And when they drew near to Jerusalem and came to Bethphage, at the mount of Olives, then Jesus sent two disciples,
The Lord's last journey to Jerusalem turns here. He stops at a village on the Mount of Olives, sends two disciples ahead, and everything that follows starts with this quiet act of a King arranging His own entry.
One writer sees the Lord forcing the question, so that Israel's refusal of Him would be open and deliberate:
Before the Lord Jesus would formally announce their present loss of the kingdom, I think He would first draw out from the nation of Israel a formal rejection of Him. He would stand before them fully displayed in His character as their King, so that they might be left without excuse. This is how the scene of His last solemn entry into their city comes about. As we shall see, He entered in the style and actions of the true Son of David, the rightful King of Israel.
Another writer shows what this entry settled for the nation:
He enters Jerusalem as King, according to the prophecy of Zechariah... His whole character here puts the Jews under the final test: the presence of Messiah their King. It brings on their judgment as He is about to leave them. The rejected King passes them all in review before Him and assigns them their place. It is the last closing act between Messiah and Jerusalem.
The village name carries meaning, and so does the animal He sends for:
So now He approaches Jerusalem, at Bethphage, the "house of unripe figs." The meaning of the fig soon becomes important. He sends two of His disciples to claim the donkey and the colt for His service, and He rides into the city on the colt. The animal was characteristic of the Prince of peace, in contrast with the war-horse on which we see Him in Revelation (Rev. 19:11). The young animal had never been ridden. It also shows the new and free spirit of obedience which alone could bring Him into His place among His people — so as to be willing in the day of His power (Ps. 110:3).
The people already had prophecies about this hill:
Jesus comes to the Mount of Olives. The Jews knew well what the prophets had said about this mountain. They should have entered into the spirit of what the Lord was doing.
One ridge holds His past and His future together:
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 the same Mount of Olives He sat in Matthew 24, surrounded by His Jewish disciples. He had left His nation, until the day when they would say, "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord." His nation rejected and crucified Him, and from the same mountain He ascended to heaven (Acts 1). And on that same mountain His feet shall stand when He returns for their full and complete deliverance in grace!
The errand He gives the two disciples is itself a claim:
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 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. His "need of them" is as astonishing as the glory of His person.
The owners' response is the surprise:
The owners of the animal had to listen to this claim: "The Lord has need of him." Against nature, and against everything the heart of man would have argued for, they sent him "at once."
Riding a donkey was not a step down from kingship. It was the older, purer form of it:
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 took every feature, however small, of the only pure and true form of that character... Moses had ruled that Israel's king must not surround himself with display that might lift up his head in pride above his brothers (Deut. 17:14).
- Purpose. He drew near on purpose, presenting Himself as King so the nation would answer openly and have no excuse.
- Place. He drew near at Bethphage, "the house of unripe figs," and on the Mount of Olives — the mountain of His entry, His ascension, and His return.
- Claim. He drew near as Jehovah: He knew what was still hidden, and "The Lord has need of them" moved the owners at once.
- Manner. He drew near meek, on a donkey rather than a war-horse — the pure, unproud kingship Moses had prescribed.
- Outcome. He drew near for the last time as Messiah. The rejected King reviews the nation, assigns them their place — and one day His feet will stand on that same mountain.
saying to them, Go into the village over against you, and immediately ye will find an ass tied, and a colt with it; loose [them] and lead [them] to me.
Jesus sends two disciples ahead on an errand that sounds ordinary: fetch an animal from a nearby village. Yet He has already settled every detail — which village, what they will find, and what they must do with it. The command is simple, but it raises questions. How did He know? By what right did He take? And why two animals, not one?
Nobody suggested this to Jesus. The arrangements begin with Him, and He can name a spot He is not standing in.
Who suggested it? The crowd did not bring a richly decorated animal. 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 — Mark tells us — at a door out in the open street, or perhaps at a crossway running round the house. 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 standing at that moment. It was there ready to bring in the King, according to prophecy.
If anyone else sent men to untie another man's animal, it would be theft. Everything here depends on who gives the order.
This act of the Lord flashes out His glory once more, 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 and the piece of silver in the sea. He commanded the fish with the coin to come to Peter's hook. In the same way, here He demands the use of the donkey and the 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).
The choice of animal was not humility only. It was the royal style of Israel at its best.
We learn that in the purest days of Jewish government the leading men in Israel used no animals but donkeys (Judges 5:10; Judges 10:4; Judges 12:14). Horses only came in later, in 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.
Only Matthew names both animals. The pair pictures the nation, old and new.
Matthew alone mentions "a donkey tied, and a colt with her," according to Zech. 9:9... The three other Gospels mention the colt only. Here, in Matthew, the old Israel and the renewed nation are linked together. The Lord's entry into Jerusalem is upon the "colt, the foal of a donkey" — the new Israel will bring Him in with Hosannas! ... The donkey was, according to the law, "unclean"; but its foal could be redeemed.
The same writer gives a practical reason for the mother being there at all.
Notice that the two disciples had the Lord's direction to bring the mother. They were not acting on their own sense of what was wise. Christ's use of the two may be put down to His tenderness. The colt would be restless from discomfort, and its mother's presence would settle it. The Lord's hand resting on her may have guided her movements, so that she could better keep pace with the colt on which He rode.
The colt is tied up, and the order is to set it loose. But it is not set loose to run free.
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 restrained. This is a parable of how grace sets us free from the bondage of the law.
- Command. The scene starts with Christ's word. The crowd did not plan it, and neither did the disciples.
- Knowledge. He describes an animal He cannot see, at a door in a village He has not entered. That is the knowledge of Jehovah, not a guess.
- Ownership. He asks permission of no one, because the cattle on a thousand hills are already His.
- Character. He calls for the mount of Israel's leaders in their purest days. Meekness here is kingship, not the lack of it.
- Loosing. The colt goes free only to come to Him and stay under His hand — freedom, in this picture, means belonging to Christ.
And if any one say anything to you, ye shall say, The Lord has need of them, and straightway he will send them.
The Lord is about to enter Jerusalem as King. He sends two disciples for an animal they do not own, and gives them one sentence to say if anyone stops them. Those few words raise the question the whole scene turns on. By what right does He take another man's property? And how does He know it is there?
The disciples do not ask a favour. They carry a claim made under the name Jehovah — the name of Israel's God.
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 complete than His knowledge of things still 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 Messiah coming in His name. His "need of them" is as amazing as the glory of His person.
He asks for what already belongs to Him as Maker.
He has a right to them, for He is the Creator, and He can say as 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)… It was His word that demanded obedience, and His word was obeyed.
No one else arranged this. The plan is His, down to the words the disciples are to say.
But who suggested that? The crowd did not bring a richly decorated animal. The disciples had not prepared the colt, nor asked the Lord to mount it. The Lord took the initiative. He sent two of His disciples to the entrance of Bethphage to get it… 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 standing at that moment.
