29-40. <\/strong> The Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem.<\/p>\n 29<\/strong>. Bethphage<\/em> ] The site is not identified, but it seems to have been regarded as a suburb of Jerusalem. The name means House of (unripe) Figs.<\/p>\n and Bethany<\/em> ] Perhaps the House of Dates<\/em>, but this is very uncertain. The mention of Bethany after<\/em> Bethphage is surprising. Here, however, St Luke omits the supper in the house of ‘Simon the leper’ (Mat 26:6-13<\/span>; Mar 14:3-9<\/span>; Joh 12:1-19<\/span>) and the anointing of Jesus by Mary of Bethany. Jesus arrived at Bethany before sunset on Friday, Nisan 8 (March 31, A. D . <\/strong> 30), and therefore before the Sabbath began. Here the throng of Galilaean pilgrims would leave Him to go to their friends in Jerusalem, or to make booths for themselves in the valley of the Kidron and on the slopes of Olivet. The Sabbath was spent in quiet. The supper was in the evening, otherwise the Jews could not have come from Jerusalem, as the distance exceeded a Sabbath day’s journey. It was on the next morning (Palm Sunday) that our Lord started for Jerusalem. His stay at Bethany may have been due to friendship, or may have been dictated by prudence. It was the brooding over the imagined loss of the value of the precious ointment an assault of Satan at the weakest point which first drove Judas to his secret interview with the Sadducean priests.<\/p>\n two of his disciples<\/em> ] The minute touch of description in Mar 11:4<\/span> has led to the conjecture that Peter was one of these two.<\/p>\n Verse 29. – 38<\/span>. See this triumphal entry into Jerusalem explained at large on Mt 21:1-11<\/span>, and Mr 11:1-10<\/span>.<\/P><\/p>\n See Poole on “Mat 21:1<\/span>“, and following verses to Mat 21:6<\/span>. See Poole on “Mar 11:1<\/span>“, and following verses to Mar 11:6<\/span>. We have discoursed there of Bethphage and Bethany, and whatever occurs in this history needing any explication. <\/P> <\/p>\n 29-38. Bethphage<\/B>“houseof figs,” a village which with Bethany lay along the furtherside of Mount Olivet, east of Jerusalem.<\/P><\/p>\n And it came to pass when he was come nigh<\/strong>,…. The other evangelists, Matthew and Mark, add “unto Jerusalem”; but this Luke designs afterwards, Lu 19:37<\/span> and therefore here means, as is expressed, that he was come nigh<\/p>\n to Bethphage and Bethany<\/strong>; two tracts of land which reached from Mount Olivet to Jerusalem; so that when he was there, he was nigh unto the city:<\/p>\n at the mount, called [the Mount] of Olives<\/strong>; or “Elaion”, as the Ethiopic version, which retains the Greek word for it; and which has its name from the great number of olive trees that grew upon it:<\/p>\n he sent two of his disciples<\/strong>; their names are not mentioned by any of the evangelists, but it is very probable they were Peter and John; of the places here mentioned; [See comments on Mt 21:1]<\/span>.<\/p>\n Unto Bethphage and Bethany <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). Both indeclinable forms of the Hebrew or Aramaic names. In Mr 11:1<\/span> “Bethany” is inflected regularly, which see.<\/P> Of Olives <\/B> (<\/SPAN><\/span>). As in Mark 11:1<\/span>; Matt 21:1<\/span>, though some editors take it to be, not the genitive plural of <\/SPAN><\/span> (olive tree), but the name of the place Olivet. In the Greek it is just a matter of accent (circumflex or acute) Olivet is correct in Ac 1:12<\/span>. See on Matt 21:1<\/span>; Mark 11:1<\/span> for details. <\/P> <\/p>\n Bethphage. See on Mt 21:1<\/span>.<\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “And it came to pass,” <\/strong>(kai egeneto) “And it happened,” or occurred, as He went up the mountain, tediously climbing, ascending for His last time, from Jericho to Jerusalem.<\/p>\n 2) “When he was come nigh,” <\/strong>(hos engisen) “As he drew near,” was come near, in view of Jerusalem, near two miles East of Jerusalem.<\/p>\n 3) “To Bethphage and Bethany,” <\/strong>(eis Bethphage kai Bethanain) “Into (the area of) Bethphage and Bethany.” Bethphage was a village believed to be East of Bethany and the name means “house of unripe figs.” While Bethany, home of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus means “house of dates,” Mat 21:1<\/span>. It is near where the road to Jericho begins a rapid descent.<\/p>\n 4) “At the mount called the mount of Olives,” <\/strong>(pros to oros to kaloumenon elaion) “Toward the mount called mount of Olives,” a mountain range extending some three miles Eastward from the city of Jerusalem. It was the area near where Jesus ascended into heaven, shortly thereafter, Luk 24:50-51<\/span>.<\/p>\n 5) “He sent two of his disciples,” <\/strong>(apesteilen duo ton matheton legon) “He mandated or sent on a mission, two of His disciples, saying,” or instructing them, Mat 21:2<\/span>. It is believed to have been Peter and John.<\/p>\n (29-38) When he was come nigh to Bethphage and Bethany.<\/strong>On the general narrative, see Notes on Mat. 21:1-11<\/span>; Mar. 11:1-11<\/span>. In details we note (1) that St. Luke unites the Bethphage of St. Matthew with the Bethany of St. Mark; (2) that, as a stranger to Juda, he speaks of the mountain that was called<\/em> the Mount of Olives. Possibly, indeed, both here and in Luk. 21:37<\/span>, as certainly in Act. 1:12<\/span>, he uses the Greek equivalent for Olivet (the Latin Olivetum,<\/em> or place of Olives) as a proper name. The absence of the article before the Greek for Olives, and the accentuation of the words in many MSS., seem decisive in favour of this view.