The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah Edersheim, A. (1896). THE CROSS AND THE CROWN ‘Ave, scala peccatorum, Qua ascendit rex cœlorum, Ut ad choros Angelorum Homo sic ascenderet; In te vitam reparavit Auctor vitæ, proles David, Et sic se humiliavit. Ut mundum redimeret. Ap. DANIEL, Thes. Hymnol. vol. 5. p. 183 ‘The blessing from the cloud that: showers, In wondrous twofold birth Of heaven is and earth— He is both yours, ye hosts, and ours: Hosannah, David’s Son, For victory is won! He left us with a blessing here, And took it to the sky; The blessing from on high Bespeaks to us His Presence near: Hosannah, David’s Son, For victory is won!’ (From an Ascension Hymn).—A. E. CHAPTER 1 THE FIRST DAY IN PASSION-WEEK—PALM SUNDAY—THE ROYAL ENTRY INTO JERUSALEM. (St. Matt. 21:1–11; St. Mark 11:1–11; St. Luke 19:29–44; St. John 12:12–19.) AT length the time of the end had come. Jesus was about to make Entry into Jerusalem as King: King of the Jews, as Heir of David’s royal line, with all of symbolic, typic, and prophetic import attaching to it. Yet not as Israel after the flesh expected its Messiah was the Son of David to make triumphal entrance, but as deeply and significantly expressive of His Mission and Work, and as of old the rapt seer had beheld afar off the outlined picture of the Messiah-King: not in the proud triumph of war-conquests, but in the ‘meek’ rule of peace. It is surely one of the strangest mistakes of modern criticism to regard this Entry of Christ into Jerusalem as implying that, fired by enthusiasm, He had for the moment expected that the people would receive Him as the Messiah.1 And it seems little, if at all better, when this Entry is described as ‘an apparent concession to the fevered expectations of His disciples and the multitude … the grave, sad accommodation to thoughts other than His own to which the Teacher of new truths must often have recourse when He finds Himself misinterpreted by 1 So notably Keim Of course, the theory proceeds on the assumption that the Discourses reported by St. Luke are spurious. those who stand together on a lower level.’2 ‘Apologies’ are the weakness of ‘Apologetics’—and any ‘accommodation’ theory can have no place in the history of the Christ. On the contrary, we regard His Royal Entry into the Jerusalem of Prophecy and of the Crucifixion as an integral part of the history of Christ, which would not be complete, nor thoroughly consistent, without it. It behoved Him so to enter Jerusalem, because He was a King; and as King to enter it in such manner, because He was such a King—and both the one and the other were in accordance with the prophecy of old. It was a bright day in early spring of the year 29, when the festive procession set out from the home at Bethany. There can be no reasonable doubt as to the locality of that hamlet (the modern El-’Azaríye, ‘of Lazarus’), perched on a broken rocky plateau on the other side of Olivet. More difficulty attaches to the identification of Bethphage, which is associated with it, the place not being mentioned in the Old Testament, though repeatedly in Jewish writings. But, even so, there is a curious contradiction, since Bethphage is sometimes spoken of as distinct from Jerusalem,a while at others it is described as, for ecclesiastical purposes, part of the City itself.b Perhaps the name Bethphage—‘house of figs’—was given alike to that district generally, and to a little village close to Jerusalem where the district began.1 And this may explain the peculiar reference, in the Synoptic Gospels, to Bethphage (St. Matthew), and again to ‘Bethphage and Bethany.’c For, St. Matthew and St. Mark relate Christ’s brief stay at Bethany and His anointing by Mary not in chronological order,2 but introduce it at a later period, as it were, in contrast to the betrayal of Judas.d Accordingly, they pass from the Miracles at Jericho immediately to the Royal Entry into Jerusalem—from Jericho to ‘Bethphage,’ or, more exactly, to ‘Bethphage and Bethany,’ leaving for the present unnoticed what had occurred in the latter hamlet. Although all the four Evangelists relate Christ’s Entry into Jerusalem, they seem to do so from different standpoints. The Synoptists accompany Him from Bethany, while St. John, in accordance with the general scheme of his narrative, seems to follow from Jerusalem that multitude which, on tidings of His approach, hastened to meet Him. Even this circumstance, as also the paucity of events recorded on that day, proves that it