And having said these things, he went on before, going up to Jerusalem.
The parable of the pounds has just ended, with its warning that His own citizens would not have Him reign over them. Now the Lord sets out at the head of the group, on the road that climbs to Jerusalem.
He went in front. One writer ties this to His call for followers to take up the cross:
If the Lord was going to make those who followed Him take up the cross, He could not but bear it Himself. He went before His sheep in this path of self-denial and devotion, to prepare the way. He went alone. It was a path His people had not yet walked, nor could they, until He had walked it first.
"Going up" is not a figure of speech here. One writer measures the road out of Jericho:
The journey now started again, and the Lord led the way, going ahead and going up to Jerusalem. They had about seventeen miles to travel. After leaving the fertile region around Jericho, the road ran through desolate country. It climbed from the Jordan valley up to the neighbourhood of the capital. Jericho lies 820 feet below sea level, and Jerusalem 2,593 feet above it.
One commentator reads the unhurried pace as mercy, not delay:
In Luke's Gospel His gradual approach to the city is traced more clearly than in either Matthew or Mark. See Luke 9:51; 13:22, 33; 17:11; 18:31; 19:1, 11, 28. He seems to linger from stage to stage. He is not willing to hasten the doom of the nation, because what was to happen to Him there was to fill up their sin and leave them for judgment. He was waiting to be gracious. It is the same now, in this age: the patience of God in not sending Jesus is salvation, since He is not willing that any should perish.
The verse points back: He said these things first, then He went. What He had just said shapes what the journey means:
Next follows the approach to Jerusalem. He is the Messiah indeed, but Son of Man. He presents Himself according to the prophecies that had gone before, even when they are not quoted word for word. And He does so right after the parable had taught in full that the opposition to Him was deliberate, wilful and final. For it was not only that His citizens, the Jews, despised Him, though He came in humiliation for the deepest purposes of divine love. They hated Him, and sent a message after Him, saying, "We do not want this man to reign over us."
Why go up at all, when the refusal was already settled? One writer answers:
The King of Israel was presenting Himself to Jerusalem as her King. He had never done that before, though He was born King of the Jews. It is true that His rejection and death were close at hand, but Jerusalem had to reject Him as her King. So on this occasion He presented Himself as King.
The climb does not end in gloom. One writer sets this ascent beside the ascent of Solomon:
As He continued His "going up to Jerusalem," the crowd of disciples look ahead to the triumph of the coming day. They praise Him, saying, "Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!" (v. 38)… The ascent of Solomon so astonished the queen of Sheba that "there was no more spirit in her." In the same way, the ascent of the Son of God filled His disciples with praise to God.
On the road up, He sends His disciples for a colt. One writer draws a lesson for service from that errand:
Luke tells us that the colt was the one the Lord had need of. He tells the disciples to go and untie it, and more than that, to bring it to Jesus. That is a word which older believers, and all who seek to serve the Lord, should take to heart. Can we, under the command of the Lord, bring in a ministry that sets affections free for His service?
- Ahead. He does not send His followers up the road; He goes in front, on a path no one had walked before Him.
- Upward. The road from Jericho to Jerusalem climbs over three thousand feet. The ascent ends at the place of His rejection.
- Slowly. Luke traces the journey stage by stage; the unhurried pace is patience, not hesitation.
- As King. He goes up right after the warning that His citizens would refuse Him. He still offers Himself to the city as her King.
- With praise. The same ascent fills the crowd of disciples with worship, and sets a colt free for His use.
And it came to pass as he drew near to Bethphage and Bethany at the mountain called [the mount] of Olives, he sent two of his disciples,
The road up from Jericho ends at two small villages on a hillside outside Jerusalem. There Jesus stops and sends two men ahead on an errand. The place, the messengers, the borrowed animal — every detail serves one act. The King is about to present Himself to His city.
The teaching about the kingdom has just ended. What comes next is its outcome, not a new subject.
He had declared what the kingdom was — what it would be. He now comes to present it for the last time in His own Person to the people of Jerusalem, according to the prophecy of Zechariah. All is gathered round His entrance. Jerusalem is in the day of her visitation, and she does not know it.
Luke names Bethphage and Bethany. One writer finds the meaning of each name fitting the moment.
Now He moves toward that end on purpose, though the way there meant rejection and death. He came near Bethphage, which means "the house of unripe figs." That pictures Israel being unready to receive Him. He came near Bethany, which means "the house of affliction." That pictures how His own people treated Him. Then He sent two of His disciples to a nearby village.
Commentators give Bethany's name a second meaning. It was also a house where He was welcome:
The "house of dates," a village on the eastern slope of the Mount of Olives, about two miles from Jerusalem, near the road to Jericho. It was where Lazarus, Martha, and Mary lived, in whose house the Lord found a resting place, among those whom He loved, and who were always ready to welcome Him.
Luke names the hill. The same hill appears at four turning points in His story.
From the same place He had entered Jerusalem as their King, according to this prophet (Zech. 9:9), riding on a donkey's colt. On that same Mount of Olives He sat in Matthew 24, surrounded by His Jewish disciples… From that same mountain He went up to heaven (Acts 1), after His nation had rejected Him and crucified Him. And on that same mountain His feet will stand when He returns to deliver them fully and completely in grace!
What He tells them to do is itself a claim. He describes an animal He has not seen, in a village He has not entered. He also tells them what to say if anyone stops them.
The sending for the colt shows the Lord as Jehovah, who has a perfect right to all. "The Lord has need of them." What could be more complete than His knowledge of circumstances hidden in the future? How clear His control over the owner's mind and feelings! He was meek, sitting on a donkey, the King of Zion the prophet spoke of. Yet He was as surely Jehovah as He was the Messiah coming in His name.
Who did the owners hear in that title, "the Lord"? Writing on Mark's account of the same errand, Kelly leaves the question open:
I suspect "the Lord" is here left purposely vague. The Lord had need of the donkey's colt, whether they took the title to mean Jehovah or the king who came in His name. If their faith did recognise the Messiah in Jehovah, that was entirely true, and so much the better for those who did.
The instructions were exact. So was their fulfilment. That precision is the point.
Old and modern writers work hard to find in this remarkable incident a picture of the Gentiles obeying the gospel. That does not seem intelligent to me. It was simply the evidence of His divine knowledge. It was His claim, made among the Jews, to be Jehovah Messiah. Facts proved that claim, and so did the submission of human hearts, where God was pleased to produce it for the honour of His Son. That is why the Spirit records so exactly the words that passed and the fulfilment of all He said.
- Approach — He had taught what the kingdom is. Now He goes to Jerusalem to present it in His own Person for the last time.
- Place — One writer reads the two village names as a picture of what waited for Him. Bethphage, "house of unripe figs," is a nation unready. Bethany, "house of affliction," is His own people treating Him badly.
- Shelter — Bethany was the home of Lazarus, Martha and Mary. There He found a resting place among people glad to welcome Him.
- Mount — Olivet ties the whole story together: He entered from it, taught on it, ascended from it, and will return to it.
- Claim — He sent two disciples for a colt He had never seen, and He knew someone would stop them. He knows what is hidden, and He owns all things.
saying, Go into the village over against [you], in which ye will find, on entering it, a colt tied up, on which no [child] of man ever sat at any time loose it and lead it [here].
Jerusalem is now in sight, and the Lord arranges His entry Himself. He sends His disciples ahead for a colt He has never seen, which raises the question the whole scene turns on: who is this, that He can claim an animal as His own?
Why record such small directions at all? One writer finds the answer in what the detail proves.