<\/p>\n ‘And it came to about that, when he drew near to Bethphage and Bethany, at the mount that is called Olivet, he sent two of the disciples,’<\/p>\n Coming along the mountain road from Jericho Jesus approaches Bethphage and Bethany, two villages on the outskirts of Jerusalem near the Mount of Olives, the latter being on its lower slopes. The double mention of the Mount of Olives (see also Luk 19:37<\/span>) indicates the significance that Luke sees in this. Possibly he has Zec 14:4<\/span> in mind, where the expectation was that the Lord Himself would appear on the Mount of Olives. And from there Jesus sent two disciples to find an ass’s colt on which no man had ever ridden, which He has presumably arranged with its owners to make use of, or alternately which He knew was for hire and could be commandeered by a Prophet.<\/p>\n Bethphage means ‘house of unripe figs’ and was a hamlet between Bethany, and Jerusalem. We learn from elsewhere that it marked the limit of Jerusalem proper for ritual purposes. Thus it is being emphasised that Jesus enters from the edges of Jerusalem, moving on to its religious centre as He takes possession of it in the name of the Lord. It is a ‘holy’ journey, the purposeful journey of One set apart totally to God, and now offering Himself up to God. Bethany (‘house of dates’) is probably El Azariyeh (named after Lazarus), two miles south east of Jerusalem, and on the lower slopes of the Mount of Olives. It was two miles\/three kilometres outside Jerusalem. It is mainly mentioned in order to make the connection with the Mount of Olives, but is possibly also mentioned in order to indicate the whereabouts of tiny Bethphage (which is also unidentifiable to us).<\/p>\n After Initial Preparations Jesus Rides Into Jerusalem In Triumph On A Colt (19:29-40).<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Jesus here deliberately fulfils the prophecy of Zec 9:9<\/span> (Mat 21:4<\/span>) by riding into Jerusalem on an ass’s colt, and there He is greeted by the crowds. Contrary to what at first sight seems to be the case He is welcomed as the wonder-working prophet of Galilee (Luk 19:37-38<\/span>), for none are at the time completely aware of the full significance of it (Joh 12:16<\/span>), and the cries of the people are those which normally greeted pilgrims entering Jerusalem and approaching the Temple for the Feast. although no doubt all the louder because of Who He was. But there is certainly a significance there, which is rightly read into it by the Pharisees who are concerned about its implications. When, however, they expostulate at what is happening Jesus assures them that His entry is so significant that if His followers were silent, the very stones would cry out.<\/p>\n Why then was His entry so significant? Firstly it was because it was a declaration to Jerusalem, and to the whole world that He was here as the One promised in the Old Testament, the One Who had come from God, and was God’s chosen One. He was revealing Himself as the promised Messiah, the promised King, but making it clear that He was not One Who had come in order to enforce His rule on men by force of arms, but One Who, as in Zec 9:9<\/span>, had come in gentleness and humility in order to win men to Himself. And yet at the same time it was a quiet demand for recognition. It was one of those moments when all are challenged as to what their response will be. Had the eyes of Jerusalem been open they would have fully welcomed Him in these terms (even the stones recognised it).<\/p>\n Secondly it was because to His followers He was making clear that while He was the Messiah, He would not take up His position by force of arms. He wanted them to recognise that He was here to conquer through His words. Thus when His assault on Jerusalem began it was by preaching in the Temple, not by raising an insurrection. And it was an indication that once He was gone, they too must go forward with His word. It was a dampening down of wrong expectations about the Kingly Rule of God (see Luk 19:11<\/span>).<\/p>\n The supreme courage of what Jesus did should not be overlooked. He knew that the Jewish leaders were waiting in Jerusalem for Him to arrive so that they could arrest Him and seal His fate. And yet He entered Jerusalem in as public a way as possible, so that none could doubt that He was there. And He did it as a last acted out prophecy in which He proclaimed His kingship, and His fulfilment of Old Testament prophecy (Zec 9:9<\/span>), plain for all to see. He was proclaiming Who He was and why He had come, even though He knew that He would have to die for it. And yet in spite of the cries that welcomed Him even His own disciples did not fully recognise what He had done until after His resurrection (Joh 12:16<\/span>). Nevertheless it caused a huge stir, and produced a sense of expectation, even though there was divided opinion as to what that expectation was.<\/p>\n It is noteworthy that in the Section chiasmus above this coming of Jesus into Jerusalem is in parallel with the coming of the Son of Man in glory (Luk 21:28<\/span>). Both were to be declarations as to Who He was, the first in an appeal of compassionate love, the second in a revelation of total power. And central to both is that He is God’s only beloved Son (Luk 20:9-18<\/span>).<\/p>\n Analysis of the passage:<\/p>\n a <\/strong> When He drew near to Bethphage and Bethany, at the mount that is called Olivet, He sent two of the disciples (Luk 19:29<\/span>).<\/p>\n b <\/strong> Saying, “Go your way into the village over against you, in which as you enter you will find a colt tied, on which no man ever yet sat. Loose him, and bring him” (Luk 19:30<\/span>).<\/p>\n c <\/strong> “And if any one ask you, ‘Why do you loose him?’, thus shall you say, ‘The Lord has need of him’ ” (Luk 19:31<\/span>).