New Testament

After the Triumphal Entry, Jesus goes to the Temple and is angered by merchants who are buying and selling in the Temple (21:12-13). Jesus makes a prophetic demonstration, overturning the tables of merchants and moneychangers and This is usually called the “cleansing of the Temple.”

The cleansing of the Temple is often attacked as historically suspect. Is it likely Jesus could enter the Temple courts and start a riot? More recent scholars of historical Jesus find the story plausible since it provides the reason why Jewish authorities question Jesus in the next chapter and eventually decide to execute him (Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 61-67; Meier, Marginal Jew 2:893).

Matthew’s version of the cleansing of the Temple is quite brief, only two verses, although he adds an additional story about Jesus healing in the Temple after he overturns the tables. Mark 11:12-33 has far more detail, and John 2:13-25 has a similar event.

Commenting on the version of this story in John, Köstenberger suggests the main point of Jesus’ attack is that the sellers are taking up the area of the Temple where the Gentiles are permitted to worship (Köstenberger, John, 106). I am not sure how many Gentiles actually came to Passover to worship, not is certain the sellers took up the entire area (300×450 meters, a bit less than 1000×1500 feet, larger than the size of four football fields).

The action is intentional symbolic. Like the curse on the fig tree, the “turning of the tables” functions as a condemnation of the Temple aristocracy. By overturning tables, Jesus challenges the religious authorities to be obedient to Scripture by making the temple a house of prayer for all nations.

Selling sacrifices and changing money was a necessary service provided by the Temple. It was very difficult to travel to Jerusalem with a lamb for the Passover sacrifice. If it was injured or found to be in some way unclean, then the worshiper would not have a sacrifice for the festival. To assist people in their Temple authorities sold “pre-approved” lambs for people traveling from the Diaspora for the Passover Festival. The sellers are vending oxen and pigeons along with sheep. These might be thought of as the high and low end of the sacrifice scale. A wealthy man may choose to sacrifice an ox while a poor person could only afford a pigeon.

Moneychangers were required because the half-shekel Temple Tax was supposed to be paid in a Tyrian coin (a stater or tetradrachma) which had a higher silver content. It is frequently stated that the Tyrian coin did not have the image of a Roman emperor who claimed to be God on it, making it more acceptable for the Jewish Temple tax. Jerome Murphy-O’Connor disputes this majority opinion since the Tyrian coin used an image of the god Melkart (the Tyrian Hercules from the sixth century BC). Melkart (“King of the city”) was equivalent to Baal of the Hebrew Bible.

If these sellers and moneychangers provide a necessary service, why does Jesus attack these sellers and moneychangers? Popular opinion is that these vendors were making an outrageous profit by selling in the Temple, on the analogy of the vendors at an airport or sports arena. Since they had a captive market, they were free to price-gouge on sacrifice prices. Commenting on the John version of this story, D. A. Carson says, “There is no evidence that the animal merchants and money-changers or the priestly authorities who allowed them to use the outer court were corrupt companions in graft” (Carson, John, 179).

Jesus combines two lines from the Prophets to condemn the merchants: Isaiah 56:7 (“My house shall be called a house of prayer”) and Jeremiah 7:11 (“you make it a den of robbers”). It is supposed to be like this (the ideal), but you have made it into the worst possible thing, the generation which witnesses the destruction of the Temple.

The context of Isaiah 56:7 is important. At the beginning of the third part of Isaiah, Isaiah 56:1-7 looks forward to an eschatological gathering at the Temple where those excluded from worship (eunuchs and foreigners) will be welcomed. These excluded groups will make acceptable sacrifices in the temple because they “hold fast” to the covenant and honor the Sabbath. Jesus will heal the blind and lame (21:14), people who were excluded from Temple worship, and children will worship him (21:15), another class of people who were too low socially to enter the Temple gates and worship the Lord.

