On the third day there was a wedding at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there.
Jesus also was invited to the wedding with his disciples.
When the wine ran out, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.”
And Jesus said to her, “Woman, what does this have to do with me? My hour has not yet come.”
His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.”
Now there were six stone water jars there for the Jewish rites of purification, each holding twenty or thirty gallons.
Jesus said to the servants, “Fill the jars with water.” And they filled them up to the brim.
And he said to them, “Now draw some out and take it to the master of the feast.” So they took it.
When the master of the feast tasted the water now become wine, and did not know where it came from (though the servants who had drawn the water knew), the master of the feast called the bridegroom
and said to him, “Everyone serves the good wine first, and when people have drunk freely, then the poor wine. But you have kept the good wine until now.”
This, the first of his signs, Jesus did at Cana in Galilee, and manifested his glory. And his disciples believed in him.
After this he went down to Capernaum, with his mother and his brothers and his disciples, and they stayed there for a few days.
The Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.
In the temple he found those who were selling oxen and sheep and pigeons, and the money-changers sitting there.
And making a whip of cords, he drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and oxen. And he poured out the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables.
And he told those who sold the pigeons, “Take these things away; do not make my Father’s house a house of trade.”
His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal for your house will consume me.”
So the Jews said to him, “What sign do you show us for doing these things?”
Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”
The Jews then said, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?”
But he was speaking about the temple of his body.
When therefore he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the Scripture and the word that Jesus had spoken.
Now when he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Feast, many believed in his name when they saw the signs that he was doing.
But Jesus on his part did not entrust himself to them, because he knew all people
and needed no one to bear witness about man, for he himself knew what was in man.
Cana of Galilee becomes the setting for Jesus' first sign (semeion), where water is transformed into wine at a wedding feast, revealing his glory and causing his disciples to believe in him for the first time. The mother of Jesus perceives the wine has run out, and though Jesus initially demurs ("My hour has not yet come"), he performs the miracle, producing wine of such quality that the steward marvels—a sign pointing to the abundance and joy of the messianic age. The second episode shifts dramatically to the temple, where Jesus cleanses the court of merchants and money-changers, declaring that they have made God's house a marketplace and must stop making it a den of merchandise. When the Jewish authorities demand a sign to justify his action, Jesus responds with the cryptic and paschal saying: "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up"—a pronouncement the disciples later understand as referring not to the building but to his body (soma). The chapter juxtaposes two kinds of faith: sign-faith that believes because of wonders, and the deeper faith that emerges from understanding Jesus' words and identity. Both episodes establish Jesus as the fulfillment of Jewish worship and the revealer of divine glory, replacing the old order with new wine and a new temple.
John 2:1
On the third day a wedding took place at Cana in Galilee — the temporal marker "third day" may carry eschatological significance (resurrection, new creation) in John's theological calendar. Cana's selection as the first sign's location (unmentioned in other Gospels) emphasizes John's distinctive material. The wedding context introduces themes of joy, consummation, and covenant that resonate with nuptial metaphors for salvation.
John 2:2
Jesus' mother was there, and Jesus and his disciples had also been invited to the wedding — Mary's presence establishes her role in the Gospel, though distinctively limited compared to Synoptic portrayals. The disciples' inclusion emphasizes their continued presence as witnesses to Jesus' signs. The social setting of a wedding feast normalizes Jesus as participant in ordinary celebrations, not merely ascetic teacher.
John 2:3
When the wine was gone, Jesus' mother said to him, 'They have no more wine' — Mary's observation initiates the sign. Her statement is not explicitly a request, yet implies expectation of Jesus' intervention. The problem of wine failure represents a kind of eschatological lack, a social fracture requiring restoration.
John 2:4
Jesus replied, 'Woman, why do you involve me? My hour has not yet come' — Jesus' address "Woman" (gynē), though respectful, maintains distance; it is also the term by which Jesus will address his mother from the cross (19:26), suggesting tragic distance. "My hour" (hē hora mou) refers to Jesus' appointment with death and glorification; the statement that the hour "has not yet come" suggests that Mary seeks to precipitate events before God's time. Yet Jesus proceeds to act, creating interpretive tension.