It was very simply the evidence of His divine knowledge, and the assertion among the Jews of His claim as Jehovah Messiah. Facts proved that claim, and so did the submission of human hearts, where God was pleased to produce it to the honour of His Son. That is why the Spirit notes in fine detail the words that passed and the carrying out of all He said.
The disciples are not sent to ask a favour. They carry a claim, and one writer roots it in the Creator's ownership of every living thing.
This act of the Lord flashes out once more His glory, and shows that the King-Messiah is Jehovah. He knew that a donkey was tied there with a colt, just as He knew about the fish with the coin in the sea. He commanded that fish to come to Peter's hook. Here He demands the use of the donkey and colt. He has a right to them, for He is the Creator. He can say what He has said: "For every beast of the forest is mine, the cattle on a thousand hills. I know all the birds of the hills, and all that moves in the field is mine" (Ps. 50:10, 11).
Because the claim is His alone, the same act done by anyone else would be a crime.
Only the Lord could give such instructions, for all things are His property. For anyone else to do this would be stealing. The owners questioned the disciples at first. But no difficulty arose: the words "the Lord has need of him" settled the matter even for them.
The disciples were given an answer to use if anyone objected, and that answer was enough. What moved the owners was not the words but the One behind them.
So He knew and directed a heart far away. He showed how David's Lord had a good claim to be David's Son — indeed to be received as such by the title of His own Person and glory. He who did these things by this divine power and ordering was claiming the place of David's Son, in grace and with no needless untruth. All was already subject to Him, whatever He might subject Himself to. This reached several hearts, whoever they were. It was not merely knowledge of the owner, but control of their hearts.
This colt had never carried a rider. One writer draws out the lesson Israel should have taken from that.
Another significant fact here is that it was the colt of a donkey. He rode a young animal, unbroken, as Luke 19:30 proves. Though no one had ridden it before, it was fully submissive to the Lord Jesus. Israel should have learned from this that they too should submit to the authority of the lowly Son of Man.
The choice of animal said something about His kingship. It also matched Israel's own history.
We learn that in the purest days of Jewish government the leading men in Israel used no animals but donkeys (Judges 5:10; 10:4; 12:14). Horses only came in during the corrupt times of Solomon. So when the Lord took up the style of "King of Israel," He of course took every feature, however small, that belonged to the only pure and true form of that character. That is why He orders His disciples to bring a donkey's colt to Him. Besides, this was the Messiah showing Himself as King, just as the prophet had presented Him beforehand (Zech. 9:9). His being "meek and lowly" was as kingly a feature as any other.
The colt was tied because it was untrained; it was untied so that He could ride it. Commentators differ on how far to press this. Kelly, quoted above, thinks attempts to read a picture into the incident miss the plain force of it, while others find a lesson in the sequence.
The colt was unbroken, for no one had sat on it, and so it was tied up under restraint. It was loosed from restraint, but only so that He might sit on it. Under His powerful hand it was perfectly restrained. This is a picture of how grace sets us free from the bondage of the law.
- Knowledge. He describes a village and a colt He has not seen. That knowledge is divine, and it backs His claim as Jehovah Messiah.
- Ownership. He asks no permission because every beast of the forest is already His; the same act by anyone else would be theft.
- Control. His power reached the owners' hearts, not just the facts about the colt. They gave the animal up at a word.
- Submission. An animal no one had ridden carried Him without a struggle. Israel should have learned to submit to the lowly Son of Man in the same way.
- Lowliness. He chose the animal Israel's leaders used in its purest days, not a horse. Meekness is as kingly a feature as any other.
And if any one ask you, Why do ye loose [it]? thus shall ye say to him, Because the Lord has need of it.
Jesus sends two disciples to untie a young donkey that is not theirs, and gives them one sentence to say if anyone stops them. Everything rests on that sentence: on who this "Lord" is, and on how He can need a borrowed animal.
The disciples do not bargain or explain. They state a claim, and that claim rests on who owns every living thing.
He demands the use of the donkey and its colt. He has a right to them, because He is the Creator, and He can say what He has already said: "For every beast of the forest is mine, the cattle on a thousand hills. I know all the birds of the hills, and all that moves in the field is mine" (Psalm 50:10-11)... These men either owned the colt or had charge of it. No doubt the majestic "The Lord has need of them" made a deep impression on their hearts. So they were at once ready to let them go. His word demanded obedience, and they obeyed.
Luke tells us who let the animal go. Their quick surrender suggests they already knew the One making the claim.
Luke is the only one of the four Gospel writers who certainly was not an eyewitness. From his account we gather that the owners of the animals allowed the disciples to take the foal. "The Lord has need of him" was enough. Surely they were disciples of the Master. Probably so was the owner of the upper room where they ate the last Passover. The owners acknowledged the Lord's claim at once, and the two disciples led off the foal without further discussion.
Jesus knew the owner's answer in advance. That knowledge came with power over the man's will.
They were to say simply, "The Lord has need of it"... So He knew and ordered the heart at a distance. He showed how David's Lord had a good claim to be David's Son... He did these things by divine power, and so He was surely claiming the place of David's Son, in grace and with no needless untruth. Everything was already subject to Him, whatever He might subject Himself to. This power was over several hearts, whoever they were. It was not merely knowledge of the owner, but control of their hearts.
One sentence settled every question that day. Writers see in that willingness a small picture of a day still ahead.
Coming as the King, He acts with kingly authority. Someone might ask why the disciples were untying the colt. The answer "that the Lord has need of him" would be enough, and straight away every question would cease. So it came to pass. And so it will be in the coming day of glory. Then it will be true of Zion: "Your people will offer themselves freely on the day of your power" (Psalm 110:3).
The One who owns everything asks for the loan of a donkey. The word "need" sits oddly beside the glory of the One who says it.
Sending for the colt shows the Lord as Jehovah, who has a perfect right to everything. "The Lord has need of them." What could be more complete than His knowledge of circumstances still hidden in the future? How clear His control over the owner's mind and feeling! He was meek, sitting on a donkey, the King of Zion that the prophet spoke of. Yet He was as surely Jehovah as He was Messiah coming in His name. The "need of them" is as amazing as the glory of His person.
The errand had two halves: untie the colt, and bring it to Jesus. Both halves shape service today.
Luke tells us that the colt was the one the Lord had need of. The Lord instructs the disciples to go and untie it, and more than that, to bring it to Jesus. That is a word that older believers and those who seek to serve the Lord should take to heart. Under the Lord's command, are we able to bring in a ministry that sets affections free for His service?... The Lord Himself has gone from the scene, but His name and His interests are here. We should want everything we do and say to free affections and attach them in loyalty to an absent Christ.
- Right — He asks for another man's colt because, as Creator, every beast and all the cattle already belong to Him.
- Word — the disciples carried no argument, only one sentence, and that word won obedience.
- Heart — He did more than know where the animal stood; He had control over the owners' hearts at a distance.
- Day — their quick willingness previews the promised day when His people offer themselves freely.
- You — the disciples untied the colt only to bring it to Jesus, and service still means setting affections free for Him.
And they that were sent, having gone their way, found as he had said to them.
Jesus sent two disciples ahead for a colt they had never seen, and gave them one sentence to say if anyone stopped them. This verse reports what they found, and what that proves about the One who sent them.
The weight of the verse falls on the match between what He said and what they found. One commentator warns against turning the scene into a picture of something else:
Ancient and modern writers have worked hard to find in this remarkable incident a picture of the Gentiles obeying the gospel, as the Lord received and rode on the colt. That effort seems to me far from intelligent. Instead, it was very simply the evidence of His divine knowledge. It was His claim among the Jews to be Jehovah Messiah. Facts verified that claim, and so did the proved submission of human hearts where God was pleased to produce it, to the honour of His Son. So the Spirit records every word that passed, and how everything He said came true.
