings of the temple; one at the beginning, the other at the close of Christ’s ministry. In this first, given by John alone, (see note on Mat 21:11-13,) Jesus uses language less severe than in the second, but performs the act with an evident exertion of supernatural power, by a positive and overruling miracle. The reasons for supposing two cleansings are: First, The propriety of both opening and closing his ministry by such a symbolic act. Second, The clearness with which the first is related by John and the second by Mark. Third, The distinct and rational connections which each has with its own immediate surrounding circumstances.

Went up Up to Jerusalem as down to Capernaum. (Joh 2:12.) The natural language of one familiar with the country. For the Passover see our notes on Mat 26:2; Mat 26:17-20.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘And the Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.’

John constantly tells us that Jesus went up to Jerusalem for the different Feasts of the Jews, and especially for the Passover (Joh 1:13; Joh 5:1; Joh 7:10; Joh 10:22; Joh 11:55 with Joh 12:12). But even if we had not been told we would have assumed it. One point that is being made is that Jesus did not ignore the traditions of Israel. It is probable also that the writer saw these feasts as pointing forwards towards what the Christ had come to do as the Lamb of God Who would take away the sins of the world (Joh 1:29). This is apparently Jesus’ first Passover after taking up His calling. Perhaps John therefore intends us to link it with the final Passover, and to bring to us an awareness of the shadow that lies already over the ministry of Jesus, something that will come out in the course of the narrative. These verses emphasise that Jesus’ ministry continued over some years. All these emphases underline the Jewishness of the writer.

However, the incident he will now describe is paralleled at the end of Jesus’ life by what at a superficial first glance looks to be a similar incident before His final denunciation (Mar 11:12-19 and parallels), and this must raise the question as to whether there were two such incidents or one. It is of course always possible that John deliberately puts the incident here in order to reinforce the message that the old is passing way and the new has come (chronology was not a major factor to the Gospel writers). He does, however, put it in such a context that it suggests that it did occur early rather than late in the ministry, and on examination the incidents are in fact so dissimilar on most counts that it seems far more likely that this is a different incident altogether.

Given the fact that the trading in the Temple must always have angered Jesus this is not surprising, especially in view of Mal 3:1-4. What is rather surprising is that He did not do something like this every time He went to Jerusalem, although we must recognise that, at least for a period after this incident, they would be on their guard, and He would perhaps realise that such repeated actions could precipitate a collision which would prematurely end His ministry. He knew, after all, that it could only be a token gesture. Having made His point He possibly felt that He had done what was necessary. But by the time of the later incident the passage of years would have convinced the guards that He was no longer a danger. They would have considered that the young hothead had matured and have relaxed their guard. After all the Temple was open to all an it would have caused great consternation among Galileans if Jesus had been excluded. Thus we might consider that two incidents, taking place years apart, might really be expected by us, the first occurring when in His new zeal He faces men up to the matter of the need for purity of worship in the Temple for the first time, the second occurring as a thought out policy in order to expose corruption before He is finally put to death. The first He gets away with as being the act of a zealous young man who may well hold promise for the future, the second is to be a seal on His death warrant.

The reason for His act here is described very differently from that in Mark 11 and parallels, and fits better into the beginnings of His ministry when He was probably not quite as aware, as He was later on, of the dishonesty that was going on in the Temple. The reason described is exactly the kind of reason that might well fire up a younger man without containing the thought out attitude revealed in the later incident. He enters quite innocently into the temple. But becoming aware of the commotion caused by incessant trading in the court of the Gentiles, He feels in His new awareness of His Messiahship that He has to do something, for they are treating God’s house like a market and making a mockery of the opportunity for Gentiles to truly worship! He may well have had in mind the words of Zechariah, ‘In that day there will be no more a merchant in the house of the Lord of Hosts’ (Zec 14:21), and the words of Malachi, ‘The Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant whom you delight in — for he is like a refiner’s fire or a launderer’s soap –’ (Mal 3:1-3), and ‘zeal for your house will eat me up’ (Psa 69:9). His concentration here was on emptying the temple of the cattle, sheep and doves, although the only way He could demonstrate His displeasure with the money-changers was by turning over the tables.

We should note that in the other incident in Mark 11 He enters the Temple with a deliberate aim (He had looked around earlier). Then His concentration will be on the misbehaviour of the people, and He ignores the cattle and the sheep. He also stops those who are taking a short cut through the Temple, whilst His words are about the total dishonesty of all involved. They have turned the house of prayer into a den of thieves. Given that they took place in the same Temple (there was no other) the two incidents could not be more different.

It is not too surprising that it is not mentioned in the other Gospels, for the other Gospels tell us little about His early ministry in Jerusalem, especially in its earlier stages, concentrating rather on His itinerant ministry, thus they tended to disregard the happenings at the trips to Jerusalem, possibly because they were not present (in John ‘His disciples’ is a vague term not necessarily always meaning the twelve), or possibly because they saw Galilee rather than Judea as the true reflection of Jesus ministry. Galilee welcomed Him. Judea put Him to death. But John, who records a number of trips to Jerusalem, perhaps did not wish to jar the account of the final visit by describing a violent visit to the Temple, and perhaps wished to finish his Gospel on a spiritual note with his concentration on the cross. He does after all leave out the physical details of the last Supper, and of Jesus’ prayers in Gethsemane, and he ignores Jesus’ actual baptism and the transfiguration, while hinting at both. His later concentration is on the new coming of the Spirit. And he might well have seen the repetition of such an event as superfluous to what he wanted to say, or even as taking attention away from what he saw as important.

But he does remember this early incident and describes it because it fits in well with his purpose, to indicate that the new has come. He is well aware that the later cleansing is already well known in the Christian church, whilst an action like this helps to explain why in the other Gospels the leaders are so antagonistic to Jesus at an early stage (e.g. Mar 3:22). And this one provides an opportunity for him to hint at the coming death and resurrection of Jesus (‘Destroy this Temple and I will raise it again in three days’).

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The Cleansing of the Temple ( Joh 2:13-25 ).

