• Post comments:0 Comments

Are we to suppose that this multitude who went out to welcome Jesus as He made His entrance into Jerusalem was composed of the political and religious leaders of the day?  See Joh 11:47-48,57.  What is the significance of Psa 118:22 in this context that would not be lost upon the lowly “rabble” among the people who were acclaiming Him king?  Was the sort of kingdom they were expecting Him to establish any different from the worldly sort of kingdom the religious leaders who rejected Jesus as the chief cornerstone were expecting the Messiah to establish, except in terms of who would share power with Him over their enemies?  Were they any less mistaken than the political and religious leaders were in regard to the fundamental nature of the kingdom they supposed Jesus would seek to establish as their Messiah / King?  In the same way today as it was then, is it conceivable that everyone’s expectations about Jesus’ second coming, including our own, might be just as misplaced?  Despite the mistaken expectations of even those who welcomed Him, in the end, what made them more receptive to the true nature of the kingdom Jesus did in fact establish through His death and resurrection?  See Jam 4:6, Isa 57:15, 66:2; cf. 1Co 1:26-29.  What does this teach us our heart attitude must be in case our own expectations about Jesus’ second coming are also mistaken?

What word in Mat 21:8 indicates that the acclaim for Jesus on this occasion was not entirely unanimous?  For what reason might any naysayers have joined them?  Is it any different today?  Cf. Mat 13:24-30.  Notice in Luk 19:39 that there were some Pharisees among the multitude; what was their reaction?  What was the significance of Jesus’ response in Luk 19:40?  See Rom 8:19-22; cf. Psa 96:11-13, 98:4-9, Isa 55:12 and think: what supernal events could be happening before our own eyes that we might not see or understand because they are veiled in a humble cloak and appear to our worldly outlook to be insignificant?  What hope does such an understanding give us that our simple, humble, day-in and day-out faithful service to God can in the same way accomplish great things of eternal value and significance?  Cf. Gal 6:9.

What does Matthew say in Mat 21:10 was the effect upon the city of Jesus’ entrance into Jerusalem?  Notice that stirred is literally shaken in a manner that connotes fear, from the Greek word eseisthe from which we get our word seismic; cf. Mat 27:51, 28:4, Heb 12:26, Rev 6:13 for the only other NT uses.  How much of the city does Matthew say was stirred?  What does this indicate about the significance the many Jews who were in Jerusalem for the feast saw in this event?  Was it necessarily the case that they even knew who Jesus was?  See their question in Mat 20:10.  What does Matthew record that the multitudes proclaimed Him to be that stirred the whole city?  What was the significance of them calling Him “the prophet”?  See Deut 18:15-18, Joh 1:21, 6:14, 7:40, Act 3:22-23, 7:37, and consider that as the Jews observed Passover in celebration of their deliverance from their bondage in Egypt, they came to believe that it would be at Passover when the Lord would send a second Moses to deliver them from their bondage to Rome.  See also Joh 11:47-48, 12:17-21 and think: considering how divided the people and rulers were in their opinions of Jesus, why would there have been an element of fear in the city at Jesus’ entrance?  Why ought they rather to have feared?  See Luk 19:41-44.  Due to the political, social and economic changes taking place today, our own nation is stirred in a similar manner with an element of fear for what might come of it; in the same way as then, why ought we rather to fear?  See Joe 3:13, Act 17:30-31, Rom 2:5, 2Th 1:7b-9, 2Pe 3:3-7, Rev 6:12-17, 14:19-20, 16:1, 19:15.

Leave a Reply