Nobody suggested this to Him. The arrangement came from His side, down to the words the disciples were to use:
The disciples had not prepared the colt, nor asked the Lord to mount it. The Lord took the initiative by sending two of His disciples to the entrance of Bethphage to get it. The foal was there, tied, as Mark tells us, at a door outside in the open street. He told them where to find it, what to do, and what to say to the owners. Zechariah had foretold that the foal would be available for the King's use. The Lord made known where it was actually standing at that moment. It was there ready to bring in the King, according to prophecy.
He told the disciples to take an animal that belonged to someone else, and to explain it with one short sentence about the Lord's need:
Only the Lord could give such instructions, for all things are His property; for anyone else to do this would be stealing. No difficulty arose, for the words, "the Lord has need of it" settled the matter even for the owners, who at first questioned the disciples.
The disciples found the colt because He knew where it was. The owners let it go without a fight. One writer links this to a day still to come:
Jesus still acts on His supreme and holy Lordship. He knows all things, directs all things, and has all things at His command — including the wills of men. For His people shall be willing in the day of His power. This was a brief demonstration of what He was and of His rights. "The Lord has need of it."
The animal they untied had never carried anyone. Yet it gave the Lord no trouble at all:
He rode a young animal, unbroken, as Luke 19:30 proves. Despite never having been ridden before, it was fully submissive to the Lord Jesus. Israel ought to have learned from this, that they too should submit to the authority of the lowly Son of Man.
Commentators differ over how far to press this. Kelly, quoted above, rejected reading the incident as a picture of the Gentiles coming to the gospel. He took it as plain evidence of divine knowledge and of Christ's claim to be the Messiah.
The errand also says something about the two who ran it:
When the Lord sent two disciples to bring the colt, they were to say certain things. When questioned they said exactly those words, adding nothing and taking nothing away, and they completed the service successfully.
- Word. What He said and what they found matched exactly. Facts verified His divine knowledge, so the Spirit notes every detail.
- Right. Their one sentence rested on ownership. Anyone else sending men to take another man's animal would be stealing.
- Power. He knew where the colt stood, and He moved the owners to release it. It was a small sample of the day when His people will be willing.
- Submission. The unbroken colt carried Him without resistance. Israel should have learned to submit to the lowly Son of Man.
- Obedience. The two disciples spoke only the words He gave them, and the errand succeeded.
And as they were loosing the colt, its masters said to them, Why loose ye the colt?
Two disciples are untying an animal that is not theirs. The owners walk up and ask the obvious question. They answer with one short sentence. Everything turns on whether that sentence outranks a legal title deed.
The instruction given to the disciples would be criminal on any other lips. One writer notes that the whole errand rests on who is sending them:
Only the Lord could give such instructions, because all things are His property. For anyone else to do this would be stealing. No difficulty arose, because the words "the Lord has need of him" settled the matter even for the owners, who questioned the disciples at first.
The same claim runs through His life. One commentator lists moments when He took up glories that belonged to the God of Israel:
He healed leprosy, the well-known special honour of God (2 Kings 5:7). He put away all sicknesses, as Jehovah-rophi, the ancient Healer of Israel (Ex. 15:26). He fed the crowds in the wilderness again. He stilled the waves, as though He could once more divide the Jordan and the Red Sea. He made the fish bring Him tribute money, just as here He claims the donkey — treating the earth and everything in it as His own.
The disciples' reply names Him only as "the Lord." Commentators differ on how much the owners understood by that title:
The Lord had need of the donkey's colt, whether they applied the title to Jehovah or to the king who came in His name. If their faith truly recognised the Messiah in Jehovah, that was perfectly true, and so much the better for those who did. But I am not sure anyone can claim that the Spirit meant to imply that much.
Something more than a good argument moved these owners. One writer sees more than knowledge at work here:
So He knew and directed a heart far away, showing how David's Lord had a good claim to be David's Son... Everything was already subject to Him, whatever He might subject Himself to. This power reached several hearts, whoever they were, so it was not just knowledge of the owner, but control of their hearts.
Some read the owners' quick consent as a sign that they already belonged to Him. One writer links them with another unnamed host in the same closing week:
From Luke's account we gather that it was the owners of the animals who allowed the disciples to take the foal. "The Lord has need of him" was enough. They were surely disciples of the Master, probably like the owner of the upper room where the last Passover was eaten.
This was not a seizure. Mark's fuller wording adds a promise:
The owners saw the disciples untying the colt and asked why. They answered as the Master had told them: "The Lord has need of him, and He will send him back here at once." That is how Mark seems to have written it (11:3), hinting that the Master needed it for a short time, and would give it back when He was done with it.
Being untied did not leave the colt free to do as it pleased. One commentator reads the episode as a picture:
The colt was unbroken, for no one had ever sat on it, and so it was tied up and held in. It was set loose from that restraint, but only so that He could sit on it. Under His powerful hand it was held in completely. This is a picture of how grace sets us free from the bondage of the law.
These owners hand over a working animal at a moment's notice, with no explanation. One writer treats that as the normal call on anyone who owns anything:
We are so quick to think of things as ours. We should remember instead that all we have and all we are belongs to the Lord, and we should always give it up when He calls. This is not just a matter of rightful obedience; it is for our lasting good and happiness.
- His by right. For anyone else, taking another man's colt would be theft. It is lawful here because all things are already His.
- His by title. The reply names Him only as "the Lord." The owners may have heard Jehovah, or the King coming in His name.
- His over hearts. He did more than know the owners' minds. He held their wills, so their question stopped the moment they heard His name.
- His for a purpose. They untie the colt only so that He can sit on it, and Mark adds that He will send it back — a loan, not a loss.
- His at His call. He asks of every owner what He asked of these owners: hold everything as His, and give it up when He calls.
And they said, Because the Lord has need of it.
Two disciples are untying an animal that is not theirs, and its owners are standing right there asking why. Their whole answer is one short sentence Jesus gave them before they left.
On anyone else's lips, the instruction to take a tied-up colt would have been theft.
Only the Lord could give such instructions, for all things are His property; for another to do this would be stealing. There was no difficulty. The words, "the Lord has need of it," settled the matter even for the owners, who questioned the disciples at first.
The title is the point. "Lord" here stands for Jehovah, the covenant name of God, and this is the God who owns everything saying He has need of a donkey.
The sending for the colt shows the Lord as Jehovah, who has a perfect right to all. "The Lord (Jehovah) has need of them." What could be more thorough than His knowledge of circumstances hidden in the future? How clear His control over the owner's mind and feeling! He was meek, sitting on a donkey, the King of Zion that the prophet spoke of. Yet He was as surely Jehovah as He was the Messiah coming in His name. The "need of them" is as amazing as the glory of His person.
One writer sets this beside other moments when He acted as the earth's true Owner:
He claims the donkey from its owner, because He could say of Himself, "The Lord has need of it." It is very striking that through His life and ministry, though He was the rejected man from Galilee the whole time, there was no form of the ancient glory that He did not take up. He made the fish bring Him tribute, and here He claims the donkey, treating the earth and everything in it as all His own.
He knew what the owners would say before they said it, and more than one heart was involved.
He knew and directed a heart far away, showing that David's Lord had good claim to be David's Son. All was already subject to Him, whatever He might subject Himself to. This was over several hearts, whoever they were. So it was not only knowledge of the owner, but control of their hearts.
Luke's account tells us who let the colt go, and how fast they agreed.