The promise attached is that no argument will follow. That takes more than knowing the facts. It takes power over a stranger's will.
He sends two of His disciples. If anyone asked, "Why are you doing this?" they were simply to say: "The Lord has need of it," and at once he would send it. So He knew and directed a heart far away, and showed how David's Lord had every claim to be David's Son. He who did these things by this divine power and ordering was surely claiming, in grace, the place of David's Son. Everything was already subject to Him, whatever He might subject Himself to. This was over several hearts, whoever they were, so it was not merely knowledge of the owner, but control of their hearts.
That quiet surrender previews something larger.
If anyone asked why the disciples were untying the colt, one reply was enough: "that the Lord has need of him." Every question would stop at once. So it happened. And so it will be in the coming day of glory. Then it will be true of Zion that "Your people will offer themselves freely on the day of your power" (Ps. 110:3).
The animal He sends for is not a step down from royalty. In Israel's history it was the mark of true rule.
We learn that in the purest days of Jewish government the leading men in Israel rode donkeys only (Judges 5:10; 10:4; 12:14). Horses did not come in until 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… and His being "meek and lowly" was as kingly a feature as any other.
The verse says "them," not "it." Two animals are in view.
Matthew alone mentions "a donkey tied, and a colt with her," according to Zech. 9:9. The three other Gospels mention the colt only. Here, in Matthew, the old Israel and the renewed nation are connected. The Lord's entry into Jerusalem is on the "colt, the foal of a donkey" — the new Israel will bring Him in with Hosannas!
- Right — the name He sends is Jehovah's own. The One asking for a colt owns the cattle on a thousand hills.
- Knowledge — no one told Him anything. He names the place, the animal, the objection and the answer before any of it happens.
- Power — the owner sends the colt at once. That is control of a heart He had never met, not just knowledge of it.
- Meekness — the donkey is not a lesser choice. It is the royal one, matching Israel's purest days and the prophet's word.
- Preview — a stranger gives up his colt at a word. It is a first taste of the day when His people will offer themselves freely.
But all this came to pass, that that might be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophet, saying,
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
Say to the daughter of Zion, Behold thy King cometh to thee, meek, and mounted upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.
Matthew quotes an old prophecy at the moment Jesus rides into Jerusalem. Two questions follow. Why does Israel's King arrive on a donkey instead of a horse? And why does Matthew quote only part of the prophet's words?
Prophecy had set the manner of His entry long before. Yet He is not carried along by events. He gives the orders.
The Lord then enters Jerusalem according to prophecy. He enters it, however, not in the outward pomp and glory that the nations look for. He comes as the prophet's words now literally came true: Jehovah's King sitting on a donkey in the spirit of humiliation. But this very thing gave the fullest proof that He was Jehovah Himself. The word to the owner of the donkey and colt was, "The Lord has need of them."
The pronoun matters.
Note that it is "your" King. As another has written, "He does not say a king, but your King, your own, the long-promised, the long-expected."
Older translations say "meek" or "lowly" where the ESV says "humble." The word covers the whole style of His arrival.
Kings were always presented in great pomp and dignity, riding at least a beautiful horse. To come in meekness instead of authority, on a donkey's colt instead of a war horse, is so unlike a king's usual presentation that Israel should have been woken up by such a prophecy. They should have recognised this occasion as its clear fulfilment.
Yet lowliness was not a lapse from kingliness. Israel's own history and law had set this pattern for a ruler.
In the purest days of the Jewish government, the leading men in Israel used no animals but donkeys (Judges 5:10; Judges 10:4; Judges 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 such a character... and His being "meek and lowly" was as kingly a feature as any other. Moses had ruled that the king later appointed over Israel must not surround himself with the pomp that might lift up his head in pride above his brothers. Christ the King would surely follow the model Moses gave (Deut. 17:14).
The prophecy also called the King "just, and having salvation." Matthew leaves those words out.
We ask the reader to notice the omission of the words, "just, and having salvation." Why are they not quoted? Because they would not apply to the Saviour's circumstances then. He was going to certain and known rejection. It was always true that He had salvation for those who put their trust in Him. But He was not at that time going to bring salvation to the daughter of Zion. Nor did He present Himself to her then as the "just," or righteous One. Had He entered her gates in righteousness then (as He will do when He establishes the kingdom), it would have been for her destruction. ... One part of the prophecy has come true. Zion's King did come, lowly, sitting on a donkey. The rest waits for His return to Zion in glory. Then He will be seen as "just, and having salvation."
But who left those words out?
Matthew and Paul are not the ones quoting the Old Testament. The same Spirit of God who gave the Old Testament Scriptures through the prophets is quoting His own words in the New.
Matthew names both the donkey and her foal.
Here, in Matthew, the old Israel and the renewed nation are thus connected. The Lord's entry into Jerusalem is upon the "colt, the foal of a donkey" — the new Israel will bring Him in with Hosannas! ... The donkey was, according to the law, "unclean"; but its foal might be redeemed. See Job 11:12; Ex. 13:13; Ex. 34:20.
His meekness is not a mood that circumstances produced.
We are apt to forget that meekness is His abiding character. It was not produced by His circumstances of trial and sorrow down here, but is a trait of His perfection as man. Whether in the glory at God's right hand, or appearing to Israel as their long-awaited Messiah, He is still the lowly or meek One.
The same meekness will one day mark His people.
Today God's earthly people, the Jews, are neither meek nor beautiful as a nation; nor were any of us in our natural condition. If there is anything beautiful about any of us, it is the fruit of the salvation that has reached us. When Israel at last becomes humble and meek, she will be like her King, who was meek and brought salvation.
- Announced — the entry matches a prophecy written centuries before, down to the animal He rides.
- Owned — He is not just a king but your king, the one long promised to Israel.
- Lowly — a donkey, not a war horse, was the older and purer pattern for a ruler in Israel. It should have woken the city up.
- Withheld — "just, and having salvation" is left out, because rejection, not deliverance, lay just ahead. Commentators see the Spirit quoting His own words, not an error.
- Awaited — the King will return to Zion in glory, and a humbled Israel will be like Him.
But the disciples, having gone and done as Jesus had ordered them,
Jesus sent two disciples on a strange errand. They were to fetch a donkey and her colt, and if anyone objected, to say only that the Lord needed them. This verse records their whole response: no questions, no delay. That short sentence sits at the heart of His entry into Jerusalem as King.
The Lord planned this entry. He would have the nation decide about Him in the open.
It seems to me that before the Lord Jesus would formally announce their present loss of the kingdom, He would first draw out a formal rejection of Him from the nation of Israel. They would reject Him in His fully displayed character as their King, so that they might be left without excuse. This is why the scene of His last solemn entry into their city takes place. It was carried out, as we shall see, in the style and with the actions of the true Son of David, the rightful King of Israel.
The disciples' part was small and clearly fixed. They kept to it, right down to the words He told them to say.