In Jeremiah 7, the prophet preaches to those going up to the temple to worship the Lord condemning then for their hypocrisy. They think their worship honors the Lord and will save them from the coming judgment. Jeremiah is clear: they have not defended the rights of widows, orphans, and immigrants, so their belief temple worship protects them is “deceptive words” that are worthless (7:8).

It is possible Jesus also has in mind Zechariah 14:21 is more subtle. In the eschatological age, the Temple will be either rebuilt or purified and there will be no need for “merchants.” Several observations are important for understanding Jesus’ allusion to this text.

Zechariah 14:21 Every pot in Jerusalem and Judah will be holy to the Lord Almighty, and all who come to sacrifice will take some of the pots and cook in them. And on that day there will no longer be a Canaanite (footnote, merchant) in the house of the Lord Almighty

First, Zechariah has the future restored Temple in mind, not the present “second Temple.” All the nations will come to Jerusalem to worship the Lord. Second, “merchants” in Zechariah 14:21 can be rendered “Canaanites” (as in the NIV 2011, but not the ESV). The name Canaanite means something like merchant, and in the context of the verse it seems more likely that the original point was no more sellers will be needed to vend sacrificial animals since every pot in Jerusalem and Judah will be equally pure as the Temple mount.

By alluding to these verses, Jesus is announcing the beginning of the new age of the Messiah. The merchants must leave the Temple since the time is coming when they will not be needed. Jesus’s execution at Passover will solve the problem of sin and render these sacrifices superfluous. In that eschatological age, all the excluded people will be included in Temple worship.

The Triumphal Entry is a well-known story from the Christian celebration of Palm Sunday, but this familiarity often obscures the strong messianic expectations in the Triumphal Entry. As E. P. Sanders said, “the entry was probably deliberately managed by Jesus to symbolize the coming kingdom and his own rôle in it.… [It was] an intentionally symbolic action, performed … for the sake of the disciples … [and] it did not attract large public attention.” (Jesus, 308).

Passing through Bethpage (Matthew omits Bethany) Jesus arranges to ride a donkey from the Mount of Olives to Jerusalem.  Bethpage (“house of figs”) and Bethany (“house of dates”) are small villages along the way into Jerusalem via the Mount of Olives. Bethany is about 1.8 miles from Jerusalem. The Mount of Olives is on the east side of the Kidron Valley. It is part of a ridge with three peaks, Mount Scopus is the highest at about 3000 feet.

Why does Jesus choose to enter Jerusalem from the Mount of Olives? There are several practical reasons for this approach, but since he evokes Zechariah 9:9, perhaps the location was chosen to allude to Zechariah 14:4, the “one who is coming” will walk on the Mount of Olives. Although the mountain does not “split in two” as Zechariah says, the coming of the messiah from the east is associated with the Mount of Olives.

The triumphal entry is rich with Jewish nationalism and messianic expectation. Jesus arranged to ride to Jerusalem on a donkey, intentionally fulfilling the prophecy in Zechariah 9:9.

Zechariah 9:9 Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion! Shout, Daughter of Jerusalem! See, your king comes to you, righteous and having salvation, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.

Zechariah 9:9, a prediction of the Messiah’s coming into Jerusalem on a new colt, Jesus sends two disciples to get a donkey which has never been ridden. (How was this all arranged? Did Jesus send a message to his Jerusalem disciples to put the donkey there? Is this divine knowledge?)

A king riding a donkey is a sign the king comes in peace. Some relate this to the story of David coming in peace to Jerusalem after Absalom’s rebellion (although 1 Samuel 19 does not mention David rode a donkey into Jerusalem). It is more likely Jesus intended to evoke the story of the anointing of Solomon in 1 Kings. He is anointed, placed on a donkey, and led up the valley into Jerusalem as the Son of David who will rule over a kingdom if peace and prosperity.