From Luke's account we gather that it was the owners of the animals who let the disciples take the foal. "The Lord has need of it," was enough. They were surely disciples of the Master, probably along with the owner of the upper room where the last Passover was eaten. The Lord's claim was accepted at once, and the two disciples led the foal away with no further discussion.
Prophecy had already spoken about this colt, and Mark's record adds a few more words to the answer.
Zechariah had foretold that the foal would be there for the King's use. The Lord made known where it was standing at that moment. The owners saw the disciples untying the colt, and asked the reason. They answered as the Master had directed: "The Lord has need of it, and He will send it back here at once." So it seems Mark wrote (11:3). He means that the Master needed it for a short time, and would give it back when He had finished with it.
Commentators differ on whether the colt carries a symbolic meaning. Some read the untying of an unbroken animal as a picture of what grace does with a life:
The colt was unbroken, for no man had sat on it, and so it was tied up under restraint. It was loosed from restraint, but only so that He might sit on it. Under His powerful hand it was perfectly controlled. This is a picture of how grace sets us free from the bondage of the law.
Another writer holds that the point is plainer:
It was very simply the evidence of His divine knowledge. It was His claim, asserted among the Jews, to be Jehovah Messiah. Facts proved that claim, and so did the submission of human hearts, where God was pleased to produce it for the honour of His Son. That is why the Spirit records the words that passed, and the fulfilment of everything He said, so exactly.
- The claim. He treats the earth and everything in it as His own. What would be theft for anyone else is the Owner sending for His property.
- The word. One sentence — "The Lord has need of it" — was enough, and the owners let the colt go.
- The hearts. He knew where the colt stood and how its owners would react. That is not just knowledge of the owner, but control of their hearts.
- The wonder. That the One who owns everything should have need of anything is as astonishing as the glory of His person.
- The return. Mark adds that He would send it straight back. He borrows what He has every right to take.
And they led it to Jesus; and having cast their own garments on the colt, they put Jesus on [it].
The two disciples have done what they were told, and the owners have let the animal go. Now the colt stands in front of Jesus. The men who fetched it turn their own clothes into a saddle, and He rides into Jerusalem as King.
Writers have long asked whether the animal stands for something. One writer sets aside that reading and points to what the incident proves about Jesus:
Ancient and modern writers have worked hard to find in this remarkable incident a picture of the Gentiles obeying the gospel, since the Lord received and rode on the colt. That effort seems to me far from intelligent. It was very simply the evidence of His divine knowledge. It was His claim among the Jews to be Jehovah Messiah, asserted openly. Facts verified that claim, and so did the proved submission of human hearts, where God was pleased to produce it for the honour of His Son. That is why the Spirit records so carefully the words that passed and the fulfilment of all He said.
Others do read the scene as a picture. One writer ties the fulfilled prophecy to the unbroken colt, and sees in it bondage broken by grace:
The Lord led His disciples up toward Jerusalem, and He sent for the donkey's colt on which He rode into the city, just as Zechariah had prophesied. The colt was unbroken, for no man had sat on it, and so it was tied up under restraint. It was loosed from that restraint, but only so that He might sit on it. Under His powerful hand it was perfectly controlled. This is a parable of how grace sets us free from the bondage of the law.
The disciples took an animal that was not theirs, and the owners let them. That is only defensible if the one who sent them owns everything:
Only the Lord could give such instructions, for all things are His property. For anyone else to do this would be stealing. No difficulty came up. The words "The Lord has need of it" settled the matter even for the owners, who questioned the disciples at first.
The word for what the disciples did with their cloaks is a strong one. It appears again in a call to hand our worries to God:
"Casting (or, having cast) all your care — every anxiety — on Him." The word "casting" is a strong word. It really means "to fling," to part company with something completely. It is used that way in Luke 19:35, where the people cast their garments on the colt, letting them completely go!
One writer reads the clothing and the choice of animal together:
The people put their clothing on the animal for the Lord to ride on. Others spread their garments on the ground in the way, for the donkey to walk on. This symbolized the submission of the people to this blessed though lowly Messiah of Israel. He did not ride on a war horse, as He will when He comes in judgment (Revelation 19:11). He rode a lowly donkey's colt, for He was presented in grace, offering peace if peace would be received.
The disciples and the crowd were not acting on their own enthusiasm:
The same divine power was controlling the hearts of the disciples and the multitude. That power gave this testimony to the royalty of Jesus, and it fulfilled the words of the prophet. They threw their cloaks on it, and He sat on it. A new position for the lowly Jesus — yet lovely even in this.
Matthew mentions both the colt and its mother; Luke keeps the colt alone. One writer takes that difference as deliberate:
The colt here is seen alone, and not, as in Matthew, in company with its mother. It is grace entirely, not government. The King enters amid the applause of His people. When the Pharisees try to silence the disciples in their praise, He replies that the stones would cry out if the disciples kept quiet.
- Claim. Bringing the colt to Jesus showed His divine knowledge. It asserted His claim among the Jews as Jehovah Messiah, proved by facts and by hearts God made willing.
- Ownership. "The Lord has need of it" settled the question for the owners. All things are His property; from anyone else the same act would have been theft.
- Release. The colt was unbroken and tied. It was loosed only so that He might sit on it, and under His hand it went perfectly. That is a parable of grace freeing us from the bondage of the law.
- Surrender. The word for casting the garments means to fling, to let go completely — the same word used for casting every anxiety on Him.
- Grace. He rode a donkey's colt, not the war horse of judgment. Luke's account keeps the colt alone: grace entirely, not government.
And as he went, they strewed their clothes in the way.
Jesus rides toward Jerusalem on a donkey's colt. The crowd turns the road into a carpet of clothing, treating Him as a king. Two questions press on the scene: what did this gesture mean, and who put it into their hearts to make it?
The crowd did not invent this gesture on the spot. It belonged to an older practice.
They spread the garments in the way. It was an Eastern custom to put costly rugs before the feet of kings, and the crowds followed this custom by putting their own garments down.
The same custom appears in the Old Testament. When Israel's officers made Jehu king, they put their garments under him on the steps and blew the trumpet (2 Kings 9:13). One writer calls this an ancient custom that points forward to this very scene (C. Knapp).
Heaven had already given Him glory. Here the honour came from the crowd's own clothing.
At the entry into Jerusalem, we see Him accepted in Israel, receiving such honours as Israel could give Him. The owner of the donkey acknowledges His higher claim as Lord. The crowd, it is true, cannot bathe His garments in glory, as heaven had done before. But they can spread their own garments under His feet, and surround Him with the joys of a feast of tabernacles. No glorified ones come out from their homes of glory to wait on Him and honour Him. But His citizens will hail Him as their King.
Some have read the colt as a picture of the nations outside Israel submitting to the gospel. William Kelly rejects that reading. He points to what the scene proves about the rider.
Writers ancient and modern have laboured to find in this remarkable incident a picture of the Gentiles obeying the gospel, as the Lord received and rode on the colt. That seems to me far from intelligent. It was simply the evidence of His divine knowledge, and the assertion among the Jews of His claim as Jehovah Messiah. Facts confirmed that claim, and so did the proven submission of human hearts, where God was pleased to produce it, to the honour of His Son. This is why the Spirit records in such detail the words that passed and the fulfilment of all He said.
The clothes on the animal and the clothes on the ground carried one message. The animal He rode showed what His reign would offer.
The people put their clothing on the animal for the Lord to ride on. They spread other garments on the ground in the way for the donkey to walk on. This was a symbol of their submission to this blessed though lowly Messiah of Israel. He did not ride on a war horse, as He will when He comes in judgment (Rev. 19:11). He rode a lowly donkey's colt, for He was presented in grace, offering peace, if people would receive it.