It is difficult to avoid the feeling that this narrative is given here on close proximity to what has gone before because it illustrates the fulfilment of the turning of water into wine. Now Jesus will act to turn the Jerusalem worship into genuine ‘worship for all’ by seeking to have banned from the court of the Gentiles the trading that was going on and disturbing the worship. That is not to suggest that it is out of place chronologically. Only that its connection with the previous passage is deliberate. The suggestion that this is the same incident as that in Mark 11 and parallels really does not hold up to careful examination. The detail is different at every point. And what is described here ties in with the newness of Jesus’ ministry and with a time when He was not aware of the corruption in the Temple. It has rather, unlike the incident in the other Gospels, the flavour of someone concerned for true worship in God’s Temple, and for the purity of that Temple. It reads like the impulsive act of a ‘new prophet’ rather than like the thought through policy of Mark 11.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The first purging of the Temple:

v. 13. And the Jews’ Passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem,

v. 14. and found in the Temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting;

v. 15. and when He had made a scourge of small cords, He drove them all out of the Temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers’ money, and overthrew the tables,

v. 16. and said unto them that sold doves, Take these thing hence: m’ My Fathers’ house an house of merchandise

v. 17. And His disciples remembered that it was written, The zeal of Thine house hath eaten Me up.

Jesus was a circumcised member of the Jewish Church, and He was very strict in observing its rules and laws. Since the male members of the nation were required to be present three times a year in Jerusalem, at Passover, at Pentecost, and at the Feast of Tabernacles, He was probably present at each celebration. At the Passover festival the deliverance from the bondage of Egypt was commemorated. But when Jesus came to Jerusalem, He was deeply grieved by the evidences of contempt of all holy things which was paraded before the eyes of all visitors. Since it was impossible for many Jews to bring their sacrificial animals to Jerusalem from their distant homes, the practice had been sanctioned of permitting them to buy the sheep and Iambs and bullocks and doves at Jerusalem. It was a profitable business, and one which brought the leaders of the Jews, who controlled the concessions, many a welcome piece of money. Instead, however, of keeping the market in the lower part of the city, it had been brought up to the gates of the Temple, and finally into the very courts of the sanctuary. There were the stalls of the oxen and sheep, there were the coops of the doves, there were also the tables of the bankers, where they made change. So a regular market was conducted in the courts and halls of the Temple, with all the accompanying noise, haggling of the venders and buyers, lowing of the cattle, bleating of the sheep, clinking of the coins, and shouting of children. Jesus was not satisfied with a mere protest, which might have been received with jeering and insults. He quickly braided a scourge out of reeds or cords that could easily be procured in such a busy mart, not to employ it as a whip, but to swing it as a symbol of power and to drive out the animals with it. Incidentally, He turned over the tables of the bankers, of the money changers, causing the small change to roll in every direction. And to the sellers of doves, who were equally guilty with the rest, He gave the command to carry all the paraphernalia of their business away from there; for the house of His Father should not be made a market house, where marketing, buying and selling, trading and bartering, was carried on. It was an exhibition of zeal for pure and uncontaminated service of God. See Psa 69:9. Christ was consumed with His zeal for the honor of His Father. And no man dared to withstand Him. They all gave way and went out of the court with their property. Some of the Lord’s divine glory and power must have been evident in His bearing, which caused them to shrink before the fire in His eye. Jesus wanted to show that He was the Messiah, the Lord, who must cleanse and purge His people of all abominations. And He showed also that such bartering and trading and marketing in the sanctuary is extremely distasteful to Him. In this He ought to be an example to all Christians, especially to pastors. “The more pious a pastor or preacher is, the more zealous he will be. ” (Luther.) Every servant of Christ, every believer, should be zealous for the purity of the house of God, of the Christian congregation, in order that it may not be contaminated by great sins and offenses.

There are commentators who claim that John destroyed the chronology of the gospel-story altogether by inserting this story at this point, for they maintain that there was only one purging of the Temple. But the story of John follows chronological lines,. and there is no reason for not assuming two cleansings of the Temple. “But they are questions and remain questions which I do not want to solve; and nothing much depends upon it, only that there are many people that are so keen and sharp-witted and bring forth so many questions, desiring exact speech and answer upon them. But if we have the right understanding of Scriptures and the right articles of our faith, that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, suffered and died for us, then we do not miss much, even if we cannot answer every question that is otherwise asked. The evangelists do not observe the same order; what one has at the beginning, the other occasionally has at the end. It may very well be that the Lord did this more than once, and that John describes the first purging, Matthew the second. But be that as it may, whether it be first or last, whether it happened once or twice, it takes nothing away from our faith.”

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

Joh 2:13-16 . ] Simply the continuative and, i.e . during this short stay at Capernaum.

For Joh 2:14-16 , see on Mat 21:12-13 .

] refer not to the persons , but to the animals named immediately afterwards with the

, i.e. not only, but also (see Buml. in loc ., and Partik . 225). Thus the unseemliness which some have found in the use of the scourge, certainly intimated by the connection of and , and along with it every typical explanation of the scourge (Grotius, Godet, and others regard it as the symbol of God’s wrath), disappear.

] uncontracted form, to be taken as the aor . Lobeck, ad Phryn . p. 222.

] coin , especially small coin. Mostly in the plural in Greek. The singular here is collective .

, . . .] He could not of course drive out the doves like the other animals, and He therefore says to those who sold them, . John is here more minute than the Synoptics; but we must not regard the words as indicating greater mildness towards the sellers of the doves, because these were used by the poor (Rupertius, De Wette). The command , . . ., addressed to them applied to all .

] Admiranda auctoritas , Bengel; the full consciousness of the Son manifested itself already (as in Luk 2:49 ) in the temple.

. ] a house of, a place of, merchandise . The holy temple house had, in the Lord’s view, become this, while the temple court had been made a place of buying and marketing ( , Thuc. i. 13. 3; Dem. 957, 27; Xen. de red . iii. 3; Herodian. viii. 2. 6; Eze 27:3 ; Isa 23:17 , not the same as ). Possibly Zec 14:21 was in His thoughts.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

13 And the Jews’ passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem,

Ver. 13. And Jesus went up to Jerusalem ] In obedience to the law, and to preach the gospel in the great congregation.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

13 22. ] The first official visit to Jerusalem, at a Passover: and cleansing of the Temple .

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

13. ] No data are given to determine whether the reason of the short stay at Capernaum was the near approach of the Passover.