There are other “triumphal entries” in recent Jewish history. Judas Maccabee led a procession to Jerusalem and entered Zion “with joy and gladness” (1 Macc 5:54; Josephus, Ant. 12:348–9). When Simon recaptured the citadel in Jerusalem, “the Jews entered it with praise and palm branches, and with harps and cymbals and stringed instruments, and with hymns and songs, because a great enemy had been crushed and removed from Israel (1 Macc 13:43-53).  In 2 Maccabees 4:21-22 Antiochus entered Jerusalem with “the blaze of torches and with shouts.”

The crowds greet Jesus as the coming king (Matt 21:7-9). When his disciples place cloaks on the donkey and the road, they are enacting a coronation (1 Kings 1:38-40). In 2 Kings 9:13, when Jehu is anointed as king, people spread out their cloaks on the ground.

Others spread branches they had cut from the fields (v. 8, στιβάς refers to leafy branches, but also straw or reeds), Matthew explains these included branches cut from trees (κλάδους ἀπὸ τῶν δένδρων). Presumably palm branches were used. When Judas Maccabees entered Jerusalem, he was given a hero’s welcome (1 Macc 13:51; 2 Macc 10:7).

2 Maccabees 10:7 (NRSV) Therefore, carrying ivy-wreathed wands and beautiful branches and also fronds of palm, they offered hymns of thanksgiving to him who had given success to the purifying of his own holy place.

The triumphal entry is therefore designed to evoke imagery from the Old Testament and or the restoration of the Temple after the Maccabean revolt.

As Jesus rides the donkey into the city the people begin to shout “hosanna” and “hosanna in the highest heaven.”  Hosanna is “save now” in Psalm 118:25 (הוֹשִׁ֘יעָ֥ה, LXX ὦ κύριε, σῶσον). In 2 Sam 14:4 the phrase is used by a woman who has lost her son; she appeals to Absalom (the son of David) for justice (although this is a rouse, it does demonstrate the use of the phrase in the Old Testament).

They also shout, “Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord” is from Psalm 118:25. This verse refers of the restoration of a Davidic king to Jerusalem. As is often observed, Jesus never taught that he was going to restore a Davidic kingdom to Israel, but rather that the Kingdom of God has arrived.  Evans points out the Targum on Psalm 118:22-29 identifies David as the speaker, the one who is “worthy to the ruler and king” (Mark 8:27-16:20, 140).

It is important to hear the original Psalm clearly, since the blessing to the one who comes in the name of the Lord comes from the “house of the Lord,” the Temple. The psalm was associated with Temple worship and may have been something the pilgrims were already singing as they went up to the Temple. Jesus therefore intentionally puts himself into this worship as the one who is coming in the name of the Lord.

What would Peter, James and John make of this scene? They were told they would see the Kingdom of God coming with power (Matt 16:28). Peter rebuked Jesus when he predicted his suffering and death (Matt 16:21-23; James and John thought the kingdom was about to be restored in glory (Matt 20:20-28). Perhaps some of the disciples exchanged glances, nodding with approval at this reception of Jesus as the King of the Jews.

Contrast the two reactions to the blind men with the crowds following Jesus to Jerusalem. The blond men understand who Jesus is, but the crowds do not.

As they travel towards Jerusalem, the mother of James and John made an audacious request on behalf of her sons. Jesus is travelling with a large crowd, although these are Jewish pilgrims going up to Jerusalem rather than entirely his disciples and followers (notice the disciples and the crowd are two things in verse 1).

In Mark 10:46, the blind man is identified as Bartimaeus the son of Timaeus. The name Bartimaeus is Aramaic and means “son of Timai.” He is seated on the way out of Jericho, and later will follow Jesus on his way to Jerusalem. In Matthew, there are two unnamed blind men. Matthew features two blind men in order to highlight the contrast with two disciples who do not fully understand Jesus’s mission.

The blind men hear Jesus is passing by and begin to cry out “Son of David, have mercy on us” (20:30). Matthew omits Mark’s identification of Jesus the Nazarene, perhaps because he will use that same language at the end of the Triumphal Entry (21:11).