No leader organised this welcome. Commentators trace the whole scene to God at work in ordinary people.
The sovereign power of God moves a very great crowd to lay their garments on the road He travels. Others cut branches from the trees to spread in the way... The Jewish leaders had arranged nothing of the kind, though you would expect it at the arrival of their Messiah. Yet without any arrangement God worked in men's hearts. The result was a public presentation of the Messiah that the leaders could not ignore, however strongly they disapproved.
The praise was real, but it did not last. Even so, God had His own reason for producing it.
How happy for them if their hearts had been changed so as to hold on to this testimony in the Spirit. But God in His sovereignty arranged their hearts to give this testimony. He could not allow His Son to be rejected without receiving it.
The colt was on that road because the Lord had need of it, and the disciples loosed it and brought it. That points to a lesson for anyone who serves Him.
Luke tells us that the colt was the one the Lord had need of. He instructs the disciples to go and loose it, and more than that, to bring it to Jesus. Those who are older, and those who seek to serve the Lord, should take that word to heart. Are we able, under the Lord's command, to bring in a ministry that results in affections being set free for His service?
- Custom — spreading garments on the road honoured a king, as Israel's officers did for Jehu.
- Submission — the clothes on the colt and on the road showed the people bowing to a Messiah who came lowly, not on a war horse.
- Claim — Christ was asserting His claim as Jehovah Messiah, proved by His divine knowledge and by hearts God moved to honour Him.
- Sovereignty — no leader arranged this welcome; God worked in the crowd, and the leaders could not ignore the result.
- Application — the Lord asks for what He needs to be loosed and brought to Him; our work is to set affections free for Him.
And as he drew near, already at the descent of the mount of Olives, all the multitude of the disciples began, rejoicing, to praise God with a loud voice for all the works of power which they had seen,
Only Luke records this shout of praise on the slope of the Mount of Olives, and only he names the singers. Two questions follow: why praise broke out at this moment, and why the words differ from the angels' song at Christ's birth.
The route matters. He came down the Mount of Olives toward the city from a direction full of meaning.
The stream of men swept onward along the mountain track, the one route best suited to such a company. It led down the slope towards the city and the temple. The multitude seemed of one mind that day. The King was among them. The rightful occupant of David's throne was entering the capital of the kingdom. He came in the very way foretold centuries before. He was entering, too, the city from the east, from the very quarter from which some day He will return to it, to leave it no more. For His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives (Zech. 14:4), and the glory of the Lord will return to the house of God from the east (Ezek. 43:2).
Their praise had a stated cause: what they had watched Him do. One writer traces the road that led here, and compares it to Solomon's ascent.
Jesus had passed through Galilee and Samaria on His way up, and came near Jericho. There His mercy still flowed freely: He opened the eyes of the blind man, and He brought salvation to the house of Zacchaeus... As He continued going up to Jerusalem, the crowd of disciples looked ahead in their praises to the triumph of the coming day... If Solomon's ascent so astonished the queen of Sheba that she was left breathless, the ascent of the Son of God filled His disciples with praise to God.
Luke does not name the same singers as the other Gospels, and the words he records fit the group he names.
This is not just the crowds, or those who went before Him and followed after, as in Matthew and Mark. Nor is it the children crying in the temple, "Hosanna to the Son of David," which Matthew records so fittingly. Luke tells us of the whole multitude of the disciples. So these are words that suit their lips alone. Yet God surely gave those words a wisdom far beyond the disciples' own measure, as often happens among the witnesses of Christ.
Another writer develops that thought. The disciples said more than they understood.
By all this He was clearly presenting Himself to Jerusalem as its rightful, God-sent King. His disciples helped in this, and as they came near the city they began to praise God and rejoice. John 12:16 tells us plainly that at the time they did not understand what they were doing. Yet the Spirit of God clearly took hold of their lips and guided their words.
The praise that follows in verse 38 turns the angels' song at Christ's birth around.
So the Spirit of God gives them a step forward — a great step — in divine understanding. It reaches beyond the song of the angels at the beginning... Here we have a striking change, or rather the reverse. "Glory in the highest" is now the result, not the opening. And instead of "peace on earth," the disciples fittingly sing, "Peace in heaven." Peace on earth will no doubt be the fruit by and by, since it is according to God's mind and was looked for from the beginning. But peace on earth was not the question now. The reason was clear: the earth was not ready. It was about to judge unjustly, and to be judged.
Another writer notes what happens here to the title "Son of David."
The Son of David disappears. He is indeed the King who comes in the name of the Lord; but it is no longer the remnant of Israel seeking salvation in the name of the Son of David, acknowledging His title. It is "peace in heaven and glory in the highest." The kingdom rests on peace made in the heavenly places. The Son of man, exalted on high and victorious over Satan, has reconciled the heavens... The kingdom on earth is only a consequence of this glory which grace has established.
- Seen — Their praise rested on evidence: the mighty works they had watched Him do along the road to Jerusalem.
- Sung — What they had seen burst out loud and public, right where the road tips down toward the city He will one day return to.
- Supplied — The words were beyond them. John 12:16 says they did not understand at the time. The Spirit of God guided their lips anyway.
- Shifted — At His birth angels sang of peace on earth. Here the song rises to peace in heaven, because the earth was about to reject Him.
- Settled — Peace in heaven comes first, and the kingdom on earth follows it. Praise sung on the edge of rejection already pointed to that end.
saying, Blessed the King that comes in the name of [the] Lord peace in heaven, and glory in the highest.
Jesus rides down the Mount of Olives, and the crowd of disciples bursts into praise. They hail Him as King — but why do they cry peace in heaven, and not the peace on earth the angels announced at His birth?
The shout was not invented on the spot. It came from a psalm Israel knew, and it belongs to a day still ahead.
They hailed the Lord as King. It was a rehearsal, we may say, of the shout that will rise when Psalm 118:25-26 comes true. The "Save now" of the Psalm is the same as the "Hosanna" of the crowd... The crowd seemed of one mind that day. The King was among them. The rightful heir of David's throne was entering the capital of the kingdom. He came in the way foretold centuries before.
Compare the accounts and something stands out. Luke's version reaches past Israel's throne into the heavens.
In Matthew it was, "Hosanna to the Son of David," and "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest." All of that was true. But here we have something more. The Son of David disappears. He is indeed the King who comes in the name of the Lord. But this is no longer the faithful few in Israel seeking salvation in the name of the Son of David, owning His title. It is "peace in heaven and glory in the highest." The kingdom depends on peace made in the heavenly places. The Son of man, raised on high and victorious over Satan, has reconciled the heavens... The kingdom on earth is only a consequence of this glory which grace has established... To establish the kingdom, peace is made in heaven, and the glory of God stands complete in the highest.
Why the change? It lies in what men did with Him in between.
The angels greeted His entry into the world with praise: "Glory to God in the highest, on earth peace." But men rejected the One who alone could bring them peace. As He entered Jerusalem, shortly before the leaders of Israel rejected Him, the crowd of disciples rejoiced and praised God... Men had refused peace on earth, and now peace was about to spread her wings and fly to heaven.
So what will peace in heaven actually mean?
Peace in heaven will be the ultimate and glorious effect of the work of Christ: Satan cast out of heaven, the heavenly inheritance redeemed (Ephesians 1:13), and the things in heaven reconciled (Colossians 1:20). All this and much more will surely come, when the King-Messiah comes again. Then there will be peace on earth, peace in heaven and glory in the highest.
The disciples did not grasp what they were shouting. Yet their words were true.