John 2:5
His mother said to the servants, 'Do whatever he tells you' — Mary's faith persists despite Jesus' seeming refusal. Her instruction to servants demonstrates that she expects Jesus to act, understanding his apparent rejection as not final denial. Her faith and persistence suggest maternal knowledge of Jesus' power.
John 2:6
Nearby stood six stone water jars, the kind used by the Jews for ceremonial washing, each holding from twenty to thirty gallons — the detailed specification of the jars' material (stone), number (six), and purpose (Jewish purification) is theologically loaded. Stone jars resist impurity better than clay; their ceremonial function connects to Jewish Law. The quantity (120-180 gallons) vastly exceeds wedding necessity, foreshadowing supernatural abundance.
John 2:7
Jesus said to the servants, 'Fill the jars with water'; so they filled them to the brim — Jesus' command initiates the sign through obedience. The servants' obedience without question parallels Abraham's or the disciples' responses to Jesus. The jars filled to the brim suggest completeness and abundance, not grudging provision.
John 2:8
Then he told them, 'Now draw some out and take it to the master of the banquet.' They did so, and the master of the banquet tasted the water that had been turned into wine — the transformation occurs invisibly during the drawing process. No formula, prayer, or gesture precedes the miracle; Jesus' word effects change. The master of the banquet's unawareness that the wine is miraculous emphasizes the sign's hiddenness, known only to servants and disciples.
John 2:9
Without knowing where it had come from, though the servants who had drawn the water knew, the master of the banquet called the bridegroom aside and said, 'Everyone brings out the choice wine first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink; but you have saved the best for last' — the master's unknowing praise of the bridegroom (unaware of the miracle's true source) creates dramatic irony. The inversion of normal practice (best wine last rather than first) suggests Jesus' reversal of ordinary expectations. The comment about guests' intoxication adds realism and gentle satire on human excess.
John 2:10
This, the first of his signs, Jesus performed in Cana of Galilee. He thus revealed his glory, and his disciples believed in him — the Evangelist's interpretation frames the sign's significance: it manifests Jesus' glory (doxa) and generates belief (pisteuō) in the disciples. The term "signs" (sēmeia) becomes crucial to John's theology: Jesus' acts are not mere miracles but revelatory events pointing to his identity. The disciples' belief develops incrementally, strengthened by witnessing.
John 2:11
After this he went down to Capernaum with his mother and his brothers and his disciples. They stayed for a few days — the transition from Cana to Capernaum shifts Jesus' base of operations. The mention of "brothers" (adelphoi) indicates Jesus had siblings (though John's Christology does not elaborate their role). The brief stay suggests temporary residence rather than permanent base, maintaining Jesus' itinerant character.
John 2:12
When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem — the first explicit Passover reference frames Jesus' ministry within the Jewish liturgical calendar. The phrase "went up to Jerusalem" (anabainō eis Hierosoluma) invokes Jerusalem's topographical elevation and spiritual significance. This Passover journey initiates a pattern: Jesus structures his ministry around Jewish festivals, participating in and reinterpreting them.
John 2:13
In the temple courts he found people selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money — Jesus encounters the temple's commercial operations, which, while necessary for sacrifice procurement and temple tax payment, have transformed sacred space into marketplace. The cataloging of animals (cattle, sheep, doves) and money-changers suggests institutional systematization of what should be worship.
John 2:14
So he made a whip out of some cords and drove all from the temple courts, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables — Jesus' violent cleansing represents extraordinary action, unprecedented in his prior ministry. The whip's construction, though non-injurious to humans, dramatically enacts zeal (zēlos) for God's house. The specificity of his actions (driving, scattering, overturning) emphasizes determination and thorough disruption rather than token protest.
John 2:15
To those who sold doves, he said, 'Get these out of here! Stop turning my Father's house into a market!' — the direct command and the proprietary claim ("my Father's house") assert Jesus' authority over the temple itself. The term "market" (emporion) emphasizes the desecration of sacred space. The phrase "my Father's house" echoes Mary's annunciation-related term (Luke 1:46, "my spirit rejoices in God my Savior") and Jesus' childhood saying (Luke 2:49, "in my Father's house"), suggesting continuity in filial consciousness.