Nothing is said of those who accompanied Jesus: but at all events, His already called disciples would be with Him (see Joh 2:22 , and ch. Joh 3:22 ), and among them in all probability the Evangelist himself: but not the rest of the Twelve , who were not yet called. Of this visit, the synoptic narrative records nothing.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Joh 2:13-22

13The Passover of the Jews was near, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14And He found in the temple those who were selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers seated at their tables. 15And 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; 16and to those who were selling the doves He said, “Take these things away; stop making My Father’s house a place of business.” 17His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal for Your house will consume me.” 18The Jews then said to Him, “What sign do You show us as your authority for doing these things?” 19Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” 20The Jews then said, “It took forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?” 21But He was speaking of the temple of His body. 22So when He was raised from the dead, His disciples remembered that He said this; and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had spoken.

Joh 2:13 “The Passover” This annual feast is described in Exodus 12 and Deu 16:1-6. This feast is the only means we have of dating Jesus’ ministry. The Synoptic Gospels imply that Jesus ministered for only one year (i.e., one Passover mentioned). But John mentions three Passovers: (1) Joh 2:13; Joh 2:23; (2) Joh 6:4 and (3) Joh 11:55; Joh 12:1; Joh 13:1; Joh 18:28; Joh 18:39; Joh 19:14. There is also a possibility of a fourth in Joh 5:1. We do not know how long Jesus’ active public ministry lasted, but John’s Gospel suggests that it was at least three years and possibly four or even five.

John structured his Gospel around the Jewish feasts (Passover, Tabernacles, and Hanukkah, see Richard N. Longenecker, Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period, 2nd ed., pp. 135-139).

SPECIAL TOPIC: THE PASSOVER

“and Jesus went up to Jerusalem” The Jews always spoke of Jerusalem in this theological sense more than in a geographical or topographical sense.

Joh 2:14 “in the temple” Herod the Great’s (an Idumean who ruled Palestine from 37-4 B.C.) temple was divided into seven different courts. The outer court was the Court of the Gentiles, where the merchants had set up their shops in order to accommodate those who wanted to offer sacrifices and bring special offerings.

“oxen and sheep and doves” People traveling from a long distance needed to purchase sacrificially acceptable animals. However, the family of the high priest controlled these shops and charged exorbitant prices for the animals. We also know that if people brought their own animals the priests would say they were disqualified because of some physical defect. Therefore, they had to purchase their animals from these dealers.

“the money changers” There are two explanations of the need for these persons: (1) the only coin the temple would accept was a shekel. Since the Jewish shekel had long ceased to be coined, the temple accepted only the shekel from Tyre in Jesus’ day or (2) no coin bearing the image of a Roman Emperor was allowed. There was, of course, a fee!

Joh 2:15 “He made a scourge out of cords, and drove them all out of the temple” This whip is only mentioned here. Jesus’ anger can be clearly seen in this account. The place where YHWH could be known was no longer a place of worship and revelation! Anger in itself is not a sin! Paul’s statement in Eph 4:26 is possibly related to this act. There are some things that should anger us.

Joh 2:16 “Take these things away” This is an emphatic aorist active imperative, “get these things out of here!”

“‘stop making My Father’s house a place of business'” This is a present imperative with a negative particle which usually meant to stop an act already in process. The other Gospels (i.e., Mat 21:13; Mar 11:17; Luk 19:46) quote Isa 56:7 and Jer 7:11 at this point, however, in John these OT prophecies are not mentioned. This may be a possible allusion to the Messianic prophecy of Zec 14:21.

Joh 2:17 “His disciples remembered” This statement implies that even in the light of Jesus’ ministry and the help of the Spirit, these men saw the spiritual truth of Jesus actions only later (cf. Joh 2:22; Joh 12:16; Joh 14:26).

“that it was written” This is a perfect passive periphrastic which is literally “it stands written.” It was a characteristic way to affirm the inspiration of the OT (cf. Joh 6:31; Joh 6:45; Joh 10:34; Joh 12:14; Joh 20:30). This is a quote from Psa 69:9 in the LXX. This Psalm, like Psalms 22, fits Jesus’ crucifixion. Jesus’ zeal for God and His true worship will lead to His death, which was the will of God (cf. Isa 53:4; Isa 53:10; Luk 22:22; Act 2:23; Act 3:18; Act 4:28).

Joh 2:18

NASB”What sign can You show us as your authority for doing these things”

NKJV”What sign do You show to us, since You do these things”

NRSV”What sign can you show us for doing this”

TEV”What miracle can you perform to show us that you have the right to do this”

NJB”What sign can you show us that you should act like this”

This was the central question the Jews had concerning Jesus. The Pharisees claimed His power came from the devil (cf. Joh 8:48-49; Joh 8:52; Joh 10:20). They were expecting the Messiah to do certain things in certain ways (i.e. like Moses). When He did not perform these specific acts, they began to wonder about Him (cf. Mar 11:28; Luk 20:2), as did even John the Baptist.

Joh 2:19 “‘Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up'” The Greek word for Temple (hieron) in Joh 2:14-15 refers to the Temple area, while the term (naos) in Joh 2:19-21 refers to the inner sanctuary itself. There has been much discussion about this statement. Obviously in Mat 26:60 ff; Mar 14:57-59; Act 6:14 this is a reference to Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection. However, in this context, it must also relate somehow to the temple itself being destroyed in A.D. 70 by Titus (cf. Mat 24:1-2). These two statements are related to the truth that Jesus was setting up a new spiritual worship focused on Himself and not ancient Judaism (cf. Joh 4:21-24). Again, John uses a word in two senses!

Joh 2:20 “It took forty-six years to build this temple” Herod the Great expanded and remodeled the second temple (from Zerubbabal’s days, cf. Haggai) to attempt to placate the Jews for his being an Idumaean. Josephus tells us that it was started in 20 or 19 B.C. If this is correct, it means that this particular incident occurred in the year 27-28 A.D. We also know that the work continued on the temple until 64 A.D. This temple had become the great Jewish hope (cf. Jeremiah 7). It will be replaced by Jesus Himself, the new Temple. In Joh 1:14, He is depicted as the tabernacle and now the temple! What shocking metaphors for a carpenter from Nazareth! God and mankind now meet and fellowship in Jesus!

Joh 2:21 “But He was speaking of the temple of His body” At the time Jesus spoke these words the disciples did not realize this (cf. Joh 2:17). Remember John is writing decades later.

Jesus knew why He came. There seem to be at least three purposes.