The title “Son of David” was a messianic title in the first century. Isaiah 11 describes the messiah as a “branch from the stump of Jesse” and Jeremiah 23:5-6 says in the coming days the Lord will “raise up for David a righteous branch” to reign as king. The Dead Sea Scrolls use similar language. 4Q252 v.3-4 connects Gen 49:10 (the scepter shall not depart from Judah) with the “messiah of righteousness,” the righteous branch of David. “Until the messiah of righteousness comes, the branch of David. For to him and to his descendants has been given the covenant of the kingship of his people for everlasting generations.” LXX Isaiah 30:19 reads slightly different than the MT: “Because a holy people will reside in Zion, and Jerusalem has wept with weeping, ‘Have mercy on me!’” (Lexham LXX).

The reaction of the crowd traveling with Jesus is surprising. Many in the crowd rebuke the man, trying to silence him, but Jesus calls for him and asks what he can do for him (20:31). In Matthew 19:13 the disciples rebuke the people trying to get children to Jesus, here in Matthew 20:31 the crowd rebukes some beggars for trying to annoy Jesus. “One supposes that the crowd, hardened to roadside beggars, thinks the man a nuisance” (Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:107).

It is perhaps ironic that the crowds want to silence the beggars, even though they are correctly identifying Jesus as the son of David and perhaps even correct about his being the Branch, the Messiah from Isaiah 11:1. Throughout the gospel Jesus has tried to silence those who identified him as the Messiah, the son of God. Now Jesus does not silence the blind man.

Jesus Heals the two blind men (Matthew 20:32-34). First, he asks what they want (20:32). Jesus’s question is the same as the previous story, James and John approached Jesus to beg a favor (what do you want? Matt 20:21). Just as Peter’s blindness was evident after the healing of the blind man in Mark 8:22-26, now James and John’s blindness is evident just before the restoration of sight to this blind man.

Matthew is intentionally contrasting the (arrogant) request from James and John with the (humble) request of these two blind beggars.  “One wonders whether there might not be a lesson intended in the juxtaposition of 20:20–8 and 20:29–34. In the former, two privileged insiders (James and John) make a request through a third party (their mother). The request is prefaced by no title of respect or majesty, it concerns the eschatological” (Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:110).

They ask for their sight to be restored, so Jesus heals them (20:33-34a). Jesus responds, “in pity.” The aorist passive participle from σπλαγχνίζομαι indicates he was “moved with compassion.” Jesus looked on the crowds in Matthew 9:36; In Matthew 14:14 Jesus has compassion on the crowds and heals their sick; the same verb is used on Luke in the parable of the Good Samaritan (he was moved with compassion for the injured man, Luke 10:33) and the parable of the Prodigal Son (the father was moved with compassion for his son when he returned, Luke 15:20)

This restoration of sight is a parabolic miracle. The crowd traveling with Jesus are blind to who Jesus really is. Even James and John do not fully see clearly who Jesus is, the suffering servant (the son of Man, the Branch, the son of David). Even though the crowd will worship Jesus as the coming king who fulfills prophecy in a few hours.  Jesus is about to enter Jerusalem as the King, yet everyone he meets in the next few chapters is blind to who is, ultimately, they will reject him and attempt to ultimately silence him by executing him.

What is the point of this story? Why does it appear just before the Triumphal Entry?  A hint might be in the comparison between this story and Matthew 8:4 and 9:3. In both of those miracle stories, Jesus tells people to say nothing., Yet now he allows the blind men to call him son of David openly. Jesus and his disciples are heading directly from Jericho to Jerusalem and the Triumphal Entry is next story in Matthew. The story of these two blind men anticipates that clear announcement of Jesus as messiah

Because they asked to sit in the important seats in the coming kingdom, Jesus tells James and John are thinking like the Gentiles. James and John are trying to gain an advantage so that they are more honored than the other disciples.

