«Home

How Did Jesus Get Into Jerusalem: On One Or Two Donkeys?

Matthew 21:1 - 9 paints the following scene:

Now when they drew near Jerusalem, and came to Bethphage, at the Mount of Olives, then Jesus sent two disciples, saying to them, “Go into the village opposite you, and immediately you will find a donkey tied, and a colt with her. Loose them and bring them to Me. And if anyone says anything to you, you shall say, ‘The Lord has need of them,’ and immediately he will send them.” All this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying: “Tell the daughter of Zion, ‘Behold, your King is coming to you, lowly, and sitting on a donkey, a colt, the foal of a donkey.’ ” So the disciples went and did as Jesus commanded them. They brought the donkey and the colt, laid their clothes on them, and set Him on them. And a very great multitude spread their clothes on the road; others cut down branches from the trees and spread them on the road. Then the multitudes who went before and those who followed cried out, saying: “Hosanna to the Son of David! ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!’ Hosanna in the highest!”

Now consider the following;

Was Jesus riding one or both animals?

Do you know why this story appears at all in Matthew? It there a chance Matthew was simply setting the scene up so that it looked like the fulfillment of prophecy but was a bit careless with his facts?

Avatar
Newbie
31 answers

Last i checked none of the gospel writers claim that Christ rode both the colt and Bottom TOGETHER AT ONCE.

pretty clever excuses i see

u've been trying to smuggle your own words into the bible to justify your claims of contradictions.

really what words did i smuggle.

For people who claim God does not exist, you spend an unhealthy amount of your time talking about Him.

it's an hobby not a profession.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Last i checked none of the gospel writers claim that Christ rode both the colt and Bottom TOGETHER AT ONCE.

u've been trying to smuggle ur own words into the bible to justify ur claims of contradictions.

what is much more sad is ur obsession with biblical "contradictions" . . . one would think ur life depended on proving the bible wrong.

For pple who claim God does not exist, you spend an unhealthy amount of ur time talking about Him.

0
Avatar
Newbie

thou hypocrite, where did u read that He sat on BOTH OF THEM?

the last time i checked THEM signified plural.

i've been here all day, all i have seen is lies, inconsistencies, dribbling around your own feet and a profound inability to engage your sense of reasoning.

oh really, i'd think u be man enough to point out the lies or inconsistencies.

I tell u what fellaz! If the whole idea of christianity by any crazy chance turns out to be a hoax,i would still believe it,because nuthin else offers more meaning to mankind,not even d placebos so-called free thinkers profer as the panacea 4 life's ills!

this is just sad

0
Avatar
Newbie

@Wordsmith

Never knew d Religion thread was dis much fun. With d likes of therationa,dat babalawo dude,KAG,and d rest of em still tryna comprehend biblical truths using logic,i know am bound to get a few laffs b4 i say my prayers 4 d nite!

I tell u what fellaz! If the whole idea of christianity by any crazy chance turns out to be a hoax,i wud still believe it,coz nuthin else offers more meaning to mankind,not even d placebos so-called free thinkers profer as the panacea 4 life's ills!

IF THERE WERE NO CHRIST (GOD FORBID),THERE WOULD'Ve BEEN A NEED TO CREATE ONE!

0
Avatar
Newbie

thou hypocrite, where did u read that He sat on BOTH OF THEM?

i've been here all day, all i have seen is lies, inconsistencies, dribbling around ur own feet and a profound inability to engage ur sense of reasoning.

0
Avatar
Newbie

@ Rapsody,

mayne, you haven't seen the half of it yet! This two clowns remind me of the good ol' days of the slow Kuns and the good ol' Revvin Rev. They had the dumbest arguments then.

Frag it, you could even equate bolajibaok with therationa and bawomol!!

0
Avatar
Newbie

there is no dodging any contradiction. . . it is a matter of making sense. Can you ride two animals of differing sizes AT THE SAME TIME?

unlike white jesus, i do not possess such mystical powers so why ask me??

They brought the donkey and the colt, laid their clothes on them, and set Him on them

why was jesus sitting on both of them. for fun??

Again we see the deciet and hypocrisy that is the hallmark of athiests like you . . . were did any of the gospels tell you that Jesus "sat on BOTH OF THEM"?

what hypocrisy?? i posted the contradictory thread and u guys are hardly anywhere to be found

0
Avatar
Newbie

there is no dodging any contradiction. . . it is a matter of making sense. Can you ride two animals of differing sizes AT THE SAME TIME?

This passage isnt confusing except to those who are desperate to read confusion into it . . .

If a horse owner told his wife he rode his hors[b]es[/b] to the market does that mean he rode ALL 50 horses (for example) AT ONCE?

Again we see the deciet and hypocrisy that is the hallmark of athiests like you . . . were did any of the gospels tell you that Jesus "sat on BOTH OF THEM"?

0
Avatar
Newbie

Dont you think such a feat would have warranted special mention? It takes a miracle to ride an Bottom and a much smaller colt AT THE SAME TIME don't you think?

don't u think there's a possibility such event may not have been recorded. again the passage said jesus sat on both of them. this is just one of the few confusing passages in the bible. y are u guys dodging the contradiction thread??

0
Avatar
Newbie

My intention was not to put up a defence but to expose you for your inability to think outside your preconcieved notions of the bible being riddled with confusion and errors.