1. to reveal God

2. to model true humanity

3. to give His life a ransom for many

It is this last purpose that this verse addresses (cf. Mar 10:45; Joh 12:23; Joh 12:27; Joh 13:1-3; Joh 17:1).

Joh 2:22 “His disciples remembered that He said this” Often Jesus’ words and acts were for the benefit of the disciples more than for the ones He was addressing. They did not always understand at the time.

“they believed the Scripture” Although the text itself does not state which Scripture, possibly Psa 16:10 is the resurrection text that Jesus is alluding to (cf. Act 2:25-32; Act 13:33-35). This same text (or theological concept-resurrection) is mentioned in Joh 20:9.

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

the Jews’ passover. After the revival under Ezra and Nehemiah corruption proceeded apace (see notes on p. 1296), and the Lord found the nation as described in Malachi. Hence, what were once “the feasts of Jehovah” are spoken of as what they had then become, “feasts of the Jews” (Joh 5:1; Joh 6:4; Joh 7:2; Joh 11:55; Joh 19:42). See note on Joh 1:19,

passover. Greek. pascha, Aramaic. See App-94.

went up. Greek. anabaino, same word as “ascending”, Joh 1:51 Compare “down”, Joh 2:12.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

13-22.] The first official visit to Jerusalem, at a Passover: and cleansing of the Temple.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Joh 2:13. , the Passover) About the times of the Passover the office of Christ was in especially fruitful exercise.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Joh 2:13

Joh 2:13

And the passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.-The Passover was the feast commemorating the passing over or sparing of the first-born of the children of Israel when the first-born of the Egyptians were slain. It was eaten on the fifteenth of the month Abib, the first month of the Jewish year, and corresponds in time to what is popularly known as “Easter. It is important that we note the Passovers during the public ministry of Jesus, as they afford one of the easiest ways of determining the length of his public ministry from his baptism until his ascension. This was the first

Passover after he began his public ministry and he went to Jerusalem to attend it.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

passover: Joh 2:23, Joh 5:1, Joh 6:4, Joh 11:55, Exo 12:6-14, Num 28:16-25, Deu 16:1-8, Deu 16:16, Luk 2:41

Reciprocal: Deu 16:7 – in the place Neh 13:8 – I cast Hag 2:7 – I will fill Mat 26:2 – the feast Mar 11:15 – and Jesus Luk 19:45 – went Joh 3:22 – these Joh 4:45 – having Act 17:16 – his spirit

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

3

John’s record of the Gospel is the only one of the four that refers to all the passovers Jesus attended while on earth. These events give us the Biblical basis for saying that His earthly ministry lasted between three and four years. The present verse gives the first one, and the next is in chapter 5:1.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Joh 2:13. And the passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. The expression, passover of the Jews, is very remarkable, and can be explained only by the usage already noticed in Joh 2:6. To Johns mind the nation cannot but present itself habitually as in opposition to his Master. As yet, indeed, Jesus is not confronted by an organized band of adversaries representing the ruling body of the nation; but we are on the verge of the conflict, and the conflict itself was only the outcome of ungodliness and worldllness existing before their manifestation in the persecution of Jesus. The light was come, but it was shining in darkness: this darkness rested on what had been the temple, the city, the festivals, of the Lord. The feast now at hand is not the Lords passover (Exo 12:11), but the passover of the Jews. The prevailing spirit of the time has severed the feast from the sacred associations which belonged to it, so that Jesus must go up rather as Prophet than as worshipper,not to sanction by His presence, but powerfully to protest against the degenerate worship of that day. The word of prophecy must be fulfilled: And the Lord whom ye seek shall suddenly come to His temple,… but who may abide the day of His coming? (Mal 3:1-2).

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Subdivision 6. (Joh 2:13-22.)

The purging out of evil.

There follows, at Jerusalem, upon the occasion of the “Jews, passover,” as John characteristically calls it, a first purging of the temple by Him, which He repeats, as we have seen in other Gospels, after His presentation to them openly as their King. It is given as one of the features of millennial blessing by the prophet Zechariah, that “there shall be no more a Canaanite” -or “trafficker” -“in the house of the Lord of hosts” (Zec 14:21). The profanation of that which, till he finally leaves it, He always calls His Father’s house stirs within Him the zeal for it which, as the psalmist is cited here as saying, consumed Him. How much did that house, God’s dwelling-place among men, mean for Him whose great work was to establish it! In His own Person God had come down, and in such a way as implied no mere temporary visitation. His Name Emmanuel had told that out. Wisdom’s delights were with the sons of men; yet with iniquity He could not dwell. The precious blood shed for their sins could only make their persistence in them after this more hideous and more hateful. Thus the house must be purged in which God is to dwell; and the glory of God and the blessing of man required its purgation.

As Son of God, therefore, Christ casts out the defilement, taking openly a place of authority which none dare openly dispute. The shadow of future judgment falls upon them and scatters them. The Jews ask what sign He can show that the authority He claims belongs to Him. He answers them with a challenge to “destroy this temple and in three days He would raise it up” -referring to His death and resurrection: a parable which they could not interpret, and applied falsely to Herod’s building, still unfinished; while even the disciples understood it only when it was fulfilled. The eyes of those held by externalism were not on Him; while as yet it held even those of true disciples. Thus the blow had to fall even upon the temple itself which left not even one stone upon another, and scattered its worshippers also far and wide over the earth; while the new temple of His humanity, glorified by the out-breaking of the glory that was within, becomes in heaven an open sanctuary, whence the divine Light shall irradiate the earth.

Fuente: Grant’s Numerical Bible Notes and Commentary

SECOND VISIT TO JUDEA

With reference to what occasion, and hence at what period of the year, did this visit take place (Joh 2:13)? With what display of Jesus authority and power is it associated (Joh 2:14-17)? Comparing this with Mat 21:12-13, it would seem that this transaction was repeated at the last Passover. In what manner did He refer at this time to His death and resurrection (Joh 2:18-22) ? What great discourse of Jesus is associated with this second visit to Judea (Joh 3:1-21)? Where did this discourse occur presumably (Joh 2:23)? How does the theme of this discourse demonstrate the profundity of this gospel, and bear out the theory that it was written for the church? How further does John the Baptist bear testimony to Jesus on this visit (Joh 3:25-36)? An analysis of this testimony like that in the first chapter, would make an excellent sermon, or Bible reading. He testifies (1) to Jesus, relationship to His people (Joh 3:29); (2) His growing influence and authority (Joh 3:30); (3) His exaltation (Joh 3:31); (4) His truth (Joh 3:32; Joh 3:34); and (5) His supreme power and grace (Joh 3:35-36).