could not have been at early morning that Jesus left Bethany. Remembering, that it was the last morning of rest before the great contest, we may reverently think of much that may have passed in the Soul of Jesus and in the home of Bethany. And now He has left that peaceful resting-place. It was probably soon after His outset, that He sent the ‘two disciples’—possibly Peter and Johne—into ‘the village over against’ them—presumably Bethphage. There they would find by the side of the road an ass’s colt tied, whereon never man had sat. We mark the significant symbolism of the latter, in connection with the general conditions of consecration to Jehovaha—and note in it, as also in the Mission of the Apostles, that this was intended by Christ to be His Royal and Messianic Entry. This colt they were to loose and to bring to Him. The disciples found all as He had said. When they reached Bethphage, they saw, by a doorway where two roads met, the colt tied by its mother. As they loosed it, ‘the owners’ and ‘certain of them that stood by’b asked their purpose, to which, as directed by the Master, they answered: ‘The Lord [the Master, Christ] hath need of him,’ when, as predicted, no further hindrance was offered. In explanation of this we need not resort to the theory of a miraculous influence, nor even suppose that the owners of the colt were themselves ‘disciples.’ Their challenge to ‘the two,’ and the little more than permission which they gave, seem to forbid this idea. Nor is such explanation requisite. From the pilgrim-band which had accompanied Jesus from Galilee and Peræa, and preceded Him to Jerusalem, from the guests at the Sabbath-feast in Bethany, and from the people who had gone 2 Dean Plumptre on St. Matt. 21:5. a Siphré, ed. Friedm. p. 55 a, last lines; Sot. 45 a; Tos. Pes. 8. 8 b Pes. 63 b; 91 a: Menach. 78 b; Babha Mets. 90 a 1 See also Caspari, Chron. Geogr. Einl. p. 161. The question as to the proposed identification (by some) of Bethany with the Beth Hini, or Beth Hanioth, where the Sanhedrin (apparently of Sadducees) sat after leaving the Temple and which was destroyed three years before the City, must be left here undiscussed. c St. Mark and St. Luke 2 St. Augustine has it, recapitulando dixerunt. d St. Matt. 26:6–13; St. Mark 14:3–9 e Comp. St. Luke 22:8 a Num. 19:2; Deut. 21:3 b St. Mark; comp. also St. Matthew out to see both Jesus and Lazarus, the tidings of the proximity of Jesus and of His approaching arrival must have spread in the City. Perhaps that very morning some had come from Bethany, and told it in the Temple, among the festive bands—specially among His own Galileans, and generally in Jerusalem, that on that very day—in a few hours—Jesus might be expected to enter the City. Such, indeed, must have been the case, since, from St. John’s account, ‘a great multitude’ ‘went forth to meet Him.’ The latter, we can have little doubt, must have mostly consisted, not of citizens of Jerusalem, whose enmity to Christ was settled, but of those ‘that had come to the Feast.’c With these went also a number of ‘Pharisees,’ their hearts filled with bitterest thoughts of jealousy and hatred.d And, as we shall presently see, it is of great importance to keep in mind this composition of ‘the multitude.’ If such were the circumstances, all is natural. We can understand, how eager questioners would gather about the owners of the colt (St. Mark), there at the cross-roads at Bethphage, just outside Jerusalem; and how, so soon as from the bearing and the peculiar words of the disciples they understood their purpose, the owners of the ass and colt would grant its use for the solemn Entry into the City of the ‘Teacher of Nazareth,1 Whom the multitude was so eagerly expecting; and, lastly, how, as from the gates of Jerusalem tidings spread of what had passed in Bethphage, the multitude would stream forth to meet Jesus. Meantime Christ and those who followed Him from Bethany had slowly entered on1 the well-known caravan-road from Jericho to Jerusalem. It is the most southern of three, which converge close to the City, perhaps at the very place where the colt had stood tied. ‘The road soon loses sight of Bethany. It is now a rough, but still broad and well-defined mountain-track, winding over rock and loose stones; a steep declivity on the left; the sloping shoulder of Olivet above on the right; fig-trees below and above, here and there growing out of the rocky soil.’2 Somewhere here the disciples who brought ‘the colt’ must have met Him.