When the Lord sent two disciples to bring the colt, they were to say certain things. When questioned they said exactly those words. They added nothing and took nothing away, and so the service succeeded.
The same measure applies to anyone who serves Christ.
The main business of the servant is to obey. His aim should not be to do a great deal, but simply to do what he is told. This makes everything plain. What is more, it makes the Bible precious as the storehouse of the Master's will.
The two men carried a claim, not a favour to ask. It shows who was speaking.
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 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 could only work if strangers handed their animal to two men they had never met. They did.
In His day, He, the true Ark, had to be carried, like the ark in the days of Samuel, from the place where He was. He had to visit Jerusalem in His glory. As King of Zion He had to enter the royal city; and He gets the donkey, and the colt the foal of a donkey, to do that service for Him. And He does this with all the conscious dignity and rights of the Lord of the fullness of the earth. The owners of the animal had to listen to this claim: "The Lord has need of him." It went against nature. It went against everything the heart of man would have defended and argued for. Yet "immediately" they sent him.
A prophet described what the disciples found in that village long before they were born. It stood ready at the hour they arrived.
This chapter opens with the Lord presenting Himself to Jerusalem according to the prophecy of Zechariah. The Lord had spoken through the prophet. Now, some five hundred years later, the donkey and her colt stood ready at exactly the right time. They were in the care of someone who would respond at once to the Lord's need.
Matthew names two animals. The other Gospels name one. Commentators find meaning in that detail.
Matthew alone mentions "a donkey tied, and a colt with her," according to Zechariah 9:9. "They brought the donkey and the colt, and put on them their cloaks, and He sat on them" (verses 2, 7). The three other Gospels mention the colt only. Here, in Matthew, the old Israel and the renewed nation are linked together. The Lord's entry into Jerusalem is on the "colt, the foal of a donkey" — the new Israel will bring Him in with Hosannas!
- Command. The errand began with Christ. He chose the animal, the words, and the hour of His entry as King.
- Obedience. The two disciples said and did exactly what He told them. They added nothing and left nothing out, and the service succeeded.
- Claim. "The Lord has need of them" is the word of One with a perfect right to all. He knew where the hidden colt stood. He held the owner's heart. The meek Rider is Jehovah.
- Surrender. The owners let the animal go at once, against everything the human heart holds on to. His control reached their minds and feelings.
- Fulfilment. Five hundred years after Zechariah spoke, the donkey and colt stood ready at the right hour. A plain act of obedience became the public presentation of Israel's King.
brought the ass and the colt and put their garments upon them, and he sat on them.
This verse looks like a small piece of stage-setting, yet the Lord had arranged every part of it. It raises three questions: why two animals, why borrowed clothing for a saddle, and why the colt carried Him so calmly.
The disciples did what He told them, and the owner let his animals go. One writer looks at who was making the request.
The sending for the colt shows the Lord as Jehovah, who has a perfect right to all. "The Lord (Jehovah) needs 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 the prophet spoke of. Yet He was as surely Jehovah as He was Messiah coming in His name. That He should need them is as amazing as the glory of His person.
There is no royal harness here. The men walking beside Him give what they are wearing. One writer then asks whether He rode both animals.
The disciples willingly give Him their own clothing as a saddle. Verse 7 seems to imply that He sat on both animals. Of course He could have done this by turn, but the other Gospels speak only of the colt.
Matthew alone names the mother beside her foal. Another writer answers the same question by pointing to the Lord's care for the young colt.
Critics have wasted a lot of words on Matthew's record that there were both a donkey and her colt… Notice that the Lord Himself told the two disciples to bring the mother. They were not acting on their own sense of what was wise. Christ's use of the two may come from His tenderness. The colt would be restless and uncomfortable, and its mother's presence would steady it. The Lord's hand resting on her may have guided her steps, so that she could better keep pace with the colt He rode on. This is probably all that the first of our Gospels means by "He sat on them."
Others see a picture in the pairing, reading the older animal and the young one as two stages of the same nation.
Matthew alone mentions "a donkey tied, and a colt with her," according to Zechariah 9:9… The three other Gospels mention the colt only. Here, in Matthew, the old Israel and the renewed nation are linked together. The Lord's entry into Jerusalem is on the "colt, the foal of a donkey" — the new Israel will bring Him in with Hosannas! Under the law the donkey was "unclean," but its foal could be redeemed (Exodus 13:13; Exodus 34:20).
The colt was tied, and the disciples untied it. One writer finds a picture of grace in that moment.
They untie the colt — a picture of release from bondage to law — so that the Lord Jesus can take rightful control. The colt is unusually submissive. The Lord Jesus takes the reins, and the donkey becomes completely docile. How precious this picture is of what His grace can do in the heart of a stubborn person! It is a picture too of what Psalm 110:3 says about Israel in the future: "Your people will offer themselves freely on the day of your power."
Riding a donkey looks like the opposite of royal display. One writer shows it was the oldest mark of a king in Israel, set by the nation's best days and by the law.
In the purest days of Jewish government the leading men in Israel rode nothing but donkeys (Judges 5:10; Judges 10:4; Judges 12:14). Horses came in only with the corrupt times of Solomon. So when the Lord took up the title "King of Israel," He took every feature, however small, that belonged to the only pure and true form of that role… And His being "meek and lowly" was as kingly a feature as any other. Moses had laid down a rule for the king who would later rule Israel. He must not surround himself with the pomp that might lift up his head in pride above his brothers.
- Command. The disciples act because He spoke; His claim on the animals is the claim of the One who has "a perfect right to all."
- Consent. The owner lets them go, showing "His control over the owner's mind and feeling."
- Cloaks. The only saddle is what the disciples were wearing: they "willingly give Him their own clothing."
- Control. The colt turns "completely docile" once He takes the reins — a picture of what grace does in a stubborn heart.
- Character. He enters as King, but meekness is not a lapse from royalty: it "was as kingly a feature as any other."
But a very great crowd strewed their own garments on the way, and others kept cutting down branches from the trees and strewing them on the way.
The crowd turns the road into a carpet with whatever it has: the clothes off their backs, branches cut from the trees. Two questions sit under the scene. Who put this welcome into their hearts? And why did it fade within days?
Spreading clothing and greenery on a road was not a random burst of feeling. It was how a people honoured a king.
Many spread their garments on the road He was riding. Others cut down branches of trees to form an avenue of royal welcome for Him. He came in lowly humility, yet the praise given Him is worthy of the King in majesty and glory.
The crowd was also following a known custom:
The people spread their garments on the road. In the East it was the custom to put costly rugs before the feet of kings. The crowds followed this custom by putting their garments down.
No one planned this. Israel's religious leaders would have been the obvious hosts for a Messiah's welcome. They had no part in it.
A very great crowd is moved by the sovereign power of God to lay their garments on the road that He travels. Others cut down branches from the trees to spread them in the way... The Jewish leaders had certainly not arranged any such thing, as you would expect at the arrival of their Messiah. But without any arrangement God worked in men's hearts. So there was a public presentation of the Messiah that the leaders could not ignore, however strongly they disapproved.