What reason is assigned for Jesus departure from Judea at this time (Joh 4:1-3)? Whence did He journey, and what route did He take (Joh 3:3-4)? What exhibition of grace was associated with this journey (Joh 3:5-36)? Select some passages in this part of the chapter which harmonize with the design of Johns Gospel. What about verses 10, 14, 24? How long did Jesus remain in Samaria, and where did he next go (Joh 4:43)? What miracle is connected with this return journey to Galilee, and how does it bear on the purpose of Johns Gospel (Joh 4:46-54)? An allusion to this miracle was made in the introduction to our study of John.

We must not pass the teaching in 3:3-8 about regeneration. We see how essential it is because the natural man cannot see, apprehend, the Kingdom of God without it. Read here Jer 17:9; 1Co 2:14; Rom 8:7-8; Psa 51:5; Eph 2:3. As to its nature or source it is a supernatural, creative act of the Holy Spirit, not reforming our old nature, but giving us a new one alongside of the old (Joh 1:12-13; John 2Co 5:17; Eph 2:10; Eph 4:24). There is one condition for our receiving it: faith in the crucified and risen Lord (Joh 3:14-16; Gal 3:24). This gospel is richly set before us in the familiar Joh 3:16. Salvation may be said to be its theme, and we find in it: (1) its source, the love of God; (2) its ground, the gift of Christ; (3) its means, faith; (4) its need, should not perish; (5) its result, eternal life; and (6) its extent, whosoever.

That word perish must not be misunderstood. It is translated marred in Mar 2:22 and lost in Mat 10:6 and other places, but nowhere does it signify cessation of existence.

The great teaching in chapter 4 is suggested in Joh 4:6-14 about the Holy Spirit, whose indwelling in the believer is set before us in the Symbol of the living water. Other truths are the nature of God (Joh 4:24), the revelation of the Messiahship (Joh 4:26); the governing motive of Jesus (Joh 4:34), and the miracle of Joh 4:46-53.

QUESTIONS

So many questions are asked in the text of the lesson that but few are required here.

1. What is the doctrine in Joh 3:3-8?

2. Tell what you have learned about it in this lesson.

3. How many of the corroborative scriptures have you examined?

4. Analyze Joh 3:16.

5. What do we learn about the Holy Spirit in chapter 4?

Fuente: James Gray’s Concise Bible Commentary

ADDITIONAL NOTES BY THE AMERICAN EDITOR.

XI.

Beginning with Joh 2:13, the account of the first visit of Jesus to Jerusalem is given. There can be little doubt that the five or six disciples were with Him in this visit. Joh 2:12 states that they went with Him from Cana to Capernaum, and that they (not He alone) remained there not many days. It is then said (Joh 2:13) that He went up to Jerusalem; and at the close of each story of what He did there (Joh 2:17; Joh 2:22), the relation of His words or actions to the thoughts of the disciples is referred to. When we add to this the evident design of the writer to set forth the growing faith of the disciples in their association with Jesus, the probability in the case rises almost to certainty.

There are four points of special interest connected with these verses (Joh 2:13-25):

1. As the miracle at Cana had by reason of the supernatural power exhibited in it confirmed their faith, two means of a different order are now employed for the same end. The driving out of the dealers is an exhibition of His prophetic zeal. It was the power of the prophet that awed and overcame those who had desecrated the sacred place. The impression made on the disciples was immediate and profound (Joh 2:17). The testimony comes to them in a new line. As related to the scene at Cana, however, it comes in the right order of proof. The miracle is the first , the prophet’s work is the second. The matter recorded in Joh 2:18 ff. is of another character. As we see by Joh 2:22, it was not fully understood at the time. The scene at Cana and the one with the dealers taught their lesson at once; the disciples believed (Joh 2:11), and they remembered and applied what was written (Joh 2:17). But this scene suggested a question which they could not answer. It was a question, however, to which their minds might naturally often turn, and it was one which would lead them to the thought of the wonderful element in His person and character. It worked as a proof by reason of the strangeness belonging to it. What could be the significance of those remarkable words? What a wonderful man must He be who could utter them of Himself! The different character of the signs, as the author brings them before us, may well arrest attention.

2. In respect to the last point (Joh 2:18 ff.), it is said that the disciples did not come to the right apprehension of the meaning of Jesus’ words until after He rose from the dead. In the following verses, persons are spoken of who were led by the signs to believe, but not to believe in such a way that Jesus could trust Himself to them. These statements show clearly that the author is marking in the progress of his narrative the development of faith. These indications, also, are of such a nature that they point us to an author contemporary with the facts as the one who gives them. They are of the simple, artless sort, which men removed from the actual scenes do not think of.

3. The signs referred to in Joh 2:23 are not described or related in the chapter. The inference which must be drawn is, that the writer purposely selects those things only which affected the disciples, and those even which moved them in a different way from the miracle, properly so-called, which they had witnessed at Cana.

4. We may add that, at this point, ch. 3 opens with a testimony which lies wholly within the sphere of words.

As to the questions arising in connection with these verses, which relate to the difference between this Gospel and the Synoptics, it may be said, in the first place, that both of the two things mentioned seem better suited to the beginning of the public life of Jesus than to its end. The demand for a sign, with the particular answer here given, is more easily accounted for as made on His first appearance, than at the period when, after three years of ministry, He comes to Jerusalem for the last time and enters it with a sort of triumphal procession. It will be noticed, indeed, that in the Synoptical account these words about the temple are only mentioned as what the false witnesses reported that they had heard, and that Mark says, apparently with reference to this matter (comp. Mar 14:59 with 58), that they did not agree with one another in their statements. This may most readily be explained, if the words of Jesus had been uttered two years before. As for the driving out of the traders, on the other hand, the act on the part of Jesus which is here related would seem to be just that which, in the first impulse of His mission, He would be not unlikely to do. It belongs in its character, as we might say, to first impulses, and not to the feelings of that later time when the deadly conflict with the Jewish authorities was at hand. It is, moreover, just such an act as awakening astonishment by reason of its boldness and the prophetic impulse which characterized itmight naturally induce the leading Jews to ask the newly-appearing prophet what sign He had to show. The difficulty with respect to these points lies, therefore, not in the fact that this Gospel places the occurrences at the beginning of the history, but in the fact that the Synoptics (Matt. and Mk.) place them (or, rather, one of them) at the end. We may not be able to explain this difficulty, but the limitation of the Synoptic narratives may, in some way, have occasioned the representation which they give. Such questions belong, in large measure, with the comprehensive one, as to why the earliest writers confined themselves almost exclusively to the Galilean story.

Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)

P A R T F O U R T H.

FROM THE FIRST TO THE SECOND

PASSOVER.

(Time: One Year.)

XXIV.

JESUS ATTENDS THE FIRST PASSOVER OF

HIS MINISTRY.

(Jerusalem, April 9, A. D. 27.)

Subdivision A.

JESUS CLEANSES THE TEMPLE.

dJOHN II. 13-25.

d13 And the passover of the Jews was at hand [We get our information as to the length of our Lord’s ministry from John’s Gospel. He groups his narrative around six Jewish festivals: 1, He here mentions the first passover; 2, another feast, which we take to have been also a passover ( Joh 5:1); 3, another passover ( Joh 6:4); 4, the feast of tabernacles ( Joh 7:2); 5, dedication ( Joh 10:22); 6, passover ( Joh 11:55). This gives the entire length of our Lord’s ministry as three years and a fraction], and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. [It was fitting that he should enter upon his full ministry in this city, as it was still the center of what was recognized as a heaven-revealed worship. The fitness of Jerusalem for such beginnings was afterwards recognized in the preaching of the gospel of the New or Christian dispensation– Act 1:8.] 14 And he found in the temple [Our English word “temple” includes two Greek words; namely, 1. The naos, or [121] sanctuary–the small structure which contained the holy and most holy places, and which answered to the tabernacle used in the wilderness. 2. The heiron, or entire court space which surrounded the naos, and which included some nineteen acres. The heiron was divided into four courts, and as one entered toward the naos from the east, he passed successively through them, as follows: 1, Court of the Gentiles; 2, of the women; 3, of Israel; 4, of the priests. It was in this outer or Gentiles’ court that the markets described in this section were held] Those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting [This market in the temple was for the convenience of the people, and the nearness of the passover increased its size. Oxen and doves were constantly needed for sacrificial purposes, and as each family which ate the passover required a lamb, they would be in the market in great abundance. Josephus tells us it required about two hundred thousand lambs for the passover feast, but his exaggerations will stand a liberal discount]: 15 and he made a scourge of cords, and cast all [The rest of the verse shows that “all” does not refer to men, but to sheep and oxen. The scourge was used in driving them out] out of the temple, both the sheep and the oxen; and he poured out the changers’ money, and overthrew their tables [The Jews were each required to pay, for the support of the temple service, one half-shekel annually ( Exo 30:13, Mat 17:24). These money-changers sat at small tables, on which their coins were piled and counted]; 16 and to them that sold the doves he said, Take these things hence [As the doves were in cages of wicker-work, they could not be driven out; hence Jesus called upon their owners to remove them. Though Jesus cleansed the house, he wrought no waste of property. The sheep and oxen were safe outside the temple, the scattered money could be gathered from the stone pavement, and the doves were not set free from their cages]; make not my Father’s house a house of merchandise. [Jesus bases his peculiar authority over the temple on his peculiar relationship to Him for whom the temple was built. [122] As a Son, he purged the temple of his Father. In the beginning of his ministry he contested their right to thus appropriate his Father’s house to their uses, but in the end of his ministry he spoke of the temple as “your house” ( Mat 23:38), thereby indicating that the people had taken unto themselves that which truly belonged to God, even as the wicked husbandmen appropriated the vineyard ( Luk 20:14, Luk 20:15). The rebuke of Jesus was addressed to the priests, for the market belonged to them, and the money-changers were their agents. Edersheim says that this traffic alone cleared the priests about three hundred thousand dollars a year. Though churches differ widely from the temple, they are still God’s houses, and should not be profaned. Religion should not be mixed with traffic, for traffic tends toward sin. Phariseeism is its fruit–a wish to carry on profitable business, even with God. On this occasion Jesus objected to the use of the temple for trade without criticising the nature of the trade. When he purged the temple three years later, he branded the traders as robbers– Mat 21:13.] 17 His disciples remembered that it was written [ Psa 69:9], Zeal for [loving concern for] thy house shall eat me up. 18 The Jews therefore answered and said unto him, What sign showest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things? [The Jews felt that only a divinely commissioned person could thus interfere with the ordering of God’s house. They therefore called upon Jesus to give them a sign as an evidence that he possessed such divine commission. The manner in which he had cleansed the house of its trafficers was of itself a sign, if they had only had eyes to see it. Jesus could not have thus cleansed the temple unaided had he been a mere man. The power which he showed in the temple was much like that which he manifested in Gethsemane– Joh 18:6.] 19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. [John here records this saying, and Matthew ( Mat 26:61) and Mark ( Mar 14:58) tells us how at the trial it was twisted into a charge against Christ; thus the Evangelists supplement each other. [123] For the temple in this sentence uses the word “naos,” or sanctuary, the structure which was peculiarly the seat of God’s presence. The sanctuary was a figure or symbol of the body of Christ, and the words of Jesus were a covert prediction that as they were desecrating the symbol so would they destroy his body, which it symbolized. They reverenced the Spirit of God neither as it dwelt in the sanctuary nor as it dwelt in the body of Christ. The body of Jesus was a temple ( Col 2:9), and Christians and the church are also temples ( 1Co 3:16, 1Co 3:17, 1Co 6:19, 2Co 5:1, 2Pe 1:13). God’s temples can not be permanently destroyed. They are “raised up.”] 20 The Jews therefore said, Forty and six years was this temple in building [The temple which then stood upon Mt. Moriah was the third structure which had occupied that site. The first temple, built by Solomon (B.C. 1012-1005), was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar. The second temple, built by Zerubbabel and Jeshua (B.C. 520), had been torn down and rebuilt by Herod the Great, but in such a manner as not to interfere with the temple service. The sanctuary was completed in one year and a half, while the courts required eight years. Josephus says eighteen thousand workmen were employed in its erection. Additional outbuildings and other work had been carried on from that time, and the whole was not completed until A.D. 64], and wilt thou raise it up in three days? [To put before him the difficulty of what he apparently proposed to do, they merely mention one item–time. They say nothing of the army of workmen, nothing of a variety and cost of material, nothing of the skill required in the process of construction. How impossible seemed his offer! Yet by no means so impossible as that real offer which they misunderstood. A man might rear a temple in three days, but, apart from Christ Jesus, self-resurrection is unknown to history.] 21 But he spake of the temple of his body [John differs from the other three Evangelists, in that he frequently comments upon the facts which he records. Both history and commentary are inspired.] 22 When therefore he was raised from the dead, his [124] disciples remembered that he spake this [It was three years before they understood this saying. Thus truth often lies dormant for years before it springs up in the heart and bears fruit– 1Co 15:58, Ecc 11:1]; and they believed the scripture [several passages foretell the resurrection– Psa 16:9, Psa 16:10, Psa 68:18], and the word which Jesus had said. [They believed that Jesus had meant to predict that the Jews would kill him, and that he would rise again on the third day.] 23 Now when he was in Jerusalem at the passover, during the feast [the seven days’ feast of unleavened bread– Lev 23:5, Lev 23:6], many believed on his name, beholding his signs which he did. [We have no description of the miracles wrought at this time. See Joh 4:45, Joh 20:30.] 24 But Jesus did not trust himself unto them, for that he knew all men [The word here translated “trust” is the same as that translated “believe” in the Joh 2:23. They trusted him, but he did not trust them, for he knew them. He did not tell them anything of his plans and purposes, and the conversation with Nicodemus which follows is a sample of this reticence], 25 and because he needed not that any one should bear witness concerning man; for he himself knew what was in man. [John gives us many examples of this supernatural knowledge which Jesus possessed. See Joh 1:42, Joh 1:47, Joh 1:48, Joh 3:3, Joh 4:29, Joh 6:61, Joh 6:64, Joh 11:4, Joh 11:14, Joh 13:11, Joh 21:17. This chapter itself gives us a faithful picture of “what was in man.” We find in it temple, profaners, money-makers, sign-seekers, opposers of reform, false and weak professors of faith, etc., but none to whom Jesus could trust himself.] [125]