0
Avatar
Newbie

(Matthew 21:2-7) - "Go into the village opposite you, and immediately you will find a donkey tied there and a colt with her; untie them, and bring them to Me. “And if anyone says something to you, you shall say, ‘The Lord has need of them,’ and immediately he will send them.”

There is no contradiction.

Matthew 21:2-7 tells us that there was both a donkey and a colt (a colt is a young donkey).

Mark and Luke focus on the colt only and mention that no one had ever sat upon it.

Mark and Luke are focusing on this detail while Matthew focuses on the prophetic fulfillment (Matthew 21:4-5).

Logically, if there are two animals, then there is also, at least, one animal. To say there was one does not mean there weren't two. This is not a verbal game. It is an issue of logic.

The fact that Mark and Luke mention one colt does not mean there is a contradiction anymore than saying that Frank and Joe came to my house last night but today I tell a friend about what Joe said last night and don't mention Frank.

[i]Zechariah 9:9 [/i]is the scripture that Matthew refers to. It says, "Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion! Shout in triumph, O daughter of Jerusalem! Behold, your king is coming to you; he is just and endowed with salvation, humble, and mounted on a donkey, even on a colt, the foal of a donkey."

We can see that Matthew is simply including both animals as was prophesied in Zechariah.

Why would both be needed if Jesus only rode one into Jerusalem? The simple answer is that the colt was young and still attached to the mother, and vice versa. They would travel together as a mother and offspring naturally would among many animal species.

0
Avatar
Newbie

I give up. I have seen far better christian apologetical defenses to this than I have seen from you. checkout http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/595, you might learn a few.

0
Avatar
Newbie

its not about Matthew being wrong but about you two hypocrites struggling desperately to read errors into his gospel.

that Matthew mentioned "them" does not mean he wanted to say that Christ rode on both animals at ONCE.

you can think rationally, excercise ur brain.

A colt is much smaller than an Bottom . . . it would take a feat of genius for a man to ride 2 animals of different sizes at once.

i know . . . this two dudes like to make a lot of inconsequential noise. For once i decided to waste a bit of time pushing their own "questions" up their noses.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Dude, seriously there's no need answering these two. . .it's a waste of time. . .heck, cooking a pot of beans ala ewa goin is more beneficial. . .

0
Avatar
Newbie

So which version is wrong? Matt's?

and set Him on them. While it does not say he rode both, He was set on both(THEM). If you do not accept the version of events as narrated in Matt as plausible, the Matt is wrong. PERIOD.

0
Avatar
Newbie

Dont you think such a feat would have warranted special mention? It takes a miracle to ride an Bottom and a much smaller colt AT THE SAME TIME dont you think?

I expect you to not just be able to ask questions but to be able to think things through urself. Can you ride an Bottom and a smaller colt at the same time?

0
Avatar
Newbie

It says in the bible (Matt) that He rode on THEM

They brought the donkey and the colt, laid their clothes on them, and set Him on them

0
Avatar
Newbie

because neither of the gospel writers indicated that he rode BOTH AT ONCE.

but isn't it possible that a man with infinite powers such as jesus rode both at once?? what makesu think the gospel of mark and john are exact

0
Avatar
Newbie

That they put a cloak on both of them does not mean he rode both at once

and how do u know this.

0
Avatar
Newbie

That they put a cloak on both of them does not mean he rode both at once.

0
Avatar
Newbie

an Bottom is different from a colt/young Bottom. the bible writers knew what they meant.

why put a cloak on both of them for jesus to ride??

0
Avatar
Newbie

if you looked at a dictionary u wouldnt be asking such a question.

an Bottom is different from a colt/young Bottom. the bible writers knew what they meant.

0
Avatar
Newbie

because neither of the gospel writers indicated that he rode BOTH AT ONCE.

0
Avatar
Newbie

a colt is a young Bottom . . . you're begining to sound desperate.

please enlighten me, how do u know a colt is a young Bottom??

Jesus commanded them And brought the Bottom, and the colt, and put on them their clothes

the colt and Bottom are differentiated here.

0
Avatar
Newbie

a colt is defined as a young male horse under the age of 4 . . . you're begining to sound desperate.

0
Avatar
Newbie

u're confused. If i ask that you get me two cars, does that mean i am driving both at once?

no jesus rode both the colt and the Bottom like a medieval love-vendor

Mark 11:7

And they brought the colt to Jesus, and cast their garments on him; and he sat upon him.

John 12:14

And Jesus, when he had found a young Bottom, sat thereon.

so which one is it??

0
Avatar
Newbie

u're confused. If i ask that you get me two cars, does that mean i am driving both at once?

0
Avatar
Newbie

there is nothing to suggest that Christ rode BOTH the Bottom and the colt AT THE SAME TIME.

then y insert it into the bible then. was Matthew inspired by the devil??

0
Avatar
Newbie

the opening post is not particularly sane . . . i mean you have to prove to me that it is possible to ride an Bottom and a colt AT THE SAME TIME before i even decide to counter it.

What say you?

0
Avatar
Newbie

you are no longer borderline crazy, this is full blown insanity! making up controversies where there is none. You are obsessed and need to get something checked!

why don't u just admit, u are a blind sheep and have nothing to counter the opening post.

0
Avatar
Newbie

therationalist . . . why dont you try riding two horses at once then come tell us how nice the experience was.

0
Avatar
Newbie
Your answer
Add image

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.