But commentators trace the scene deeper than excitement over miracles:
What a wonderful scene! It is not the cold reasoning of man's intellect that is at work here. Nor is it only the effect of His miracles, though it is a fruit of them. It is the mighty working of God on the minds of the crowd, compelling it to give testimony for a short time to the despised Son of God.
The shout that went with the branches was not invented on the spot. The crowd reached for words already written, and said more than it knew:
The crowd waving palms was, as it were, keeping the Feast of Tabernacles. They took their triumphant shouts from Psalm 118. That passage of Scripture pictures the nation of Israel bringing into His glory the Head Stone, the very stone the builders had rejected... Perhaps they neither understood nor intended any of this. But God moved them to take the part they did, so that the whole scene would present their King, in full form, to the city and the nation.
The Feast of Tabernacles was one of Israel's set feasts, kept with branches in hand. Writers see the branch-strewn road as a sketch of it, drawn before the real thing:
This same feast was also sketched out, as it were, with the branches and palms when Jesus entered Jerusalem... when the crowds acknowledged Him as the son of David and as king of Israel... The true feast of tabernacles, the final feast, will not be celebrated until a time yet future.
The road was carpeted, but the city only asked who He was. And Matthew quotes the old prophecy only in part.
Centuries earlier Zechariah had predicted that the Jewish monarchy would be restored (Zechariah 9:9). That prophecy has been fulfilled, but only in part. We say only in part, because Matthew, who quotes it (21:5), deliberately leaves out the words "just, and having salvation." The time of Jerusalem's redemption had not come. Yet the King entered the city in the manner predicted, riding on a colt, the foal of a donkey.
Listen to how the words change between the road and the city:
The crowds might show a temporary enthusiasm, and genuine disciples add their truer homage to the King. The city, however "moved," meets it with a question and nothing more. The "Hosannas to the Son of David" weaken into a very different reply: "This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth of Galilee." The King of glory is for them already uncrowned.
The same voices shouted something very different a few days later. Writers read that turn as a warning:
It is a terrible thing to see how fickle the crowd is. They are just the same to this day... The same crowd that cried, "Hosanna to the Son of David!" and applauded Him to the skies cried with one mouth, "Crucify him, crucify him!" within a few days... Their applause was nothing. Applause is only human feeling stirred up at the moment. That feeling may give way to the opposite one, and very quickly.
- Meant — clothes and branches on the road were how people honoured a king. Here they honoured One who came in humility.
- Moved — Israel's leaders did not stage this welcome. God worked in ordinary hearts, so no one could ignore the Messiah's public entry.
- Borrowed — the crowd's shout came from Psalm 118, and the branches echoed the Feast of Tabernacles. They said more than they understood.
- Withheld — Matthew leaves out the words "just, and having salvation." That part of the promise waited for another day.
- Faded — enthusiasm on the road cooled into a question at the gate, then a cry for His death within the week. Feeling stirred up in a moment is not faith.
And the crowds who went before him and who followed cried, saying, Hosanna to the Son of David; blessed [be] he who comes in the name of [the] Lord; hosanna in the highest.
Crowds line the road into Jerusalem and shout words from an old psalm at Jesus. Within a week the same city will see Him crucified — so who did they think He was, and why did the welcome collapse?
The crowd was not inventing a slogan. Their words came from a psalm about Israel welcoming the stone the builders threw away.
They spread their garments and scattered branches of trees on the road. These actions showed the honour the crowd had for Him, and the joy with which they greeted Him. The people hailed Him as King (Luke 19:38), called Him "the Son of David," and so recognised His title to the throne of David (Mark 11:10). The crowd with its palms was, as it were, keeping the Feast of Tabernacles. They took their triumphant shouts from Psalm 118. That place in the Scriptures pictures the nation of Israel bringing into His glory the Head Stone, the stone the builders had rejected.
The word itself is a prayer, not a cheer.
This word, which is the same in Greek, is thought to be a compound of two Hebrew words, and means "save now," as in Psalm 118:25. In the New Testament the sense appears to be "bestow blessing." "Bestow blessing on the Son of David: bestow blessing, O You who are in the highest." Matthew 21:9; Mark 11:9-10; John 12:13.
Matthew records this title more often than the other Gospel writers. The crowd at the gate is one of six times.
The Old Testament records those who acknowledged the fugitive David as the anointed king of Israel (2 Sam. 23 and elsewhere). In the same way, Matthew records more fully than the other three writers those who acknowledged Jesus of Nazareth as the Son of David. There are six such instances: (1) two blind men in Galilee (Matt. 9:27); (2) the crowd in Galilee (Matt. 12:23); (3) the woman of Canaan (Matt. 15:22); (4) two blind men near Jericho (Matt. 20:30-31); (5) the crowd at the entrance to Jerusalem (Matt. 21:9); (6) the children in the temple (Matt. 21:15).
Nobody in Jerusalem organised the shouting. Writers trace it to God working in ordinary hearts. He would not let His Son be rejected without this witness.
The power of God influences the heart of the crowds. They greet Him as King, as Son of David, using the language supplied by Psalm 118. That psalm celebrates the millennial sabbath which the Messiah brings in, and which the people will then acknowledge... Happy for them if their hearts had been changed to keep this testimony in the Spirit. But God sovereignly disposed their hearts to bear this testimony; He could not allow His Son to be rejected without receiving it.
The nation's religious leaders had planned nothing of the kind.
The Jewish leaders had not arranged any such thing, though you would expect it at the coming of their Messiah. 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 crowd used the right words. They meant far less by them than the words hold.
Jerusalem received Him with shouting, and "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!" was rightly among the cries. But a little further on it appears that they used the right words wrongly. They used them only in a lesser sense. In their full meaning the words marked out Jesus as the Lord of hosts — and one day people will use them that way. But they used them of Him only as "the prophet of Nazareth," sent by God and so coming in His name. They did not use them of the Lord Himself, present in person in His own character and name.
Jesus knew what the shout was worth. He pointed to a day when the same words will be said and meant.
But that was the result of a sudden burst of enthusiasm, and had no lasting meaning, as what followed showed. Within a week He was crucified. The Lord knew how worthless their excited cry was. A little later He said, "You will not see me again, until you say, 'Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord'" (Matt. 23:39). The Psalm speaks of the moment when they will see Him again, and speak that welcome with full truth and sincerity.
- Cry borrowed. The crowd took its words from Psalm 118, the psalm that pictures Israel welcoming the stone its builders had rejected.
- Cry means save. "Hosanna" is "save now," and in the New Testament it carries the sense "bestow blessing" — asked of the Son of David.
- Cry God gave. No leader organised it. God moved ordinary hearts, and would not let His Son be rejected without this witness.
- Cry too small. The words point to the Lord Himself. The crowd meant only "the prophet of Nazareth," and their enthusiasm died within the week.
