Why the Temple Incident is not historical and not marcionite

[Giuseppe]

He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves,

(Mark 11:15)

When Moses approached the camp and saw the calf and the dancing, his anger burned and he threw the tablets out of his hands, breaking them to pieces

(Exodus 32:19)

Naturally, the Marcion's Jesus would have destroyed the new tables themselves.

[Joseph D. L.]

Tables =/= tablets you fucking moron.

[Giuseppe]

Fallacy of the distinction without a real difference.

[Joseph D. L.]

Tables =/= tablets you fucking moron.

[davidmartin]

You're half right Giuseppe, the temple incident is actually anti-sacrificial, suggesting that Jesus did not think animal sacrifices should any longer be offered (which puts him in a very narrow category in the ancient world, 99% of cultures sacrificed animals)
He wanted only grain offerings made and such-like (ie the food of John the baptist)
I recon this is one reason he got in trouble, now to expand on this further this aspect of his teaching was suppressed - why? The atonement doctrine hardly is in keeping with anti-sacrifice. Yet the incident remained in the books

So "Moses saw the calf" means animal sacrifice made him angry (when interpreted through the lens of the temple incident)