<\/p>\n d <\/strong> And those who were sent went away, and found even as He had said to them (Luk 19:32<\/span>).<\/p>\n c <\/strong> And as they were loosing the colt, its owners said to them, “Why do you loose the colt?” And they said, “The Lord has need of him” (Luk 19:33-34<\/span>).<\/p>\n b <\/strong> And they brought him to Jesus, and they threw their garments on the colt, and set Jesus on it. And as He went, they spread their garments in the way (Luk 19:35-36<\/span>).<\/p>\n a <\/strong> As He was now drawing near, even at the descent of the mount of Olives, the whole multitude of the disciples began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice for all the mighty works which they had seen, saying, “Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord. Peace in heaven, and glory in the highest.” ’ (Luk 19:37-38<\/span>).<\/p>\n Note that in ‘a’ they draw near to the Mount of Olives, and in the parallel the same occurs. In ‘b’ they are told to go and bring the colt, and in the parallel they bring it. In ‘c’ they are asked why they are loosing the colt and told what they reply, and in the parallel they do as they are told. In ‘d’ they discover it to be exactly as the Lord has said.<\/p>\n SECTION 7 God’s Only Beloved Son (19:29-21:38).<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Throughout Luke the glory, and power, and uniqueness of Jesus has been revealed, and especially His uniqueness in His relationship with God. And now the central idea of this Section is that Jesus has come as God’s only and unique Son (Luk 20:13<\/span>). He reveals His authority in His ride into Jerusalem (Luk 19:29-40<\/span>), in His cleansing of the Temple (Luk 19:45-46<\/span>), in His decisive teaching (Luk 19:47<\/span> to Luk 20:8<\/span>; Luk 20:19<\/span> to Luk 21:4<\/span>), by His direct claim in the parable of the wicked tenants (the wicked husbandmen – Luk 20:9-18<\/span>), and in His final prophecies concerning the future of Jerusalem and the world (Luk 21:5-38<\/span>), all of which reveal that He is God’s Chosen One.<\/p>\n In chapter 19 Luke puts all this together in such a way as to emphasise Jesus’ glory even more strongly.<\/p>\n Twice he stresses that Jesus is entering as ‘the Lord’ Who has the right to commandeer His means of travel as He will (Luk 19:31<\/span>; Luk 19:34<\/span>, compare Luk 20:41-44<\/span>).<\/p>\n He reveals that He is proclaimed in terms of ‘the King Who has come in the name of the Lord’ (Luk 19:38<\/span>) Whose entry is such that if men were silent the very stones would cry out (Luk 19:40<\/span>).<\/p>\n Then he portrays Him as the Prophet Who is prophesying the destruction of Jerusalem because it has not responded to His coming (Luk 19:41<\/span>).<\/p>\n And finally he reveals why this is necessary by depicting Jesus as entering the Temple and clearing ‘His House’ of unscrupulous traders, calling it ‘a Den of Robbers’ (Luk 19:45<\/span>), when it was intended by Him to be a House of Prayer.<\/p>\n The full significance of all this is brought out in the way that Luke presents the material, for the events themselves were partly veiled, and at the time were not all fully understood.<\/p>\n Jesus Rides Into Jerusalem, And Reveals Himself As God’s Only Son, Which Finally Results in His Description of His Triumphant Return (19:29-21:38).<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n The Section may be analysed as follows:<\/p>\n a <\/strong> After initial preparations Jesus rides into Jerusalem in triumph on a colt revealing Himself as the Messianic King. If the people had not welcomed Him the very stones would have cried out (Luk 19:29-40<\/span>).<\/p>\n b <\/strong> Jesus weeps over a Jerusalem which will be desolated, thus revealing Himself as the Messianic Judge. Not one stone will be left upon another (Luk 19:41-44<\/span>).<\/p>\n c <\/strong> Jesus enters the Temple, in which Israel trusts, revealing Himself as its Lord, and as God’s Cleanser, of the Temple, as a warning against the unworthiness of the chief priests, who have forfeited their authority, and of the state of their Temple which is subject to condemnation as a Den of Robbers, thus revealing Himself as the Messianic Purger (Luk 19:45-46<\/span>).<\/p>\n d <\/strong> The chief priests and scribes and elders seek to destroy Jesus but could not, revealing that they lack any real authority (Luk 19:47-48<\/span>).<\/p>\n e <\/strong> Jesus is challenged as to His authority and reveals their inability to judge levels of authority, because they are fearful of being stoned (Luk 20:1-8<\/span>).<\/p>\n f <\/strong> The parable of the vineyard – Jesus is revealed as the only Son and the Head Cornerstone, the One in supreme authority. He is the Great Cornerstone on which His people will be established, but on which His antagonists will stumble (Luk 20:9-18<\/span>).<\/p>\n e <\/strong> Jesus challenges His questioners use of Caesar’s image, and reveals that their authority comes only from Caesar (Luk 20:19-26<\/span>).<\/p>\n d <\/strong> The Sadducees seek to undermine Jesus’ teaching, but could not, and have to admit His authority (Luk 20:27-40<\/span>).<\/p>\n c <\/strong> Jesus as David’s Lord, the Messiah, Who has come with authority from God, is contrasted with the unworthiness of the Scribes who claim that authority and yet desolate others, for they will receive the greater condemnation in that they have forfeited their authority. They in turn are contrasted with the poor widow (Luk 20:41<\/span> to Luk 21:4<\/span>).<\/p>\n b <\/strong> Jerusalem is to be desolated. Not one stone will be left upon another (Luk 21:5-7<\/span>).<\/p>\n a <\/strong> After initial preparations Jesus will come back in triumph to the world (Luk 21:8-36<\/span>).