Charles Ellicott Commentary Matthew 21

And when they drew near to Jerusalem — Here again, we must fill a gap in St. Matthew’s Gospel. We have to imagine the journey up the narrow valley that leads from Jericho to Jerusalem. As before, our Lord was followed by the disciples, who were in turn followed by crowds of pilgrims. These crowds were drawn to the Holy City either by the coming Passover or by a curious wonder to see what role the Prophet of Nazareth would take. Throughout the multitude, including the disciples, there was a feverish expectation that He would at last announce Himself as the Christ and claim His kingdom (Luke 19:11).

They reached Bethany “six days before the Passover,” likely on Friday afternoon (John 12:1). They remained there for the Sabbath, probably in the house of Lazarus or Simon the leper (Matthew 26:6; John 12:2). In Simon's house, we find the story of the anointing, which St. Matthew relates out of chronological order in Matthew 26:6-13. The narrative, which now becomes more continuous, opens at this point: the dawn of the first day of the week, the daybreak of Palm Sunday.

Bethphage — The village is named with Bethany in Luke 19:29 and in many manuscripts of Mark 11:1. Since it is mentioned before Bethany, it seems probable that it lay on the road from Jericho and was therefore east of Bethany. The traditional site, however, followed in most maps, places it west of Bethany and nearer the summit of the hill. The name meant “the house of unripe figs,” just as Bethany meant “the house of dates,” and Gethsemane “the oil-press.” These three names obviously indicate local features that gave the sites their distinctiveness.

All three locations were on the Mount of Olives. Bethany is identified with the modern El-’Azariyeh, or Lazarieh (a name connected to the story of Lazarus), which lies about a mile below the summit on the eastern slope of the Mount of Olives. It is situated in a woody hollow planted with olives, almonds, pomegranates, and figs. The palms implied by the name of Bethany and by the story of the entry into Jerusalem (John 12:13) have since disappeared.

Two disciples — The messengers are not named in any of the Gospels. The fact that Peter and John were sent on a similar errand in Luke 22:8 makes it probable that they were the ones sent in this instance as well.

Go into the village opposite you — This may have been either Bethany or, on the assumption that it was nearer Jerusalem, Bethphage itself.

An ass tied, and a colt with her — St. Mark and St. Luke name the colt only. St. John speaks of a “young” or “small” ass, using the diminutive of the usual name (ὀνάριον). The colt was one on which man had never sat (Mark 11:2; Luke 19:30). The command clearly implies a deliberate fulfillment of the prophecy cited in Matthew 21:4-5. They were to claim the right to use the animals as for the service of a King, not to hire or ask permission.

The Lord has need of them — Simple as the words are, they allow for three very different interpretations.

1. "The Lord" may be used in the highest sense as equivalent to Jehovah, as if the donkey and the colt were claimed for His service.
2. It may refer to Christ in the special sense in which He was spoken of as "the Lord" by His disciples.
3. It may point to Him, but only in language that all people would acknowledge, without any special claim beyond that of being the Master whom the disciples owned as their Lord in a lesser sense.

Of these, the third interpretation is nearly excluded by the facts of the case. The words involve a claim to more than common authority, and the claim is recognized at once.

In support of the second interpretation, we have numerous instances where the disciples and the evangelists not only address their Master as "Lord" but also speak of Him as "the Lord" (Matthew 28:6; Mark 16:19; Luke 10:1; Luke 17:6; Luke 18:6; John 11:2; John 13:13; John 20:2; John 20:13; John 20:18; John 20:20; John 20:25; John 21:7; John 21:12). In support of the first, we have our Lord's use of the word as a synonym for God (Mark 5:19; Mark 13:20).

Overall, the second interpretation seems most consistent with the customary language of the disciples. Assuming the owners of the colt were, in some sense, disciples themselves, they would have recognized the full meaning of the words addressed to them and obeyed without hesitation.

All this was done—The Evangelist returns to the formula of Matthew 1:22. Literally, all this has come to pass. The words are his comment on the act. At the time, as we find from John 12:16, the disciples did not understand its significance as connected with the prophecy that follows. The purpose lay in the mind of their Master, not in theirs. It is significant that, as John records, neither Mark nor Luke alludes to the prophecy.

Tell the daughter of Zion — The words seem to have been cited from memory, as the Hebrew text of Zechariah 9:9 begins, Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem, and also includes the phrase just, and having salvation in the description of the King.

As the words stand in Zechariah (we need not discuss the authorship or composition of that book here), they paint the ideal King. He comes not with chariot and horse and battle bow, like the conquerors of earthly kingdoms, but as a prince of peace. He revives the humbler pageantry of the days of the Judges (Judges 5:10; Judges 10:4; Judges 12:14), yet exercises a wider dominion than David or Solomon had, from sea to sea, and from the river (Euphrates) to the ends of the earth (Zechariah 9:10).

Our Lord claimed to fulfill that ideal. Interpreted this way, His act was partly an apparent concession to the fevered expectations of His disciples and the crowd. It was also partly a protest—the meaning of which they would later understand—against the nature of those expectations and the self-seeking spirit that accompanied them.

Here, as before, we see the solemn, sad accommodation to the thoughts of others that a teacher of new truths must often resort to when He finds Himself misinterpreted by those who are on a completely lower level of understanding. They wanted Him to claim the kingdom so that they might sit on His right hand and on His left. He would do so, but it would be a kingdom not of this world (John 18:36), utterly unlike anything they were expecting.

A colt, the foal of a donkey — Literally, of a beast of burden, as the word is not the same as that previously used. In the Hebrew of Zechariah, the word reproduces the old poetic phrasing of Genesis 49:11.