John 2:16
His disciples remembered that it is written: 'Zeal for your house will consume me' — the disciples' citation of Psalm 69:9 interprets Jesus' action as prophetic fulfillment. The shift to first-person in the Psalm ("consume me") applies prophetic passion to Jesus, foreshadowing his consuming suffering. The disciples' later remembrance of Scripture suggests that understanding develops retrospectively, often through Resurrection illumination.
John 2:17
Then the Jews responded to him, 'What sign can you show us to authorize what you are doing?' — the Jewish authorities demand authentication of Jesus' extraordinary action through a sign (sēmeion). This introduces the sign motif's juridical dimension: signs function as credentials, proof of authority. The demand both tests and challenges Jesus, anticipating the Gospel's theme of faith tested by demand for proof.
John 2:18
Jesus answered, 'Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days' — Jesus' cryptic response employs the temple as metaphor for his body. The future "will raise" (egeirō) employs resurrection vocabulary, though the meaning remains hidden until post-Resurrection understanding. The three-day timeframe alludes to his Resurrection, though this connection remains opaque to auditors.
John 2:19
The Jews replied, 'It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?' — the historical detail (forty-six years, dating to approximately 20 BCE under Herod the Great) grounds the passage in historical reality. The Jews' literal misunderstanding, characteristic of John, demonstrates the blindness that prevents perception of spiritual truth.
John 2:20
But the temple he had spoken of was his body — the Evangelist's clarification establishes Jesus' body as replacement for and fulfillment of the temple's mediating function. This Christological reinterpretation transforms the physical building into symbol for Jesus' incarnate presence. The temple's destruction and rebuilding (in 70 CE) becomes eschatologically significant when understood as pointing to Jesus' death and Resurrection.
John 2:21
After he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered what he had said. Then they believed the Scripture and the words Jesus had spoken — the post-Resurrection community's remembrance and understanding mirrors the earlier disciples' remembrance of Psalm 69:9. This pattern emphasizes that full understanding requires both the historical event (Resurrection) and Spirit-enabled interpretation, suggesting that John writes from the perspective of post-Resurrection faith.
John 2:22
Now while he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Festival, many people saw the signs he was performing and believed in his name — the Passover festival draws crowds who witness Jesus' signs and respond with faith. The plural "signs" suggests multiple miracles beyond the one narrative explicitly recounted (Cana), indicating John's selective narration. Faith in Jesus' "name" (onoma) involves trust in his identity and power, not mere intellectual assent.
John 2:23
But Jesus would not entrust himself to them, for he knew all people — the crucial limitation: Jesus recognizes the inadequacy of sign-based faith when unaccompanied by true understanding. "Would not entrust himself" (ou pisteuō, literally "did not believe") creates ironic tension: though the crowd believes in Jesus, Jesus does not reciprocate with faith in them. The statement "he knew all people" echoes the Prologue's theme of Jesus' universal knowledge.
John 2:24
He did not need any testimony about mankind, for he knew what was in each person — Jesus' supernatural knowledge of human interiority (ho en tō anthrōpō) constitutes his authority to judge and his independence from human witness. This knowledge transcends empirical observation, suggesting divine omniscience. The verse emphasizes that Jesus requires no external information; his own perception suffices.
John 2:25
He did not need any testimony about mankind, for he knew what was in each person — the closing statement of the temple-clearing episode serves as a theological hinge between chapter 2 and the Nicodemus encounter that follows. The verb knew (ginosko) here carries the weight of divine omniscience rather than mere perception: Jesus' knowledge of the human heart is presented as comprehensive and unsought. The contrast with the crowds who believed in his name because of the signs (2:23) is deliberate — the signs produce a shallow, wonder-based response, but Jesus does not entrust himself to sign-faith because he perceives its fragility. The verse prepares the reader for Nicodemus, who arrives as a representative figure of the sign-impressed believer, coming at night with a faith still partly in shadow. John's Gospel will repeatedly return to the theme that Jesus knows what people are — the Samaritan woman (4:17-18), the crowd seeking bread (6:26), Judas (6:70-71) — establishing divine knowledge as the basis of his relational discernment.