<\/p>\n “But you, watch at every season, making supplication, that you may prevail to escape all these things that will come about, and to stand before the Son of man” (Luk 21:36<\/span>).<\/p>\n Note that the section commences in ‘a’ with the ride in triumph into Jerusalem and in the parallel it ends in the return in triumph to the world. In ‘b’ Jesus weeps over Jerusalem, not one stone will be left on another and in the parallel Jerusalem is to be devastated, and not one stone left on another. In ‘c’ Jesus as God’s Messiah cleanses the Temple as an indication of the unworthiness of the Jewish leaders, and in the parallel He demonstrates that David had declared Him to be the Messiah, and that the Scribes are unworthy. In ‘d’ the Jewish leadership conspire to destroy Jesus but could not, and in the parallel they seek to undermine His teaching, but could not. In ‘e’ Jesus is challenged concerning His authority, and in the parallel He challenges whose authority the leaders are under. In ‘f’ He reveals His unique sonship and the unworthiness of the present Jewish leadership.<\/p>\n Luk 19:29-38<\/span> . See on Mat 21:1-9<\/span> ; Mar 11:1-10<\/span> . Luke follows Mark, yet not without something peculiar to himself towards the end. With Fritzsche, ad Marc<\/em> . p. 794 f., Lachmann, and Tischendorf, we must certainly place the accent thus on the word , olive-grove, olivetum<\/em> ; not as though, if it were , the article would in itself<\/em> be necessary (after . would have to be repeated), but because Luke, when he designates the mountain as the “Mount of Olives,” constantly has the article (Luk 19:37<\/span> ; Luk 22:39<\/span> ); but besides, in Act 1:12<\/span> , where he likewise adds ., he undoubtedly uses the form as a name. Hence, at Luk 21:37<\/span> also, is to be written. Comp. Joseph. Antt<\/em> . vii. 9. 2 : . On the nominative<\/em> , in respect of a verb of naming, see Lobeck, ad Phryn<\/em> . p. 517; Fritzsche, l.c.<\/em> ; Bernhardy, p. 66.<\/p>\n Luk 19:31<\/span> . ] because<\/em> , an answer to .<\/p>\n Luk 19:33<\/span> . ] the actual possessor and those belonging to him.<\/p>\n Luk 19:35<\/span> . ] they use their own upper garments<\/em> for a riding cushion in their reverence and love for the Lord. So serves for a vivid colouring<\/em> of the narrative.<\/p>\n Luk 19:37<\/span> . .] , not of the movement whither<\/em> (de Wette), but a pregnant union of the direction ( .) with the where<\/em> (when He approached at the declivity). See generally, Khner II. p. 316. In Homer is often found thus with the dative.<\/p>\n ] for this was only the last station of the Messiah’s entry.<\/p>\n ] in the wider sense.<\/p>\n ] for all the Messianic mighty works which they, as companions of Jesus, had seen.<\/p>\n Luk 19:38<\/span> . . .] belongs to ., according to a frequent transposition. See Bornemann, Schol<\/em> . p. 121 f.; Khner, ad Xen. Anab<\/em> . iv. 2. 18. Comp. Luk 23:48<\/span> .<\/p>\n . . .] The thought that “ with God is salvation<\/em> (which He is now purposing to communicate by means of the Messiah), and He is praised<\/em> (for it) in the height<\/em> (by the angels, comp. Luk 2:14<\/span> ),” is expressed in a hymnic form by the parallelism: “Salvation is in the heaven, and glory in the highest.” Luke gives the acclamation, according to a tradition, which had avoided the Hebrew Hosanna.<\/p>\n XVI<\/p>\n<\/p>\n JESUS AT BETHANY; THE TRIUMPHAL ENTRY; THE FIG TREE CURSED; THE COMING OF THE GREEKS, AND THE CRISIS OF THIS WORLD<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Harmony, pages 140-146 and Mat 21:1-22<\/span><\/strong> ; Mar 11:1-18<\/span><\/strong> ; Luk 19:29-48<\/span><\/strong> ; Joh 11:55-12:50<\/span><\/strong> .<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n We now come to the seventh part of the Harmony, devoted to the transaction of one week. The record extends from page 140 to page 217 of the Harmony. It is very thrilling. There is no halt; one event chases another. It is as living a narrative for rapidity of action as can be found in any language, and from now on to the conclusion of the Harmony we have before us the greatest studies to which the mind of man was ever directed. On page 140 there is a paragraph from John. That paragraph of just a few lines tells everything that is recorded about two of the days of the week, Friday and Saturday. Friday he gets to Bethany; Saturday, the Jewish sabbath, he remains there; there is nothing recorded about it at all. So that from the bottom of page 140 to the part that commences with the appearances, we have just six days. Now, as that one paragraph in John tells about what took place Friday and Saturday, so we have what happened on Sunday pages 140-143; what happened on Monday, pages 144-146; and what happened on Tuesday, pages 146-148, and so on. But we will have to do our hardest studying when we come to what happened on Tuesday. Just now, however, we are to consider what happened on Friday. The events that happened on Friday were that Jesus, six days before the Passover, came to Bethany where Lazarus was, and on that very day in Jerusalem there was an intense curiosity as to whether Jesus would come to this feast. The resurrection of Lazarus had made a profound impression. It stirred the people; it stirred the enemies of Jesus, and there was an increased curiosity in the city about his coming. About that time the common people found out that he was already within two miles of Jerusalem, at Bethany, there on Friday, and so a great many of them go out that afternoon to Bethany, just a two-mile walk, with a double purpose in view: First, to see Jesus; and, second, to look in the face of a man who had been raised from the dead after he had been dead four days. When the Pharisees saw that great throng leaving Jerusalem that Friday afternoon to go two miles out to Bethany, and learning that one of the motives that prompted them to go was to see Lazarus, then they counseled together to put Lazarus to death as well as Jesus. They were afraid for the people to go out and see Lazarus. They were afraid that the multitudes, through this miracle of the raising of Lazarus and their personal knowledge of the fact that Lazarus was raised, would turn from them.