Did Jesus have the legal authority to cleanse the temple?

Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars

Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected

The narrative of Jesus’ cleansing of the temple is present in all four gospels: Mark 11:15-17, Matthew 21:12-13, Luke 19:45-46, John 2:13-17. When He cleanses the temple, there does not seem to be any immediate legal ramification. No one seems to directly challenge this act; nor is He fined or arrested for the act. Furthermore it is mentioned:

And the chief priests and the scribes heard it and were seeking a way
to destroy him, for they feared him, because all the crowd was
astonished at his teaching. (Mark 11:18 ESV)

It seems their fear for Him was used a motivator used to seek His destruction, but not legal reasoning, per se.

I have read that a rabbi is “a person sufficiently educated in halakhah (Jewish law) and tradition to instruct the community and to answer questions and resolve disputes regarding halakhah”. Jesus is called a rabbi several times in the NT.

It has been pointed out that a certain amount of trade was allowed in/near the temple at the time; so legally speaking the money changers and sellers may have been in the right, according to the law at the time.

So would Jesus’ status as rabbi have given Him any earthly legal authority at all in regard to the happenings at the temple; at that historical point in time? Would it have been legal according to Jewish law (and/or Roman law) for a rabbi to clear the temple, as a teacher of the Law– or did that title simply not carry enough clout due to the existence of priests and scribes at the time? Was it simply that they were afraid to challenge Him at that time?

This question sprang out of “How should we understand the cleansing of the temple?“.