They did not understand, yet they spoke out the mind of God, led by the Spirit. They knew the Scripture in Zechariah 9:9. But they did not foresee or expect this: at His first coming men would reject the King. Then, as the rejected King, He would go to the cross and there make a peace wholly connected with heaven. Yet was not this the truth? The kingdom was to be postponed, not lost.
Notice the order in the shout: the King comes, and peace in heaven comes with Him.
Until you get peace in heaven, Christ cannot ride in. But when peace is in heaven, you cannot hinder it.
But that peace had to be made first, and it cost Him blood.
Our blessed Lord acted apart from man, and even despite man. He would not return to heaven without making a peace far higher than peace on earth among men. It was not a peace between man and man, but between God and man. He made it by the blood of His cross.
So the verse is practical. It points anyone who wants peace in one direction.
Earth refused Him, but heaven received Him very soon after His resurrection. Anyone today who wants true peace will find it only by looking to the Prince of Peace in heaven. The day will yet come when the Lord Jesus will establish peace on earth, but not until He returns.
- Refused — At His birth the angels announced peace on earth. Men would have none of it, and they rejected the King.
- Relocated — So the praise changes. Peace is now in heaven, made between God and man by the blood of His cross.
- Rehearsed — The disciples quoted Psalm 118 without understanding it. The Spirit still put the exact truth in their mouths.
- Reclaimed — Peace in heaven means Satan thrown out and heavenly things reconciled. Until heaven is at peace, the King cannot ride in.
- Returned — Peace on earth comes back only when He does; until then it is found by looking up to where He is.
And some of the Pharisees from the crowd said to him, Teacher, rebuke thy disciples.
The disciples are shouting the praise of their King as He comes to Jerusalem. From inside that same crowd, a few religious leaders ask Him to silence them. Their words raise the question the whole scene turns on. Is this praise too much, or the only honest answer to who He is?
The Pharisees were strict religious teachers, proud of how carefully they kept God's law. Note where they were standing when they spoke.
It must have been a joyful scene, the kind that would stir even the most unemotional of men. Yet some stood right in the middle of the rejoicing crowd, untouched by it, though not unconcerned. These were Pharisees, who turned to the Lord and asked Him to rebuke His disciples. His reply silenced them. The Pharisees could only regard Him as a claimant to David's throne. One day all of nature will make itself heard, welcoming Him back as Lord and as Israel's King.
Two groups watch the same Man. One sings; the other tries to stop the singing.
He presents Himself for the last time to Israel, in the lowliness of grace. That was far more important than the kingdom. This produces the sharpest possible contrast between the disciples and the Pharisees. The whole crowd of disciples began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice. They said, "Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!" Some of the Pharisees appeal to Him to rebuke the disciples. From His lips they learn that if these were silent, the very stones would cry out. There must be a testimony to His glory.
They call Him "Teacher," then ask Him to stop a song that names Him King. That is not a small point about crowd control. It asks Him to disown who He is.
The Pharisees dare to appeal to the Lord Himself to deny Himself and rebuke the disciples. He tells them that if they held their peace, the very stones would cry out. As a result of His rejection this has in fact happened, and the stones of the ploughed-up city bear witness for Him today.
The test is simple. Their objection would only stand if the claim were false.
If He had not been Israel's true King, they would have had reason to object. But the Lord silenced their objection. His words implied that the Spirit of God had moved the disciples to speak. If they would not speak, God would make even the stones cry out at once. If people will not give true honour to the Son of God, that will not stop God from using any means He pleases to glorify His Son.
The reply about the stones measures the men who complained. Stone paved their own city, and stone would have praised Him when they would not.
But the hearts of the builders at Jerusalem were harder than the stones of their streets. They rejected the Stone which God had laid in Zion, for to them He was a Stone of stumbling. Christ's disciples were singing a sweet song of praise. Their hard, unfeeling voices cut across it with the harsh sound, "Teacher, rebuke your disciples." What blindness! What insolence against the "King of Zion"... The King's meek and lowly heart stayed in perfect harmony with the daughter of Zion. Even such a rude interruption could not disturb it.
The words the Pharisees wanted silenced were bigger than the singers knew.
When He was born as man, the angels had celebrated "on earth peace," for the Man of God's good pleasure had appeared. They celebrated the whole result of His work. But now it was clear that death lay before Him. His rejection would bring in a time of anything but peace on earth. Even so, the first effect of His work on the cross would be to establish peace in the highest court of all — in heaven. It would also display glory in the highest, as He Himself went up there in triumph. This note of praise had to be struck at this point. God could have made the stones cry out. Instead He used the lips of the disciples, though they spoke the words without fully understanding them.
- King. The Pharisees saw only a man claiming David's throne. Their objection would have been fair if the claim were false. The Lord's answer shows it was not.
- Praise. The Spirit of God moved the disciples to say more than they understood. Not peace on earth now, but peace in heaven and glory in the highest through the cross.
- Objection. Asking Him to silence that song was asking Him to deny Himself. It came from men standing inside the joy, untouched by it.
- Answer. Hearts in Jerusalem proved harder than its street stones. They rejected the Stone God laid in Zion. Their rude interruption never disturbed the King's calm.
- Certainty. God will have a witness to His Son's glory. If human lips refuse it, He will use any means He pleases. One day all of nature will welcome Him back as Israel's King.
And he answering said to them, I say unto you, If these shall be silent, the stones will cry out.
The King rides down the Mount of Olives, His disciples are shouting praise, and the religious leaders tell Him to stop them. He refuses in one sentence: if these voices went quiet, God would find another.
The leaders were speaking for the whole nation. One writer hears its true mind in their demand:
But now the Pharisees say, "Teacher, rebuke your disciples." That was the heart of the nation exposing itself in the representatives of the people. The mind of the nation stood out in that saying, "Teacher, rebuke your disciples." That was rejection. "We will not have this man to reign over us."
Two groups stand opposite each other that day. His reply tells the Pharisees why the praise had to go on:
This gives rise to the most marked contrast between the disciples and the Pharisees. Some of the Pharisees appeal to Him to rebuke the disciples, but learn from His lips that if these were silent, the very stones would cry out. There must be a testimony to His glory.
The Lord did not simply prefer the praise. He gave a reason why no one could stop it:
If He had not been Israel's true King, they would have had reason to object. But the Lord silenced their objections. He implied that the Spirit of God moved the disciples to speak, and that if they would not speak, God would make even the stones cry out at once. How true it is! If people will not give true honor to the Son of God, that will not stop God. He will use any means He pleases to glorify His Son.
These men were the builders of Israel. One writer weighs their hearts against the stones under their feet:
But the hearts of the builders at Jerusalem were harder than the stones of their streets. They rejected the Stone which God had laid in Zion, for He was to them a Stone of stumbling. Christ's disciples were singing praise in sweet harmony. Their hard, unfeeling voices broke into it with the shrill cry, "Teacher, rebuke your disciples." What blindness!
This is not the only place in the Bible where stones are heard:
Even stones may have a voice in the ear of the Lord. Habakkuk 2:11; Luke 19:40.
One writer says the words came true in a way you can still see:
The Pharisees dare to appeal to the Lord Himself to deny Himself, and rebuke the disciples. He tells them that, if the disciples stayed silent, the very stones would cry out. As a result of His rejection this has indeed taken place, and the stones of the ruined city bear witness for Him today.
The Pharisees had their own low estimate of Him. One writer sets it beside what is still to come:
The Pharisees might regard Him as only a claimant to David's throne. In time to come all lifeless nature will make itself understood when it welcomes Him back as Jehovah and as Israel's King (Psalm 96; 98).
- Voice given — the Spirit of God moved the disciples to praise Him. That is why the Lord would not stop them.
- Voice refused — "Teacher, rebuke your disciples" was the nation's real mind speaking. It was rejection of the King Himself.