<\/p>\n Saturday, which was the Jewish sabbath, he remained quietly in Bethany. Now we notice what took place on Sunday. That is the first time that Sunday is brought into prominence as the first day of the week. On the first day of the week Jesus is proclaimed King; on the first day of the week Jesus rises from the dead; on the first day of the week he makes his appearance after rising from the dead; on the first day of the week he pours out the Holy Spirit upon his church. From now on Sunday will be prominent. That is what is called Palm Sunday. Palm Sunday occupies a conspicuous place in ecclesiastical calendars. The world is full of literature on Palm Sunday. The Romanists and Episcopalians have a special service on every Palm Sunday, and on the following Sunday, which is Easter, or Resurrection Sunday. On one he was proclaimed King; on the other he was raised from the dead, and crowned King in heaven.<\/p>\n Now, my own calculation commences with the commandment in Ezr 7:13<\/span> , which was 457 B.C., and adding 483 years it brings us to the baptism of Jesus Christ when he was publicly acknowledged from heaven and the Spirit of God descended upon him.<\/p>\n The procession was twofold. First, his disciples and the Bethany people, including the Jews, that had come to him the Friday previous, and then a multitude, when he was on the march to Jerusalem, came out and joined him. It was an immense procession. They knew that Zechariah had prophesied that when their King came he would come that way. They knew from the prophets just what they should say in acclamation: “Hosanna to the Son of David: blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord!” and they gathered the branches and leaves of the palm trees and spread them down before him. Some spread their clothes down for him to ride on, and the whole multitude shouted and sang as they moved, and one thousand pieces of artillery thundering at one time on Jerusalem could not have shocked and startled his enemies like seeing that throng. The event was a vivid fulfilment of Scripture and identified the Messiah, The demonstration terrified his enemies. Some of the multitudes were not participating in either the praise or throwing down branches for him to ride on, and they said, “Master, rebuke thy disciples. They are applying to you the words that belong to the Messiah. Rebuke them.” He replied, “If these shall hold their peace, the stones shall cry out.” Why? Because this is the day that marks the winding up of the probation of the Jewish people, and if nobody should cry out, “Hosanna to the Son of David,” then the rocks their lasting silence should break and cry out, “Hosanna to the Son of David.”<\/p>\n It is characteristic of children to be intensely interested in parades and processions. When a circus comes, we see the little children running to where they can see it, and when it passes them, they cut around another corner and wait for it to pass again. So these children cut around and got into the Temple, as that was Jesus’ objective point. And as he approaches the Temple they take up the song, “Hosanna to the Son of David,” and the Pharisees speak again: “Hearest thou what these children are saying? Ought you to suffer that? Why even the little children are hailing you as the Messiah!” Jesus whirled upon them and said, “Yea, did ye never read, Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise? Have you never read that?”<\/p>\n The next section commences on page 144 of the Harmony, and is the beginning of what took place on Monday. We will consider the sections separately and in order.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n THE FIG TREE CURSED (Mar 11:12-14<\/span><\/strong> and Mar 11:20-25<\/span><\/strong> ; Mat 21:18-22<\/span><\/strong> )<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n It has already been a subject of remark that nearly all of our Lord’s miracles were miracles of mercy, and that only two were punitive the cursing of the fig tree and the permitted destruction of the swine in the sea. This cursing of the fig tree, in fact, must be compared with the parable of the barren fig tree on page 118 of the Harmony given in Luk 13:6-9<\/span> . It may be well in this connection to repeat the very words of that parable: “He spake also this parable: A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came seeking fruit thereon, and found none. And he said unto the vinedresser, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why doth it also cumber the ground? And he answering saith unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it: and if it bear fruit thenceforth, well; and if not, thou shalt cut it down.”<\/p>\n The parable represents the Holy City, Jerusalem. For three years he had been preaching to them concerning the kingdom of God. They had borne no fruit and a sentence is pronounced: “Why doth it also cumber the ground? Cut it down.” The husbandman or dresser of the vineyard pleads for one more year, the part of the year yet remaining of the ministry of our Lord. How often has the parable been the theme of a sermon or of an admonition!