- Cry still coming. Jesus said they would not see Him again until they say it — the same sentence, one day spoken with full sincerity.
And as he entered into Jerusalem, the whole city was moved, saying, Who is this?
The feast has filled Jerusalem, and a crowd is shouting Psalm 118 over a man riding a donkey. But the capital of the kingdom cannot name its own King, and its stir comes out as a question, not a welcome.
The entry looked like a triumph, and even His enemies admitted it. Watch the one person the excitement did not sweep away.
When that wonderful entry took place, the King riding on the colt, the whole city was shaken as by a mighty earthquake. His enemies said among themselves, "Behold, the world has gone after Him" (John 12:10). What a triumph it was! The King entering Jerusalem. And through it all He is undisturbed. Others might have been swept away by this enthusiasm; but He is calm in all His kingly majesty.
Excitement is not the same as recognition. Even the crowd's praise sinks as the procession moves inside the city.
The crowds might show a temporary enthusiasm, and genuine disciples add their truer homage to the King. But the city, however "moved," meets it with a question only. And the "Hosannas to the Son of David" weaken sadly into the very different reply, "This is Jesus the prophet from Nazareth of Galilee." For them the King of glory is already stripped of His crown.
The one city that should have known Him is the city that asks. His own people meet Him as a stranger.
The Lord goes on to Jerusalem. And the crowd cries, "Hosanna to the Son of David!" They apply Psalm 118 to the Messiah, and they were right... He comes to the city; but He is unknown: His own do not know Him. They ask, "Who is this?" The crowd had so little understanding that they answer, "This is Jesus, the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee."
Nothing in the crowd's reply is false. What is missing is anything that only faith could have said.
The answer of the crowd showed no real faith at all. They said, "This is Jesus the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee." Quite true, of course, as far as it went; but it went no further than what was obvious even to those who had no faith. A good many prophets had entered before this, and Jerusalem had killed them.
The place they name is also telling. Moments earlier they had called Him Son of David; now they trace Him to the wrong town for a king.
The answer of the crowd does not go back to His birth in Bethlehem. It goes only to His having lived in Nazareth of Galilee, and that would not win the favour of the proud city of Jerusalem. In announcing Him they had hailed Him as Son of David: why then was there not more conviction in their answer? Perhaps they had been moved at first to proclaim more than they realised the meaning of.
Jerusalem had reacted like this once before, at the very start of His life. And the question the city threw at Him comes back on every reader.
All Jerusalem was troubled when they heard of His birth. The city had thrown off the vile practices of the pagan nations. But its leaders were too proud to recognise their great Messiah in that lowly baby. Later He presented Himself to them, fulfilling the words of the prophet Zechariah: "Tell the daughter of Zion, Behold your King comes to you, humble and mounted on a donkey." Their answer was contempt: "Who is this?" He then gave them the chance to face that all-important question themselves, asking, "What do you think of the Christ? Whose Son is He?"... This was surely the test question, for them, for us, and for all mankind.
The story does not stop at the closed door. The Lord's own words set a limit on how long the refusal lasts.
At this time, however, only babes and infants take up the words of Psalm 118 — the weak things of the world. The nation as a whole again refuses Him. But this refusal is not final, as our Lord's words plainly show. He declared that, because of their guilt, their house would be left to them desolate. Then He added, "I say to you, you will not see me again." For how long? Till the end of the world? No, but "until you say, 'Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord'" (Matt. 23:38-39).
- Stirred — the entry shook the whole city like an earthquake, while the King at its centre remained calm.
- Stirred, not won — the stir was real, but the answer showed no faith; the city met its King with a question.
- Stirred to ask — "Who is this?" came from the one capital that should have known Him; His own did not know Him.
- Stirred to a half-answer — "the prophet from Nazareth" is true, but unbelief could say it too. It also names the wrong town for a king.
- Stirred again, one day — the refusal is not the last word; the cry the nation refuses now, it will one day speak.
And the crowds said, This is Jesus the prophet who is from Nazareth of Galilee.
Moments earlier the crowds were shouting "Hosanna to the Son of David." Now Jerusalem asks who has arrived, and the answer is a name and a hometown. Was this confession faith, or the first sign that the welcome was already cooling?
One writer points out what the crowd's answer leaves out — the town where He was born.
All the city was moved, yet they were so ignorant that they had to ask, "Who is this?" The crowd's answer, however, does not go back to His birth in Bethlehem. It reaches only to His having lived in Nazareth of Galilee. That would not win the favour of the proud city of Jerusalem. In announcing Him they had hailed Him as Son of David. Why then was there not more definite conviction in their answer? Perhaps at first they were swept into proclaiming more than they understood.
Nothing in the crowd's statement is false. That is the problem. Truth can stop short of faith, and Jerusalem had a history with prophets.
Yet for a brief moment it looked as if they might receive Him... But their faith was soon put to the test. As He entered the city, the question came: "Who is this?" The crowd's answer showed no real faith at all. They said, "This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth of Galilee." Quite true, of course, as far as it went. But it went no further than what was obvious even to those who had no faith. A good many prophets had entered before this, and Jerusalem had killed them.
Between the road and the city gate, the title changes.
The crowds might show a temporary enthusiasm, and genuine disciples add their truer homage to the King. The city, however "moved", meets it with a question only. The "Hosannas to the Son of David" weaken into the very different reply, "This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth of Galilee." The King of glory is for them already stripped of His crown.
Another writer puts the two possible answers side by side, and calls the one they chose a form of refusal.
The King knew what was soon to come, and on that hill He saw the cross looming up. True, they were crying, "Son of David, save now!" But the question, "Who is this?" is answered in the terms of rejection. Instead of "the King, Jehovah-Jesus, the Messiah," the crowd answers "Jesus, the Prophet of Nazareth of Galilee."
The town had no standing anywhere — not even among its own neighbours.
To call Him a Nazarene was the well-understood language of contempt in that day. Nazareth was the most scorned of places. The men of Judea looked down on it. Even the Galileans despised it, though it was part of their own district. Later we read of an Israelite without deceit who heard that Jesus was there and exclaimed, "Can anything good come out of Nazareth?" So if one spot in Palestine matched the rejection that was Christ's portion more than any other, it was Nazareth.
Nathanael had doubted the town. The Pharisees ruled out Galilee entirely. The crowd's own words overturned both sayings.
"Search and see that no prophet arises from Galilee," was the ruling of the Pharisees. Nathanael had long since found that good could come from Nazareth; and the loud crowd paid no attention to the Pharisee's ruling. The Prophet, Jesus, from Nazareth, was the One they were escorting into Jerusalem, and He was her King.
The low title does not shrink Him. What He does next in the temple answers their small estimate.
