Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Matthew 21:1 - 21:1
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Mat_21:1. Comp. Mar_11:1 ff.; Luk_19:29 ff. Καὶ ἦλθον εἰς Βμθφαγῆ ] by way of giving greater precision to the foregoing ἤγγισαν εἰς Ἱερος . They had come towards Bethphage; that is, as the connection shows (Mat_21:2), they had not actually entered the village, but were close upon it, so that it lay right before them; comp. on Joh_4:5. Hard by them (“in latere montis Oliveti,” Jerome) was the neighbouring village of Bethany (Mat_21:17), about which, however, and its position with reference to Bethphage (Robinson, Pal. II. p. 312), nothing more precise can now be said. Consequently there is no divergence from Mark and Luke, so that it is unnecessary to understand εἰς , versus, after ἦλθον (Fritzsche), which is distinct from, and more definite than, ἤγγισαν .
Of Bethphage, áÌÅéú ôÌÇàðÅé , house of figs, no trace remains (Robinson, as above). It is not once mentioned in the Old Testament, though frequently in the Talmud. Buxtorf, p. 1691; Hug, Einl. I. p. 18.
τότε ] an important juncture. “Non prius; vectura mysterii plena,” Bengel. To any one travelling from Jericho, the holy city would be in full view at Bethphage (not at Bethany). And Jesus makes due arrangements for the entry; it is not something done simply to gratify the enthusiastic wishes of those about Him (Neander, de Wette, Weizsäcker); comp. Keim, III. p. 85 f.
REMARK.
The stay of Jesus at Bethany, recorded by John (Mat_12:1 ff.), does not admit of being inserted into the account given by the Synoptists (in answer to Ebrard, Wichelh. Komment. über d. Leidensgesch. p. 149; Lichtenstein); we should rather say that these latter expressly forbid the view that the night had been passed at Bethany, all the more that they introduce the anointing (Mat_26:6 ff.; Mar_14:3 ff.), and consequently the stay of Jesus at this village after the triumphal entry, and that not merely in the order of their narrative, but also in the order of events (Mat_26:2; Mar_14:1). This likewise in answer to Wieseler, p. 391 f.
The tradition, to the effect that the triumphal entry took place on the Sunday (Palmarum), is in no way inconsistent with the synoptic narrative itself, and agrees at the same time with Joh_12:1; Joh_12:12, inasmuch as it would appear from this evangelist that the day on which Jesus arrived at Bethany was most probably the 8th of Nisan, which, however, according to John’s representation, must have been Saturday (see note on Joh_12:1). Still, as regards the dates of the passion week, there remains this fundamental divergence, that, according to the Synoptists, the Friday on which Jesus died was the 15th, while according to John (see note on Joh_18:28) it was the 14th of Nisan; and further, that Joh_12:12 represents Jesus as having passed the night at Bethany previous to His triumphal entry, while according to the synoptical account He appears to have gone at once from Jericho to Jerusalem. In any case, the most authentic view of this matter is that of John, on whose authority, therefore, must rest the tradition that Sunday was the day on which Christ rode into the city.