<\/p>\n In our old family Testament on the margin in the handwriting of my father are these words: “Lord, spare him another year.” This was written concerning my oldest brother, and on the other margin in my mother’s handwriting years afterward are these words: “He now bears fruit.”<\/p>\n It is the mission of a fig tree to bear fruit. If it does not bear fruit it has failed of the object of its being. It is characteristic of the fig tree that it puts out its fruit before it puts on its leaves, hence to see leaves on a fig tree justifies an expectation of fruit. Jesus leaving Bethany walking toward Jerusalem, not yet having had the breakfast or first meal of the Jews and being hungry, sees a fig tree covered with leaves. He goes to it to find fruit, and finding none, pronounces a curse upon it that withers it instantly to its taproot. The action is symbolic. It represents the cursing and destruction of Jerusalem, a total and overwhelming destruction, a destruction that was so unnecessary if only their eyes had been opened to the things which made for their peace. How well Luke has expressed the thought: “When he drew nigh, he saw the city and wept over it, saying, If thou hadst known in this day,” that is, the great Palm Sunday, the day when he came as King, so vividly foretold by the prophets, “If thou hadst known in this day, even thou, the things which belong unto peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes. . . . Thine enemies shall cast up a bank about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side, . . . and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation” (Luk 19:41-44<\/span> ).<\/p>\n An infidel has said that it was not the season for figs, and according to the text itself, the curse was unjustifiable but the meaning here is that it was the full season for figs; the tree is not cursed for failing to bear fruit out of season, but having failed in season it now creates an expectation of fruit by putting forth its leaves. In nearly all books upon the Holy Land we find the fact stated that in some places of the country some fig trees bear fruit earlier than others and often some in the same garden, one tree being in a sunny spot sheltered from cold winds, bears a week or two ahead of other trees, and the putting forth of the leaf is the sign that the fruit is there.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n THE COMING OF THE GREEKS (Joh 12:10-36<\/span><\/strong> ) <\/strong> This section is intensely interesting, not merely on account of the historical incident, but on account of the great group of mighty lessons developed from it. Certain Greeks of those that went up to worship at the feast came to Philip and said, “Sir, we would see Jesus.” I suppose many preachers, as well as myself, have preached from that text, “Sir, we would see Jesus!” and maybe got more out of the text than those Greeks meant. I suppose those Greeks were Jewish proselytes, as the Ethiopian eunuch was a proselyte, that is, they had adopted the Jewish religion, and coming up to the annual feast were concerned to see the new great expounder of their adopted religion. When informed of their desire to see him, our Lord makes this strange reply, “The hour is come that the Son of man should be glorified.” What is its relevancy to the request of the Greeks that they should see him? Apparently this: if the Gentiles, already knocking at the gate of grace which they could not possess until the time of the Jews be fulfilled, then does not their coming prove that the hour approaches for Christ to die and for all Gentiles to share in his salvation? Hence he says, “The hour is come that the Son of man should be glorified.” But how is he to be glorified? He explains: “Except a grain of wheat fall into the earth and die, it abideth by itself alone; but if it die, it beareth much fruit.” The sense of the passage seems to be this: “The Gentiles are coming. In their salvation I will be glorified. I cannot get to that glory except through my cross.” His disciples all the time misconceived the nature of his kingdom: “Far be it from thee, Lord, to suffer death,” and “Wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” Jesus rebukes them by teaching first, his death: “I can attain no glory nor bear fruit until I die.” Then he announces the general principle: “He that loveth his life loses it; he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal. If a man profess to love me, let him follow me; if when to follow me means to die with me, come to my cross. Men cannot be my disciples except they take up the cross and follow me.” We must die to our sins, by the withering work of the Holy Spirit, before we can bear the fruit of joy in our regeneration. That was the astounding thing the prophet spoke concerning John the Baptist. This man comes to bring the news of salvation, and what shall he say? And the voice said, “Say that all flesh is grass and the grass withereth and its flower fadeth.” In other words, as Christ died before he was glorified, there must be the withering work of the Holy Spirit in our hearts to precede the saving work.<\/p>\n He now turns from the special application of his words to the coming of the Greeks, to the general principles involved in his death. “Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say?” This death ahead of him was not a painted death. It was not merely a physical death. It was a spiritual death; it was a penal death. The baptism of suffering was not a mere sprinkling of sorrow, but it was an overwhelming flood. Wave after wave must roll over him.