- Voice guaranteed — silence one witness and God raises another. There must be a testimony to His glory, and He will use any means He pleases to get it.
- Voice in ruins — the leaders proved harder than the stones of their own streets. The stones of the ruined city have spoken for Him ever since.
- Voice in full — one day all lifeless nature will speak. It will welcome Him back as Israel's King.
And as he drew near, seeing the city, he wept over it,
The road into Jerusalem is loud with praise. The crowd is cheering and the disciples are shouting blessings on their King. Then the city comes into view, and the one person not celebrating is the one being celebrated.
The scene holds two moods at once, and commentators note that the sadness belongs to the King Himself.
Now comes a striking contrast. As they approached the city the disciples rejoiced and shouted blessings on the King. The King Himself wept over the city! ... The lament of the LORD over Israel, recorded in Psalm 81:13, comes back here. It is far deeper now, as they approached the greatest of all their terrible sins. Jerusalem did not know the things that belonged to her peace, so peace on earth was impossible at that time... The sunrise from on high had visited them, and they did not know the time of their visitation.
Luke does not use the word John uses at the grave of Lazarus. The difference is audible.
And what kind of weeping was this? He wept at the grave of Lazarus and that was a still, a silent weeping. But before Jerusalem He broke out in loud and deep lamentations. The different words used in the original Greek clearly prove this.
One writer sets the two words side by side.
"Wept" here means "sobbed" or "wailed" (eklausen). It is the word used of Peter in Mark 14:72. In John 11:35 we have a different word for the Lord, edakrue, "shed tears."
The obvious guesses — a crowd that would soon turn, a cross only days away — are set aside.
He who was the object of that popular ovation could not hold back His tears as He looked over Jerusalem. Sometimes people shed tears for joy; His were not that. Were they drawn out as He thought of how quickly popular praise changes, and of His coming sufferings? No. Those tears came from what was about to fall on the city because she rejected Him. Only Luke tells us about them.
Being rejected did not dry up His affection for the place. It did the opposite.
The same crowd was now pressing around Him and joining in the "Hosanna" of His disciples. He knew that a few days later they would demand His death, shouting, "Crucify Him! Crucify Him!" Did this hold back His tears? No, it only drew them out, because of the terrible judgment hanging over the unhappy blinded city.
These are the tears of a real man. Writers here insist they are more than that.
Look at Christ on earth and you see the "Son of Man who is in heaven," displaying God on earth before our eyes. "In him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily." See Him weeping over Jerusalem: the Messiah's heart wrung with grief over His people's sin. It was the tender heart of a man. But it sprang from that deep and wonderful fountain — "The tears fell from human eyes, but they came from the heart of God." So God was displayed. The heart adores when we think that we have to do with a God who has stooped down to human tears, in a world of tears.
The next verses pronounce judgment. The mouth that pronounces it is weeping.
If men will not receive the offers of grace, Christ grieves (Mark 3:5). He is like a judge who passes the sentence with tears in his eyes... "I come to save you, but you push salvation away from you. I come with healing under My wings, but you bolt the door on your physician. I only want you to open your hearts and receive Me. Then I will open heaven to receive you. But you would rather stay with your sins and die than come to Me and live." "Israel would not submit to me" (Ps. 81:11). Well, sinners, I will weep at your funerals.
Every detail of the warning came true in the Roman siege. That fact makes the tears more remarkable, not less.
Every word of the warning was exactly fulfilled in the siege of Titus. But what grace shone out of that heart, overflowing with grief for the people! They were blindly refusing the very One who wept over them, and it was to their own ruin. His love for them was at once truly divine and perfectly human.
One writer reads Jerusalem's last opportunity as a mirror.
The scene in Luke 19 gives us a striking picture of where Christendom stands morally in these closing hours of the day of grace... Opportunity had been given them of learning the things that belonged to their peace, but these were "now hidden from their eyes." ... And note, ignorance is the ground of its condemnation, which is a solemn warning to those who choose to remain ignorant now.
- Visit. God came near in Person, and the city missed the time of its visitation.
- Tears. The word is not silent weeping but open lament — the same word used of Peter's weeping in Mark 14:72.
- Source. They fell from human eyes and came from the heart of God: divine love and real manhood in one Person.
- Verdict. Every word of the judgment He announced came true, spoken by a Judge who passed sentence in tears.
- Warning. Jerusalem did not lack evidence; she refused it. Christ still weeps over those who push His salvation away.
saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, even at least in this thy day, the things that are for thy peace but now they are hid from thine eyes;
Jerusalem is cheering as its King rides in, and the King is the only one crying. Everything turns on one word — peace. It was offered, refused, and now hidden from sight.
The joy around Him and the grief in Him run in opposite directions. One writer notes which word Luke chooses for this weeping.
Now comes a striking contrast. As they approached the city the disciples rejoiced and shouted blessings on the King. The King Himself wept over the city! In John 11:35, the word used shows silent tears. Here the word used shows loud grief, both seen and heard. Jerusalem did not know the things that belonged to her peace, so peace on earth was impossible at that time. The Lord foresaw and predicted her violent destruction at the hands of the Romans, which came about forty years later.
He weeps over the city that is about to kill Him, and He already sees what will follow.
But here we have another scene, His weeping over that very city that was about to cast Him out and crucify Him. It is a truth for us to treasure in our hearts. In divine grace He wept over guilty Jerusalem, which was giving up its own mercies and rejecting its own Saviour — the Lord God. He predicts that the city will be left desolate and destroyed, because it did not know the time when God came to visit it.
The city was not short of a desire for peace. It was short of sight.
He wept, for Jerusalem was not prepared to receive Him: it was ignorant of the things that belonged to its peace. The same is true of the world today. Men wanted peace, but they were too blind to see what peace requires. Those requirements were centered in the person of the Lord Jesus, the Prince of peace. Unbelief hid them from Israel's eyes.
The irony sits in the city's own name.
This was especially true of the city of Jerusalem. Its name means the city of peace, but how false to her name that city has been until now.
On that day pardon was still possible.
Oh, "Would that you, even you, had known" — all would have been pardoned then — "on this day" — what a day for Israel! Her sin had piled up, and grace piled up too, because of that very sin and because of the divine tenderness. But, alas, it only added to the sorrows of Jesus, if not of Jerusalem, His beloved. Now they were hidden from their eyes.
"But now" divides the verse in two. One writer marks where the line falls.
As long as He lived, that is, until the last entry into Jerusalem, the people could still repent. The words "But now they are hidden from your eyes" close it.
The warning He goes on to give came true in full. Yet the tone never hardens.
Every word of the warning came true exactly in the siege by Titus. But what grace shone out of that heart, so loaded with grief for the people! Blindly, and to their own ruin, they were refusing the very One who wept over them, in a love both truly divine and perfectly human.
Another writer names the choice the city faced.
This was the alternative, which His lament over the city brings fully out: it was the Saviour or the destroyer, Christ or the dreaded and hated Roman. In fact, they had already made their choice, and nothing remained but to leave them to it. But the Judge weeps as He gives sentence.
The verse does not stay in the first century. One writer turns it on readers now.
They had been given the chance to learn the things that belonged to their peace, but these were "now hidden from their eyes." Note that ignorance is the ground of its condemnation. That is a solemn warning to anyone who chooses to stay ignorant now. Many will even plead ignorance as a ground of forgiveness. But God takes pains to enlighten, so pleading ignorance is only proof of the most glaring stubbornness.
- Visit — God came to His city in person; the whole verdict hung on Jerusalem not knowing the time of that visit.