[FFG 121-125]

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

PURIFICATION 0F THE TEMPLE

Joh 2:13-25. And the Passover of the Jews was nigh, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. The Passover began April 14th, through all the ages of Israel, celebrating the exodus out of Egypt, when the destroying angel slew the first-born in every Egyptian home, and passed over the houses of Israel because he saw the blood of the slain lamb which vividly typified the blood of Christ shed on Calvary sprinkled on the doorposts and lintels of their houses. As this great Passover festival, to which the myriads of Israel gathered annually and spent eight days, typified the atonement Christ came into the world to make, it plays a most conspicuous part in our Lords ministry, marking the inauguration and the conclusion; as our Saviors ministry occupied three years, beginning at a Passover, and winding up at another, and including two in the interim. You will find the division of our Lords ministry by these four Passovers a great convenience in studying the Gospels. The prophets had predicted that Christ would come at once to the temple, and purify it at the very beginning of His ministry (Mal 3:2-3); as you remember, He told His mother at Cana that His time to preach and work miracles had not yet come, contemplating entering upon His ministry at the Passover, which speedily followed.

14. And He found in the temple those selling oxen, sheep, and doves, and the money-changers sitting. Many and magnificent buildings at that time stood on the great and beautiful Temple Campus, containing thirty-five acres, in order to accommodate the thousands of Israel assembling at their great periodical feasts. These pollutions were not in the temple proper, but in those other buildings which stood on the whole ground, and were consequently included in the dedication to God. The end in view was to keep on hand a supply of sacrificial animals, ready to sell to the pilgrims, who came from afar to worship the God of Israel, the more wealthy purchasing an ox; the middling class, a sheep; and the poor, a dove. As all these foreign pilgrims brought Greek and Roman money, or that of some other nation, they had to exchange it for the Jewish half-shekel, the temple offering prescribed in the law, foreign money being rejected.

Having made a whip of rushes, He cast them all out of the temple, both sheep and oxen, and poured out the money of the exchangers, and overturned their tables, and said to those selling the doves, Take these away; do not make the house of My Father a house of merchandise. The conclusion that He used the whip on the people is not sustained by the original. The long, nimble rushes were lying in quantities on the floor for the animals to lie down on. Taking some of these, He plaited them into a whip, and drove all the animals out, pouring out the money of the exchangers and turning over their tables. We see here a very obvious manifestation of His Divinity, as no other man in the world, ranking simply as a private volunteer, would have been permitted thus to interfere with all of those people in their business transactions. A Divine awe settling down on them held them, in a semi-paralytic suspense; astounded and lost in wonder, they are incompetent to interfere and prevent the expurgation which they see so strangely going on around them, through the intervention of this total stranger, their own acquiescence and non- intervention turning out to them even a greater surprise than the astounding invasion of the uninitiated Young Man, who is thus paradoxically exercising so much authority.

His disciples remembered that it has been written, The zeal of Thine house doth eat me up. (Psa 64:9.)

Oikos here means, not simply house, but family. Jesus is our Paragon. He was literally carried away and consumed with zeal for the promotion of Gods family in the earth. Lord, help us to walk in Thy footprints, sacrificing everything, spending and being spent, in the interest of Gods family and for the upbuilding of His kingdom in every nation!