The gentile rulers “lord it over them” (20:25). The verb translated “lord it over” (κατακυριεύω) refers to having mastery or dominion over another. 1 Peter 5:3 says the elders are to be shepherds of the flock, rather than domineering over their charges.  The Greco-Roman world was an honor/shame culture. Any Roman elite pursed his own honor at the expense of everyone else. You did what you needed to do to get ahead of your rivals, just as James and John did by asking for prominent seats when Jesus’s kingdom arrives.

Jesus requires his disciples to completely reverse the pursuit of honor common in the ancient world. Matthew 8:11-12 refers to Pharisees pursuing the best seats at meals and doing things which brought honor to themselves. In that context Jesus reverses the expectation most people had: Jews like the Pharisees would be the first to enter the Kingdom of God and sit at the best table along with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. But Jesus says they will not even get into that banquet, but rather they will be left on the outside in the darkness.

In Luke 14:7-11 Jesus reverses the common Greco-Roman and Jewish practice of trying to sit in the best seats at a wedding banquet. It is better, Jesus says, to sit in a humble seat and have the host upgrade you to a better seat than to take a better seat and be sent down to a less honored seat.

If you want to be great in the kingdom of heaven, you must be a servant (Matt 20:26-27). Jesus will say something similar in Matthew 23:11-12, contrasting the attitude his disciples ought to have with the hypocritical Pharisees. Contemporary American Christian culture has the same pursuit of honor like the Greco Roman world. Pastors routinely ask, “How big is your church?” Can you imagine Joel Osteen helping set up the chairs in the fellowship hall? Mowing the church lawn?

Jesus himself is the model for serving one another. The Son of Man came to be a servant and a ransom for many (Matt 20:28). Jesus regularly uses the phrase Son of Man to refer to himself, likely evoking Daniel 7:13-14. The Son of Man is about to arrive in Jerusalem, and many expected him to begin to rule with the authority of the Ancient of Days (and do some serious smiting of those who deserve to be judged).

But Jesus connects the (messianic) Son of Man with the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. The son of man is not coming to be served as a conquering king rendering judgment, but as a servant of God who will suffer on behalf of many. Isaiah 53 describes the suffering of the servant of the Lord. The identity of that servant was open to interpretation for Jews in the first century. In Acts 8:30-35 the Ethiopian eunuch asks Philip whether the Isaiah 53 referred to the prophet himself or someone else.

The word ransom also evokes several passages in the Old Testament. In Psalm 49:7–9, “no man can ransom another, or give to God the price of his life.” The noun λύτρον and the verb λυτρόω refer to “deliverance by payment, is used in non-biblical Greek primarily of the manumission of slaves and release of prisoners of war” (Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:95).

The word is translated either “ransom” or “redeem.” In English, a ransom is a price paid to obtain the release of someone who has been kidnapped (mostly in movies!) But the word in the Hebrew Bible, the Septuagint and the New Testament has the sense of a price paid to obtain a slave, to set them free from their old master and become the possession of a new master.

In Exodus 6:6 the word is sued in the context of God rescuing his people out of their slavery in Egypt, “I will redeem (translating גאל) you with an outstretched arm and with great acts of judgment.” The Hebrew verb as the sense of reclaiming something as one’s own (in this case, Israel is God’s people enslaved by the Egyptians, the Exodus events reclaim them as his own people).  Similarly, Exodus 15:13 God has redeemed his people because of his steadfast love.  In Romans 6:15-18 Paul uses the metaphor of slavery to describe salvation, we were once slaves obedient to a master (sin), but we have been set free from that service and now are slaves to righteousness.

Many in Second Temple Period Judaism thought Messiah will redeem Israel. Luke 24:21, the two disciples on the road to Emmaus thought Jesus was about to “redeem Israel.” In 1 Maccabees, Judas prays before the battle at Emmaus, evoking the memory of God rescuing his people from Egypt and asking God to act favorably and “crush out enemies” so that “Then all the Gentiles will know that there is one who redeems and saves Israel” (1 Macc 4:11). Psalms of Solomon 8:30 asks the Lord to “turn your mercy upon us and be compassionate” (v. 27) so that the Gentiles do not “devour them as if there were no redeemer.”  Psalms of Solomon 9:1 looks back to the Exodus events as when the Lord redeemed them.