<\/p>\n A few aspersed drops on the brow can never represent the overwhelming sorrows of Christ when deep uttered its voice to deep at the noise of its water-spouts. He continues: “Shall I say, Father, save me from this hour?” In view of its sorrow shall he ask God to avert it? It was for this cause he came into the world and shall he offer prayer to defeat the object of his mission? Later on when we see him in the garden of Gethsemane and the awful horrors of Calvary are already felt in apprehension, we indeed hear him pray: “Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me.” That seems to mean, “If men can be saved without my death; if thy omniscience can discern some other plan; if thy omnipotence can bring about any other way of salvation, then let this cup pass from my lips.” But if there is no other way and no other plan for the salvation of man, then he offers to drink the cup according to the will of God. It seems to me that this is the most convincing proof in the world that there can be no salvation apart from salvation in Christ.<\/p>\n Having thus stated the only method of his glorification and the horror of that method, he now prays: “Father, glorify thy name,” and the silence of heaven is broken by a voice from the most excellent glory, “I have both glorified it and will glorify it again.” This is the third time that a voice of attestation has come from the highest heaven once at his baptism when the Father said, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased”; once at his transfiguration, when the Father again said, “This is my beloved Son, hear ye him,” and now, “I have both glorified it and will glorify it again.” This brings us to a climax. The thought has been continually mounting upward as if climbing from one peak of a range to another still higher, until at last the foot is planted upon the crest of the loftiest summit.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n THE CRISIS OF THIS WORLD <\/strong> The coming of the Greeks suggested the thought. He sees the coming of the Gentile world. The desire of the Greeks, “Sir, we would see Jesus!” he interprets as coming from the lips of all nations. In their voice he hears the Roman and the Briton and every nation and tribe and tongue saying, “Sir, we would see Jesus.” It is no Jewish crisis of which he speaks when he says, “Now is the crisis of this world.” In employing the English word “crisis,” I simply Anglicize the Greek term. The world has had but two crises: The first man when he stood before the tree of death and yielded to the temptation of his wife that was the first crisis. In him the race fell. In that fall Satan usurped the sovereignty of this world. He has been the prince of this world ever since, and now the Second Adam has come. Satan was foiled in his first temptation of our Lord immediately after his baptism. But he only left him for a season. He is back again. The conflict between the Prince of life and the prince of death has been raging for three and a half years. The death grapple comes on the cross. There the serpent will bruise the heel of the Messiah and there the Messiah will crush the serpent’s head. So when this temptation comes to him to shun the horrors of his sacrificial, penal, and substitutionary death, it is again and for the last time the crisis, not of the Jews alone, but of the whole world. This Second Adam, this messianic Prince, who, before his incarnation, created the world for his own glory and from whom it had been snatched by the wiles of Satan in the fall of the first Adam, shall regenerate this world. The material earth itself shall be purified by fire. All its land and sea, its mountains and valleys, its sky and its earth, shall be redeemed.<\/p>\n The strong man armed has kept his goods in peace, but he shall be bound hand and foot, stripped of his armor and expelled from the house which he has defiled.<\/p>\n The crisis consists in this: That the prince of this world the usurping prince shall be cast out, and now on the last mountaintop the cross is erected as the supreme climax and his words ring out, “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto myself.” By being lifted up he signifies the manner of his death on the cross. “As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up; that whosoever believeth may in him have eternal life.” That lifting up occurred nearly two thousand years ago. We may well ask, “Has it lost its attractive power? Can it now draw men?” Paul said to the Galatians long after the crucifixion of Christ, “Before whose eyes Christ was openly get forth crucified.” On the cross he was lifted up in fact, but in the gospel he is lifted up as a proclamation of that fact.<\/p>\n Every time the preacher sets forth from the pulpit Christ crucified as the hope of glory, he is lifted up. Every time a man, claiming to be a preacher, substitutes for the cross some inferior theme, he is guilty of the blood of Jesus Christ. The cross is Time’s masterpiece and Eternity’s glory. And whoever in simple, childlike faith will lift up Jesus crucified will find that it draws more than any sensational advertisement, pays better than the hired singing of theatrical choirs, pays better than philosophical, economic, or ethical discussion, and ultimately not only all redeemed will be drawn to that cross, but all the lost will be compelled to bow the knee, and every tongue in the last judgment shall confess his name, and even from the horrors of hell in that day of revelation of the righteous judgment of God shall say, “Thy judgment is just.”<\/p>\n I mean to say that everybody that ever lived upon this earth and every angel who has ministered, and every fallen demon who has sought to mar and obstruct the kingdom of God, shall at the last acknowledge the wisdom and glory of the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ some in their salvation and others in their punishment.