Then the Jews responded and said to Him, What sign do you show us, that You do these things? Jesus responded and said to them, Destroy this temple, and I will build it in three days. The authority by which He was purifying the temple was simply the fact of His Christhood, as that temple did not belong to man, but to God alone. Therefore His Messiahship, identifying Him with very and eternal God, actually gave Him personal charge of Gods house. Now, in view of the fact that His Christhood was confirmed and demonstrated by His death and resurrection, He points them to these great salient facts of His ministry as a demonstrative proof of His right to control the temple. Then the Jews said, Forty and six years was this temple being built, and dost Thou rear it up in three days? But He spoke concerning the temple of His body. Then when He was risen from the dead, His disciples remembered that He said this, and they believed the Scripture, and the word which Jesus said. The Jews had even a superstitious veneration for the temple, running into idolatry in that way. Consequently they held this declaration against Him, clamoring over it ever and anon, and even founding on it a charge of blasphemy, for which, having hounded Him the three years of His ministry, on the day of His death they hideously howled for His blood; yet all this time having stupidly misapprehended His words, applying them to the temple edifice, while He meant the temple of His body, thus beautifully affirming His resurrection as the indubitable confirmation of His Messiahship. At that time, forty-six years had rolled away while building the beautiful and magnificent temple, under the patronage of King Herod, who ascended the throne sixty-eight years previously to that date, amid great political perturbations and much opposition, which, under Roman support, he, in a few years, exterminated in blood, thus centralizing and consolidating his kingdom, he devotes the balance of his thirty-eight years on the throne to rebuilding the temple in greater magnificence than any of his predecessors since Solomon. At the time of this record the temple was not yet entirely finished. So they continued the work, reaching its final completion A.D. 64. In A.D. 66, Gallus Cestius, the Roman general, laid siege to Jerusalem at the head of a great army, followed, in 68, by the Emperor Vespasian, who continued it two years, being succeeded by his son, the Emperor Titus, who consummated the destruction of the temple, the city, and the desolation of the land, in A.D. 73. As Jesus predicted that one stone would not be left on another, the Roman soldiers utterly demolished it, taking up the very foundation, hunting for the hidden treasures.

And when He was in Jerusalem at the Passover, during the feast, many believed on His name, seeing His miracles which He was doing. But Jesus did not commit Himself unto them, because He knows all people, and He has no need that any one would witness concerning man; for He knew what was in man. He is our only Exemplar. From His verdict and procedure here, we should learn a most important lesson; i.e., never to put confidence in a human being. They are all fallible, mutatious, and unreliable. More human woe, wreck, disappointment, and ruin come in that way than any other. We should have no faith in man, but all in God, who never disappoints. Here our Savior inculcates a glorious lesson on entire sanctification, which throws a total eclipse over all the world, so we wear it like a loose garment, ready to drop it off at a moments warning; meanwhile, the true and genuine experience of full salvation sinks us away into God.

Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament

Joh 2:13-22. The Cleansing of the Temple.The Passover of the Jews as an author writing for Christians naturally describes it without special significance or bias, was near. Jesus, following the custom of the religious party in His nation, goes up with His disciples (Joh 2:17; Joh 2:22) to keep the feast (cf. Exo 23:15). He finds the Temple desecrated by an illicit traffic in animals for the sacrifices, and sacred shekels of the heavy Phnician standard (pp. 116f.), in which alone the Temple tax could be paid. The expulsion is described with a fullness and correctness of detail (notice especially the driving out of the cattle and (?) their attendants, the overturning of the moneychangers tables, and the telling the bird-sellers to take away their cages) greater than we find in the Synoptic accounts, Mt. coming nearest. The words of the command in Joh 2:16, as compared with the quotation from Jer 7:11 in Mar 11:17, favour the originality of the Johannine account. In the light of later events the disciples saw in the incident a fulfilment of Psa 69:9. In the remonstrance which follows, it is possible that the author sees a fulfilment of Psa 69:9 b. The Jews, the religious party as represented by their leaders, demand His authority to act in this manner (cf. Mar 11:28). The language of Joh 18:6 seems to reflect Mar 8:11 [but the attitude of Jesus to the request is different, Joh 2:19, Mar 8:12.A. J. G.]. As spoken to the men of His time the Lords answer can only mean, Go on with your evil practices here, which must lead to the final desecration and destruction of the place as the Temple of God; and when you have completed your fatal work, I will raise shortly a new Temple, in the hearts of true disciples of the kingdom, where God can dwell (cf. Jer 7:3-14). It was inevitable that later Christian reflection should see in the words a reference to His crucifixion, for which the Jews were responsible, and His resurrection. The Scripture is probably Psa 69:9 (rather than Psa 16:10), which received its final fulfilment on Calvary. The forty-six years may refer, not to Herods alterations (p. 609), begun in 20 B.C. and not finished till A.D. 63 (Josephus, Ant. xx. 9), but to Zerubbabels Temple, supposed to have been begun in the first year of Cyrus 559, and completed in the ninth year of Darius, 513 (see Classical Review, 1894, pp. 89ff.). If the words which were misrepresented at the trial (Mar 14:58) were spoken as here recorded, the incident of the false witnesses is naturally explained, especially if a period of two years or more had intervened.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

2:13 {3} And the Jews’ passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem,

(3) Christ being made subject to the law for us, satisfies the law of the passover.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

C. Jesus’ first visit to Jerusalem 2:13-3:36

John is the only evangelist who recorded this trip to Jerusalem and the things that happened then.

"In distinction from the Synoptics, John’s record focuses mostly on events in Jesus’ life that took place in Jerusalem, and especially at the Passover feasts." [Note: Bailey, p. 164.]

Josephus indicated that as many as three million Jews occupied Jerusalem during the Passover feasts. [Note: Josephus, The Wars of the Jews, 6:9:3; cf. 2:14:3.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

1. The first cleansing of the temple 2:13-22

The Synoptics record Jesus’ cleansing of the temple after His triumphal entry (Mat 21:12-13; Mar 11:15-16; Luk 19:45-46). Only John noted this cleansing of the temple at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry. The differences between the two cleansing incidents and their placement in the chronology of Jesus’ ministry argue for two cleansings rather than one. [Note: See W. Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel According to John , 1:120; and Morris, pp. 166-69.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

John alone recorded that Jesus went up to Jerusalem, topographically again, for three separate Passover celebrations. He referred to a second Passover in Joh 6:4 and to a third one in Joh 11:55; Joh 12:1; Joh 13:1; Joh 18:28; Joh 18:39; and Joh 19:14. Some interpreters believe that he mentioned a fourth Passover in Joh 5:1, but this seems unlikely. This first one was evidently the Passover of April 7, A.D. 30, the first one after Jesus began His public ministry. [Note: Herold W. Hoehner, Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ, pp. 55-60, 143.] He celebrated the Passover because He was a Jew who obeyed the Mosaic Law (Deu 16:1-8), and He used the opportunity to minister. John’s description of the Passover as "the Passover of the Jews" supports the view that he wrote his Gospel late in the first century for a general audience that was mainly Gentile. It also implies that the church no longer observed this feast.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)