But though they only see Jesus of Galilee, yet He shows Himself as King, and takes a place of authority and power. He enters the temple and overturns the tables of the money-changers... It was astonishing. The One they knew only as the prophet of Nazareth boldly entered their temple and drove out all who were desecrating it. But they do not turn on Him. The power of the God of the temple was there, and they flee... As if He had said, "You hail Me as King, and I will prove that I am."
The welcome faded, but the words did not die.
Babes and infants may welcome Him. But the people are far from that spirit, and so far from the Kingdom. As the Lord declares, the cry "Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord" must be raised again, and in earnest, at a future time.
- Moved — The city is shaken by His arrival, yet still has to ask who He is; excitement is not knowledge.
- Named — The reply is accurate but bare: a prophet, a town, a region. It says nothing an unbeliever could not say.
- Downgraded — "Son of David" on the road becomes "prophet from Nazareth" at the gate. In one sentence the King is uncrowned.
- Despised — Nazareth was the most scorned address in the land. That is why it suits a rejected Christ. The crowd's own words also refuted the sayings against Galilee.
- Undeterred — They see only a Galilean prophet. He walks into the temple and clears it, proving the kingship they failed to confess. The cry they let drop will be raised again in earnest.
And Jesus entered into the temple [of God], and cast out all that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those that sold the doves.
Jesus has just ridden into Jerusalem as her King, to the shouts of the crowds. His first act is not at the palace but in the temple courts, where He clears out a market.
The order matters. The King the crowds have just hailed heads for the heart of the nation's religion.
The first errand of the King in His city is the temple… This is the second time that the Lord acted in cleansing the temple. The first is recorded in the Gospel of John 2:13, 17, and it took place at the beginning of His ministry. There it is zeal for God's house, but here He acts in all His kingly authority. The defilement of God's temple in those days must have been great and terrible. The most terrible fact was that the priests, and especially the high priest's family, grew rich from it.
Israel's best kings had cleaned up the nation's worship before Him.
This had been one of the functions that belonged properly to royal authority alone. We find the best kings of Judah reforming the religion of the people in their day. Hezekiah and Josiah are examples. Here the Lord takes up the same action by that same royal authority.
The Greek word used here does not mean the inner sanctuary. It covers the whole complex, including the outer courts where the market stood.
There are two words for Temple in the Greek New Testament. Hieron covers the whole of the Temple area. It takes in the Court of the Gentiles, the Court of the Jews, the place where they bought and sold the animals for sacrifice, the place where the money-changers had their seat (Matt. 21:12)… The other word, naos, has a narrow meaning. It is the inner sanctuary, the Holy Place where the priests ministered, the Holiest of all, which the High Priest alone entered on the great Day of Atonement.
The money-changers met a real need — and, it seems, profited unfairly from it.
These were people who served those coming to Jerusalem from far away to pay the regular temple tax. They gave them a half-shekel in exchange for whatever money they had. When He drove them out of the temple, the Lord's words seem to imply that they took unfair advantage in the exchanges.
One man overturns the tables of an established trade, and the traders leave.
They knew Him only as the prophet of Nazareth. It was astonishing that He should enter their temple so boldly and drive out everyone who was defiling it. But they do not turn on Him. The power of the God of the temple was there, and they flee. Their consciences no doubt echoed the Lord's words, that they had made His house a den of thieves.
Commentators note two cleansings. The difference shows in what Jesus calls the building.
The Lord cleansed the Temple twice. Only John records the first. Only Matthew, Mark and Luke record the second. On the first occasion He acted as in the Father's house; on the second, as in His own. "My Father's house" He called it in John. "My house" He called it in Matthew… When challenged the first time He at once gave the Jews a sign. When challenged the last time He refused.
Matthew sets this act beside the withering of the fig tree.
Next follows the cursing of the fig-tree (12-26), woven together with the purging of the temple. The two are indeed one — two sides of the same act. He must cleanse His house, and to do this, a religion that bears no fruit must wither.
Within days His words about the building change.
He calls it "my house" there, only to show how completely man had failed in the responsibility God gave him in divine things. What God designed as a place of prayer, man had made a den of thieves… Two days later He said, "See, your house is left to you desolate." Now it is not "my house," but "your house."
The trade grew out of something the law itself allowed. That makes it worse, not lighter.
The trading and money-changing in the temple had no doubt grown out of a kind provision of the law, recorded in Deuteronomy 14:24-26. Godless men had taken advantage of this provision to turn the temple precincts into a den of thieves. God intended His temple to be the house where men drew near to Him with their requests. Its guardians had turned it into a place where men were swindled, and so the name of God was maligned. To defile or corrupt the temple of God is a sin of tremendous gravity. 1 Corinthians 3:17 shows this, in its application to God's present temple.
- King — The crowds hail Him as King, and His first act is to cleanse the temple. Israel's best kings did the same by royal authority.
- House — In John He clears His Father's house. Here He clears His own. Two days later He calls it "your house," left desolate.
- Court — The word for temple here covers the whole area. That includes the outer courts, where traders sold animals and, it seems, changed money unfairly.
- Authority — No one resists Him. Their consciences knew the God of the temple was standing in it.
- Warning — The fig tree withers beside the cleansing. Religion without fruit must wither, and corrupting God's house is a grave sin.
And he says to them, It is written, My house shall be called a house of prayer, but *ye* have made it a den of robbers.
Jesus walks into the temple courts and clears out the traders. Then He defends what He did with one line of Scripture. That line raises the question of the whole scene: whose house is this, and what have its keepers made of it?
The Lord cleared the temple twice. One writer sets the two accounts side by side:
We have said that the Lord cleansed the temple twice. John here, and he alone, tells us of the first. Matthew 21:12-13; Mark 11:15-17; Luke 19:45-46 agree in telling us, and they only, of the second. On the first occasion He acted as in the Father's house; on the second, as in His own. "My Father's house" He called it in John. "My house" He calls it in Matthew. Further, when challenged on the first occasion, He at once gave the Jews a sign. When challenged the last time, He refused to grant their request. The first time, His presence as God's messenger was new to the city, so He gave them a sign. The second time, they already had proof after proof of His divine mission.
One writer pictures the scene and names the one thing He uses:
No whip of cords is in His hands; the King does not need it. The tables go over in wild confusion. The coins roll across the pavement, and out go the animals and birds brought for sacrifice... And what He uses is His own Word. "It is written, My house shall be called a house of prayer; but you make it a den of robbers." It was His house, as well as His Father's... The words "My house shall be called a house of prayer" are found in Isaiah 56:7. "For all peoples," which is in Isaiah, the Lord does not quote. That temple was not meant to be a house "for all peoples"; the temple in Isaiah 56:7 is the millennial temple.
God did not name His house after sacrifice. One writer hangs the whole charge on that:
God's house was a house of prayer; that was its moral character, not of sacrifice. God did not name His house after sacrifice, though sacrifice was carried on there. He named it in grace, for those who had need. Where His presence and His ear were, there was a house of prayer. There every need was told to God, and He was the Keeper of all grief and all need. And they had made it a den of thieves. Note it is the sin against the gracious character of God that the Lord notes as the sin against the temple of God. His charge is very general: "you make it." All evil that is allowed and gone along with is shared guilt on everyone, for the heart permits it and agrees with it.