<\/p>\n They, blind as moles, replied: “We have heard out of the law that the Christ abideth forever: and how sayest thou the Son of man must be lifted up?” The lifting up is the means of his abiding forever. Again they say, “Who is this Son of man?” Had they never read Daniel? Does not that great prophet fix the title of the Messiah as the “Son of man,” and does not Christ accept the title? Did they not recall how that prophet said that he saw one like unto the Son of man, brought to the Ancient of Days and thousands and thousands and ten thousand times ten thousands ministered unto him, and that there was given him a kingdom that should never end? In that way shall he abide forever.<\/p>\n Isaiah, seven hundred years before, had foreseen their rejection and the triumph of the cross in that great Isa 53<\/span> , commencing: “Lord, who hath believed our report and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?” Men saw no beauty in him that they should desire him. To them he seemed to be afflicted and smitten of God. They did not understand that by his stripes we are to be healed, and that God was to put on him the iniquity of us all, and that be must pour out his soul unto death, and that when he poured out his soul unto death then he should see of the travail of his soul and be satisfied.<\/p>\n We have seen all of the final struggle pivoting on the raising of Lazarus. That event led the Sanhedrin to its final determination to put the Christ to death. Then we have seen him coming according to the Scriptures on that great Palm Sunday, and their rebuking of his disciples and of the little children because they cried, “Hosanna to the Son of David!”<\/p>\n<\/p>\n QUESTIONS<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1. What division of the Harmony does this study embrace and what can you say of the narrative?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 2. Which one of the historians gives an account of our Lord’s actions on Friday and Saturday of his last week, and what were they?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 3. What particular interest upon the part of the common people were manifested, what the actions of the chief priests and why?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 4. What did Christ do on Sunday and what other great events in the scripture marking the first day of the week?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 5. What is this Sunday called by Romanists and Episcopalians, what other Sunday is of importance with them, and what do you think of such celebrations?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 6. From what date does the author calculate Palm Sunday and how?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 7. Who constituted the procession into Jerusalem, what prophet had foretold this event, how did the procession demonstrate its joy, and what the effect on Jerusalem?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 8. What request came from some of the multitude and why, what Christ’s answer and its signification?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 9. What interest manifested on this occasion by the children, who objected and what Christ’s reply?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 10. What two of our Lord’s miracles only were punitive?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 11. What parable must be considered in connection with this cursing of the fig tree, what does the parable represent, what the three years, what the extra year begged for it by the husbandman, and what touching incident in the author’s family in this connection to illustrate?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 12. What is the mission of a fig tree, what is its characteristic, justifies what expectation, what is the application, and how does Luke express Jerusalem’s great responsibility in this matter?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 13. What infidel objection, and what is the reply?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 14. Why is the incident of the coming of the Greeks intensely interesting, who were these Greeks, why their interest to see Jesus, when thus informed what was Jesus’ reply, what its relevancy to this coming of the Greeks, how was he to be glorified, what misapprehension by the disciples, what general principle announced. What its application?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 15. What was the nature of the death that he was to die?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 16. Did Christ try to escape death for the salvation of the world, what was the meaning of the prayer in Gethsemane, what great proof that there can be no salvation apart from salvation in Christ?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 17. What was his prayer on this occasion, what was the Father’s response, what three voices from the Most Excellent Glory, and how do they express a climax?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 18. What did Jesus hear in the voice of these Greeks, what thought did it suggest to him, how many and what crises of the world, how is this a crisis of the world, what the parallels between the two crises, what to be the outcome of the last, what part has the preacher in the result, and what theme suggested for the preacher?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 19. What was the reply of the multitude, what prophecies show their blindness?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 20. Show the connection of these events with the raising of Lazarus.<\/p>\nFuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n