Psalms of Solomon 8:30 Do not neglect us, Our God, lest the gentiles devour us as if there were no redeemer.

Psalms of Solomon 9:1 When Israel was taken into exile to a foreign country, when they neglected the Lord, who had redeemed them

Matthew 20:28 anticipates what Jesus is about to do as he arrives in Jerusalem. Although his disciples and the crowds are expecting a messiah who conquers, he will be the suffering servant who defeats the real enemy of humanity, sin and death.

When the mother of James and John asks for her sons to sit on Jesus’s right and left side when the kingdom comes, Jesus says they are not able to “drink the cup” he is about to drink from (Matt 20:22). More or less, Jesus tells the mother and the two sons (the verbs are all second plural) do not know what they are asking!

“Drinking the cup” is a clear reference to the suffering from the three passion predictions (20:17-19). Drinking a cup is a common metaphor for the wrath of God in the Old Testament (Jer 25:15-16; Psalm 75:8; Isaiah 51:17-23; PsSol 8:14).

Isaiah 51:18, 22(ESV) Wake yourself, wake yourself, stand up, O Jerusalem, you who have drunk from the hand of the Lord the cup of his wrath, who have drunk to the dregs the bowl, the cup of staggering. 22 Thus says your Lord, the Lord, your God who pleads the cause of his people: “Behold, I have taken from your hand the cup of staggering; the bowl of my wrath you shall drink no more.

Psalms of Solomon 8:14 Because of this God mixed them (a drink) of a wavering spirit, and gave them a cup of undiluted wine to make them drunk.

When Jesus prays in the Garden of Gethsemane he asks for the “cup he is about to drink” to be taken from him, an indication he is about to face the wrath of God as he punishes sin.

James and John claim they can suffer and die along with Jesus (20:22b). This bold assertion is like Peter’s claim at the last supper that he is able to suffer and die with Jesus (Matthew 26:33). However, when the time comes to suffer and die with Jesus, James and John fall asleep along with Peter. The “sons of Zebedee can do nothing but sleep while Jesus wrestles with drinking his ποτήριον” (Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:89). That they think they can suffer in the same way Jesus will indicates they do not really understand what will happen when they arrive in Jerusalem.

In response, Jesus predicts James and John will “drink that cup,” but as for seating in the kingdom of heaven, that is prepared by the Father (20:23). James is the first martyr. He is the first of the disciples to be executed for his faith (Acts 12:1). James was beheaded by Herod Agrippa I (not to be confused with Herod Agrippa II in Acts 26). John, on the other hand, lived a very long life, probably into the 90s A.D. It is possible he was quite young during the ministry of Jesus, maybe even a young teen, and lived a long life, often persecuted for his faith (see Ireneaus, Adv. Haer, 2.22).

The reaction of the other disciples: They were indignant! (20:24). It is possible their mother made this request in public, but most think they took Jesus aside to ask him in private. The verb ἀγανακτέω is to be angry at “what is assumed to be wrong” (BDAG); to “be vexed” (BrillDAG; the word is used in medical texts for literal irritation). Later in Matthew the Pharisees will be indignant when the disciples are shouting “hosanna” as Jesus rides the donkey into Jerusalem (21:15). The was used for the response of a disciple who thinks the woman who anoints Jesus in Bethany is wasting money which could have been given to the poor (Matt 26:8).

This bold request from the mother of the sons of Zebedee indicates these two inner circle disciples have not fully understood Jesus’s predictions that he is going to suffer and die in Jerusalem. Although they fully understand Jesus is the Messiah, they do not yet understand the messiah’s mission is to serve as “a ransom for many.”