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-Azariye, 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, [5042] while at others it is described as, for ecclesiastical purposes, part of the City itself. [5043] 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. [5044] And this may explain the peculiar reference, in the Synoptic Gospels, to Bethphage (St. Matthew), and again to Bethphage and Bethany.' [5045] For, St. Matthew and St. Mark relate Christ's brief stay at Bethany and His anointing by Mary not in chronological order, [5046] but introduce it at a later period, as it were, in contrast to the betrayal of Judas. [5047] 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 John [5048] - 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 Jehovah [5049] - 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' [5050] 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 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.' [5051] With these went also a number of Pharisees,' their hearts filled with bitterest thoughts of jealousy and hatred. [5052] And, as we shall presently see, it is of great importance to keep in mind this composition of the multitude.'