A reference work traces the word for "robbers" through its other uses:
The Greek word (lēstēs) means 'robber, bandit.' The Lord uses it of those who bought and sold in the temple... When the Lord was arrested He asked if they had come out as against a robber. The two criminals crucified with the Lord were also men of this character.
Another writer traces where the trade came from:
The trading and money-changing in the temple had no doubt grown out of the kind arrangements of the law, which Deuteronomy 14:24-26 records. Ungodly men had taken advantage of this provision to turn the temple precincts into a den of thieves. God intended His temple to be the house where men drew near to Him with their requests. Its custodians had turned it into a place where men were swindled, and so the name of God was maligned. To defile or corrupt the temple of God is a sin of tremendous gravity. 1 Corinthians 3:17 shows this, in its application to God's present temple.
He still says My house here. Two days later the pronoun changes, and one writer marks the moment:
Quoting an Old Testament scripture (Isaiah 56:7), He calls it "My house" there. He does so only to show how completely man had failed in his responsibility about divine things. What God designed as a place of prayer, man had made a den of thieves... Two days afterwards He said, "See, your house is left to you desolate" — not "My house" now, but "your house." As for the house where God was supposed to be, He has to say, It is "desolate" — He is not there.
- His house. In John's account He cleansed it as His Father's house; here He calls it My house and acts as the One who owns it.
- His word. No whip this time. The King clears the courts with His own Word.
- His character. "House of prayer" means God hears need. Making it a market sinned against His grace, not just against a building.
- His verdict. "You make it" is a charge laid on all — evil tolerated becomes shared guilt.
- His departure. Days later "My house" becomes "your house... desolate." The pronoun tells you He has left.
And blind and lame came to him in the temple, and he healed them.
Jesus has just overturned the tables of the money-changers. The chief priests are about to protest. Between the two comes one quiet act of mercy inside the temple. Why does Matthew place healing right after judgment? And why these two groups of people?
The cleansing and the healing belong together. One drives people out; the other draws people in. Both show who the King is.
But now the blind and the lame come to Him to be healed. "He healed their diseases and forgave their iniquities." David's soul hated both of these groups, because of the taunt thrown at him (2 Sam. 5:6-8). What a blessed contrast in the Son of David! He drives the selfish religious men out of the temple, and there He welcomes the poor, the blind and the lame, and heals them — perfect righteousness and perfect grace.
The blind and the lame were not a random pair. The law and Israel's first king had both shut such people out of the house. Jesus does the opposite.
Having driven out these evil men, Jesus showed mercy to the very people they would have kept outside. Leviticus 21:18 forbade the blind and the lame to come near. And 2 Samuel 5:6-8 records David's ruling against them: he said they "shall not come into the house." The great Son of David had now arrived in Zion, and He reverses what David did. The sort of people who were "hated of David's soul" were loved and blessed that day.
The cleansing had this in view. He did not clear the house to shut people out. He cleared it to make room for them.
His wrath and indignation show themselves in the zeal for God's house that consumed Him (Ps. 69:9). But He purifies His house, not to keep the blind and the lame out, as David did, but to bring them in by healing them.
Notice what happens to the space the traders left behind. It does not stay empty, and the sellers never come back.
The temple is cleansed. The noise and confusion is over. We hear nothing of these evil occupants coming back. Instead, the blind and the lame came to Him in the temple, and He healed them. A crowd of poor, stricken, suffering people filled the empty space, and He freed them from their pains and diseases.
Healing was more than kindness. The prophets had said in advance what Messiah would do, so each cure was evidence of who He was.
There, too, in the temple, He heals the lame and the blind. In this way He gave further proof that He was displaying, in His own person, the qualities the prophet had pointed to as belonging to Messiah, and to Messiah in His kingdom (Isa. 35:5-6). Nothing was lacking now. The decisive moment had come, and the question was now being put to the test: "would they reverence the Son?"
What He did that day for a few people points to what He will do for a whole kingdom.
He has already come. He walked in His temple as Zion's true but unrecognized King, and "the blind and the lame came to Him, and He healed them" (Matt. 21:14). And when His kingdom is set up in Zion, "the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf unstopped; then shall the lame man leap like a deer, and the tongue of the mute sing for joy" (Isa. 35:5-6).
Yet the chapter does not end with a coronation. The healings prove His right; the nation still refuses Him.
And there, in the now empty place, "the blind and the lame came to Him in the temple, and He healed them." They were the typical pair that stood for all who needed the touch of the true King. So both God and man own Him — though man, sadly, is still unchanged and hostile. There are no "willing people", so for them it cannot be the "day of His power." He may prove His title, but cannot take His throne.
Matthew alone records this healing, and he compresses events that took place over more than one day.
Matthew, as he often does, does not separate the stages of what happened. From his account you could not tell that the Lord only looked round at everything on the first day of His visit. It was not until the next day that He drove out those who were defiling the Temple with their buying and selling. And Matthew alone describes how the blind and the lame came to Him there to be healed (Matt. 21:14).
- Cleared — The cleansing was not the goal in itself. He purified the house not to keep the blind and the lame out, but to bring them in.
- Filled — The traders were driven out and never came back. A crowd of "poor, stricken, suffering people" took the empty space.
- Reversed — Those "hated of David's soul", shut out by Leviticus 21:18, are the very people the greater Son of David loves and blesses.
- Proved — Each healing matched what the prophets said Messiah would do. It proved His title beyond dispute.
- Postponed — He proves His right to the throne, yet there are no "willing people". The full healing promised in Isaiah 35 waits for His kingdom.
And when the chief priests and the scribes saw the wonders which he wrought, and the children crying in the temple and saying, Hosanna to the Son of David, they were indignant,
Two things are happening in the temple at once: Jesus is healing people, and children are shouting a royal title at Him. The men in charge of the building see both, and their reaction is anger rather than wonder.
The "wonderful things" were healings, and they came right after Jesus threw the traders out.
Having driven out these evil men, Jesus gave mercy to the very people they would have kept outside. Leviticus 21:18 forbade the blind and the lame to come near. And 2 Samuel 5:6-8 records David's sentence on them: he said they "shall not come into the house." The great Son of David had now arrived in Zion, and He reverses David's action. The very people who were "hated by David's soul" were loved and blessed that day. The money-changers had misrepresented the God whose house it was, and caused men to blaspheme His name. In healing the needy, Jesus rightly represented the very heart of God, and the result was praise. Even the children were found crying, "Hosanna to the Son of David!" They had caught up the cry from the older people.
Both halves of the day belong together — the whip and the healing hands.
He turns out the selfish religionists from the temple, and receives there the poor, blind, and lame, and heals them — perfect righteousness and perfect grace.
"Hosanna" is not a general cheer. It is a plea, and the children were not the first to use it that day.