- Peace — the things that make for peace were centered in one person, the Prince of peace, standing outside a city named for peace.
- Grace — where sin piled highest, grace piled higher still; pardon stayed open right up to that last entry.
- Closed — "but now" shuts the door; the Judge passes sentence in tears, not in anger.
- You — ignorance was the charge, so "I didn't know" is no shelter when God has taken trouble to make things plain.
for days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall make a palisaded mound about thee, and shall close thee around, and keep thee in on every side,
The King has just entered His own capital to cheers, and now He looks at the city and pictures the army that will one day surround it. He speaks in tears, which leaves two questions: did this happen, and why did it have to?
The prediction is unusual in that the one who makes it is weeping while He makes it. One writer sets the exactness of the outcome side by side with the heart of the Speaker.
Every word of the warning was exactly fulfilled in the siege of Titus. But what grace shone out of that heart! He was overwhelmed with grief for a people who were blindly refusing, to their own ruin, the very One who wept over them. He wept in a love at once truly divine and perfectly human.
The barricade, the encircling, the hemming in on every side — these were not vague images of trouble. A history of the Roman assault records how the decision was reached. (Older translations render the ESV's "set up a barricade" as "cast a trench," which is the wording quoted here.)
The Romans discussed three plans: to storm the city at once, to repair the works and rebuild the siege engines, or to blockade the city and starve it into surrender. They chose the last, and set the whole army to work "to cast a trench" around the city. But the siege was long and difficult. It lasted from the spring till September.
The sentence does not end at verse 43. It runs on to name the cause: the city did not know the time of its visitation. One writer explains what the phrase means here, and what it means elsewhere in Scripture.
The words in Luke 19:44, "the time of your visitation," undoubtedly mean the day of grace for Jerusalem. That grace came through the presence and testimony of our blessed Lord. It was the opportunity for blessing, and this is why the Lord laments... When, however, we come to Peter's words, "the day of visitation," the thought is rather that of judgment, and not of grace.
Verse 42 names what would have brought Jerusalem peace. Verse 43 says what came instead.
Men wanted peace, but were so blinded that they did not recognise what peace required. These things centred in the person of the Lord Jesus, the Prince of peace. But because of unbelief the things necessary for peace were hidden from Israel's eyes (v.42). Prophetically the Lord pronounced on Jerusalem the terrible alternative to peace. Its enemies would make it their prey, and subject it to oppression, siege and destruction.
Commentators differ here. Kelly, quoted above, treats the words as fully discharged in the Roman siege. Another writer reads them as having a further stage still ahead.
Those days did come. Yet I admit the Lord's prophecy was only partly fulfilled, and that it will have a fuller accomplishment later on. If you want to read a dark and bloody page of history, sit down and read the account of the sack of Jerusalem by the Romans under Titus. You will look on horrors that will strike to the very bottom of your soul. Only that time of terrible tribulation still to come will exceed them.
Some read what happened to Jerusalem as a pattern, not a one-off event.
Jerusalem is only a sample of the world in general. Because Christ was rejected, the world will have to go through a very different history than if it had been prepared for Him... The world is not prepared for Him, and the earth must pass to its rest through the judgments that will cleanse it of its defilements.
One writer turns the ground of that sentence — not knowing — on readers today.
They had had the opportunity of learning the things that belonged to their peace, but these were "now hidden from their eyes"... And note, ignorance is the ground of its condemnation. That is a solemn warning to those who remain willingly ignorant now.
- Visitation. "The time of your visitation" means Jerusalem's day of grace. The Lord's own presence and testimony gave the city its chance of blessing.
- Blindness. What made for peace was centred in Christ Himself. Unbelief hid it, and the barricade came in place of the peace they refused.
- Barricade. The words were not just images. The Romans chose blockade over assault, and set the whole army to work casting a trench around the city.
- Fulfilment. Every word came true in the siege of Titus. Commentators differ on whether that siege completed the prophecy, or points on to a greater tribulation still ahead.
- Warning. Ignorance was the ground of the city's condemnation. That makes it a warning to anyone who stays willingly ignorant while grace is still speaking.
and shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children in thee; and shall not leave in thee a stone upon a stone because thou knewest not the season of thy visitation.
Crowds have just welcomed the King into Jerusalem. Now He tells the city what is coming, and why. The sentence falls on a single charge — she did not recognise the moment God came to her.
The word "visitation" does not mean the same thing everywhere. Here it points to opportunity, not doom.
In Luke 19:44, "The time of your visitation" certainly means the day of grace for Jerusalem. That grace came through the presence and testimony of our blessed Lord. It was the opportunity for blessing. This is why the Lord laments: "If you had known, even you, at least in this your day, the things that make for your peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes." But when we come to Peter's words, "The day of visitation," the thought is judgment, not grace.
The visit was God's own coming in the Person of Jesus. Not knowing it cost Jerusalem more than a blessing.
It is the hour of her visitation, and she has not known it. If only she had, even now, listened to the call of the testimony of her God! She is given up into the hands of the Gentiles, her enemies, who will not leave her one stone upon another. In other words, she did not know this visitation of God in grace in the Person of Jesus. So she is set aside. The testimony goes no further, and she gives place to a new order of things.
The verse is a verdict, yet the One who announces it weeps as He speaks.
This was the alternative, which His lament over the city brings fully out: it was the Saviour or the destroyer, Christ or the dreaded and hated Roman. In fact, they had already made their choice, and could only be left to it. But the Judge weeps as He gives sentence. She and her children within her would be destroyed — not a stone left upon a stone.
Darby weighs what that day could have been for Israel.
Oh, "If you had known, at least," all would have been pardoned then — "in this your day" — what a day for Israel! For if all her sin was piled up, all grace was piled up too... but now they were hidden from their eyes. The joy and acclamation of His disciples was right, yet it gave occasion to the tears of Jesus rather than wiping them away. All as to Jerusalem hung on this: "You did not know the time of your visitation."
The warning was not vague. Roman armies under Titus later besieged the city.
Every word of the warning came true to the letter in the siege of Titus. But what grace shone out of that heart, overwhelmed with grief for the people! They were blindly refusing, to their own ruin, the very One who wept over them in a love that was truly divine and perfectly human.
The charge is ignorance. That is what makes it a warning for people now.
They had the opportunity to learn the things that belonged to their peace, but these were "now hidden from their eyes." So the Lord, still yearning over darkened Jerusalem, speaks ahead of time as Judge and pronounces her doom. And note, ignorance is the ground of its condemnation, which is a solemn warning to those who remain willingly ignorant now. There are many like this. They will even plead ignorance as the ground of forgiveness. But God takes pains to enlighten them, so such a plea is only evidence of the most glaring stubbornness.
The ruins are held up as evidence that a window of opportunity really can close.
It was said of Jerusalem that she did not know the time of her visitation (Luke 19:44). Her capture by the Romans, and the desolation that followed, are standing witnesses of her folly in that respect.
The ruin of the city is not the end of her story.
He now sees it as lost to Him, and soon to be laid level with the ground, because she had not known this, the time of her visitation!... The people would not see Him among them again, offering Himself to them as their King, until by repentance and faith they learn to join with His disciples in calling Him "Blessed."
- Visit — "The time of your visitation" was Jerusalem's day of grace. God Himself stood among them in Christ, offering peace.
- Blindness — The charge was not that she fought the visit. She never recognised it, and not knowing was the ground of her condemnation.
- Tears — The Judge passes sentence weeping; the same love that announces the ruin had come to prevent it.
- Ruins — Every word came true under Titus: the city levelled, her children with her, not one stone left standing.
- Return — Being set aside is not the end: the city that missed His visit will yet greet Him as blessed.