His works of grace are so striking that they move even the children in the temple — not only those on the road into the city — to cry out, "Hosanna to the Son of David." The word hosanna means "O, save." So they give Him honour as the One able to save the nation Israel. This offends the chief priests and scribes, but nothing except envy drives their protest to Him.
Commentators trace the words to Psalm 118, the psalm of a rejected stone becoming the cornerstone.
Hosanna means, Save now, or Save, I pray. Other verses of this psalm are frequently cited.
The children are in very small company. Only a handful of people ever greet Jesus with that royal title.
Son of David! Very few greeted the Lord that way while He was here in His humiliation. The blind men in Galilee (Matt. 9:27), Bartimaeus and his companion at Jericho (Matt. 20:30-31), the Syrophoenician mother (Matt. 15:22), and the children in the temple (Matt. 21:15) are the only examples we are given... Only blind men, who could not see Him, the woman who did not belong to Israel, and children, whom nobody would think of asking about such a thing, greeted Him as the Son of David. Where learned scribes might claim to find a difficulty, these had none.
Their anger was not confusion. They knew what the prophets had said about their King, and they still said no.
On one side are the voices of the children crying, "Hosanna" — praise given to Him as King, the Son of David. On the other side is the Lord acting as King, doing what the Jews well knew the prophets had said of their King. He was the confessed King there — but not confessed by the chief priests and scribes. They took offence and rejected Him deliberately, with open eyes: "We do not want this man to reign over us." So of course they try to shut the children's mouths.
Miracles do not melt a settled will.
But no testimony is enough to break through the hard covering of unbelief that wraps the hearts of the leading men of the people, even when they see the miracles. Hearing the children crying "Hosanna!" they become indignant. The Lord teaches here that the time for convincing them is past, and He appeals to the testimony of Psalm 8 on the point.
In the next verse Jesus quotes that psalm with one word changed. (The ESV has "established strength" in Psalm 8:2 and "prepared praise" in Matthew 21:16.)
The Psalm says, "ordained strength," while He applied it by saying, "perfected praise." But either way the thought is the same: God accomplishes what He desires, and receives the praise He looks for, through small and weak things. So it is made clear that the strength and the praise are of and from Himself.
That day was a preview of a larger one.
The leaders of Israel had put themselves in the place of God's enemies. But God brought praise for His Son from the most unexpected source of all — the despised children of Jerusalem. In the coming day God's praise will come from the despised remnant of His people, and the coming of the great King will silence the enemy within and the enemy outside.
- Grace first. Jesus cleared the temple, then healed the blind and lame there. David had shut them out; the Son of David let them in.
- Grace produced praise. The children's "Hosanna" — "O, save" — was the response to works of mercy they had just watched.
- Grace exposed envy. The leaders saw the same works and heard the same cry, and were indignant; the problem was will, not evidence.
- Grace chose the weak. When the qualified men withheld praise, God took it for His Son from children. The strength and the praise are His own.
- Grace will finish. Those small voices are a preview. When the King returns, His people will praise Him and every enemy will fall silent.
and said to him, Hearest thou what these say? And Jesus says to them, Yea; have ye never read, Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise?
Jesus has ridden into Jerusalem, cleared the temple, and healed the blind and the lame there. Now children are shouting "Hosanna to the Son of David," the leaders want them stopped, and Jesus answers with one line from Psalm 8.
Jesus does not quote Psalm 8 word for word. The psalm says God has "established strength"; here He says God has "prepared praise." Older translations read these as "ordained strength" and "perfected praise," and the writers below use that older wording. Commentators say this is not a mistake but an application.
Jesus defended the children in their simplicity, quoting the verse from Psalm 8 as fulfilled in them. The Psalm says "ordained strength," while He applied it by saying "perfected praise." Either way, the thought is that God does what He wants, and receives the praise He looks for, through small and weak things. So it is clear that the strength and the praise are His own and come from Him.
The greatness of God is not matched by the greatness of the mouth that reports it.
The heavens above speak of His greatness without a sound. Yet it is out of the mouths of infants and nursing babies that He has ordained strength and perfected praise. Weakness is what can celebrate the strength of God, and His strength is called into action only for weakness.
The rebuke lands on men whose whole profession was the study of Scripture. They asked Jesus to silence the children; He answered by asking whether they had read their own Bible.
"Yes; have you never read," was a rebuke to the chief priests and scribes. Of all the people they should have known what David wrote. Empty religion often neglects the sources of its faith but Jesus appreciated what the children said. This stood in sharp contrast to the leaders, who were silent except to object. Children's appreciation of Jesus, the Son of David, should never be despised.
Missing this verse said something about the men themselves, and it raises a question for every reader.
They looked to Him to rebuke the children, and instead the rebuke fell on them. No, they had never read that "out of the mouth of infants and nursing babies He perfected praise." How much of our own Bibles may we never have read, even though our eyes have often rested on words we have never really seen! If they had been little ones in spirit, would they not have seen this?
He could have silenced the children. Instead He lets their cry stand, and backs it with a psalm about praise given to God.
He was there as the acknowledged King — but not acknowledged by the chief priests and scribes. They were offended, and rejected Him on purpose and with full knowledge... So they try to silence the children and ask Jesus to rebuke them. But the Lord approves their praises... The power of the LORD was there, and there was a mouth to own it, even if only the mouth of infants and nursing babies. So "He left them" — a serious and solemn act. They rejected Him, and He abandons them, turning His back on the beloved city.
His glory would be praised one way or another. The only question was who would do it.
He must be glorified. Even though He gave Himself up, His glory still had to be upheld. If the simplicity of children did not carry it out, then, as we read elsewhere, the stones would cry out.
Psalm 8:2 says that praise from infants is raised "because of your foes, to still the enemy and the avenger." By quoting it, Jesus gives the rulers a place in that verse.
The Lord rebuked them with a passage from Psalm 8, and nothing could have suited the moment better. It rebuked the Jews by giving them, for now, the place of the enemy and the avenger. It also presented Him, the rejected Messiah, before them in His full and proper glory.
Psalm 8 goes on to speak of a man with everything under his feet. Commentators see the children's hosanna as an early sample of that day.
Hebrews chapter 2 settles the meaning of that Psalm. It is Jesus, the Son of Man, who is seen there ruling over the earth. When at last He has all things under His feet, perfect praise will silence the enemy. The praise of the children foreshadows the praise He will receive when He comes again.
- Source — God is the one who prepares praise; the strength and the praise come from Him, not from the size of the voice.
- Vessel — He chooses the small and the weak, so the praise traces back to Him and not to the voice that gives it.
- Rebuke — Men who lived in the Scriptures had never seen this verse. Only the little in spirit see what is there.
- Refusal — He takes a psalm about praise given to God as fitting for Himself, then leaves the city that refused Him.
- Preview — The children's hosannas are a first sample of the praise the Son of Man receives when everything lies under His feet.