John 12:12-19

Jesus Subverts a Triumphal March into Jerusalem

John 12:12-19     The King of Israel

It was not unusual for the city’s population to treble on the occasion of the great festivals. People with little else to do would be milling about in the city. Many would be camping on the near side of the Mount of Olives between Bethany and the city. The narrative had already made the observation that Bethany was only two miles from Jerusalem [11:18].

The entry took place on the next day after the Bethany anointing, which, in turn, had happened six days before Passover [12:1], a Sabbath. The day, then, was Sunday.

This Gospel was the only one to mention specifically palm branches. The term was significant. The procession of crowds waving palm branches recalled the triumphant return of the Maccabee leader to Jerusalem two centuries earlier (after the death of the Syrian tyrant Antiochus), and the purification of the temple. The occasion was commemorated annually at the Feast of Dedication. The Second Book of Maccabees recorded the event:

In time, palm branches came to be seen as a nationalist symbol. Effectively, the crowd’s gesture was an acclamation of Jesus as a political Christ/Messiah/King.

The cry of the crowd echoed a verse from a royal Psalm of thanksgiving, composed to accompany the liturgical celebrating the return of a triumphant king to the Temple:

To accentuate even further the political intent, the crowd added their own acclamation: King of Israel!

Their response echoed that of the crowd of five thousand whom Jesus had fed on the far side of the Jordan. On that occasion, they were about to come and take him by force to make him king [6:15]. Perhaps, some of the same crowd were present on both occasions.

Triumph Subverted

On the former occasion when the crowd had sought to make Jesus king, he had withdrawn to the mountain by himself [6:15]. Withdrawal was impossible this time. Instead, he made a symbolic response that sought to interpret his sense of kingship: he found a young donkey and sat on it. There would have been no shortage of donkeys at hand, as they were regularly used to carry goods and people. The gesture may have disconcerted the crowd, but it could well be questioned whether anyone saw the point of his unexpected behaviour at the time.

The author needed to explain the meaning of the gesture to his readers, so he proceeded to situate it clearly within the context of the Hebrew Scriptures.

The quotation was a composite of a number of verses. 

A King Sitting on a Donkey

The first line was taken from the prophet Zephaniah who looked forward to the final saving intervention of God and the restoration of a faithful remnant of Israel. Jesus would be king in the sense that, with him, God would be in their midst:

As well, according to that same vision of Zephaniah, Israel’s restoration would happen within a context of universal renewal:

The remainder of the quotation was taken from a second prophet, Zechariah:

Though the addition was not explicitly quoted, the prophecy continued, putting the future king’s entry within the context of universal, peaceful dominion:

Given that the disciples did not understand Jesus’ gesture, it is highly unlikely that the crowds would have done so. Apparently, the matter did not worry the author, who was more concerned that his own community of disciples read the incident correctly. He wanted them to know that Jesus really was the Christ/Messiah, the Son of God, but he wanted them to be unmistakably clear that Jesus was king of a totally different kind (as he would later say to Pilate: My kingdom is not from this world ... my kingdom is not from here [18:36]). Jesus’ way was that of humility and peaceful non-violence, and his reign would be universal, not nationalistic.

The author’s comment repeated what he had noted earlier in the narrative, after Jesus had symbolically shut down all activity in the Temple. On that occasion he wrote: When he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the scripture and the word that Jesus said [2:22]. 

In referring to the process by which the disciples came to realisation, the author made three important points:

• The key to understanding Jesus’ identity and making sense of the details of his historical life was the insight enabled by the final glorification of his death and resurrection. It was his death and resurrection that clearly revealed, to all with eyes to see, the depth and the commitment of the love that motivated Jesus throughout his whole life.

• The way to understanding was through remembering (a practice with which they were already familiar because of their Jewish background with its regular liturgical celebrations and festivals, as well as its constant synagogue discussions).

• Their remembering within the Christian community would happen under the influence of the Spirit of Jesus as they reflected on the details of Jesus’ life. Their understanding would deepen through the light shed by their meditating on their Hebrew Scriptures – these things had been written about him.

The Gospel text was its own testimony to the validity of the process.

Jesus as King and Lord

The behaviour of the crowd was, indeed, dangerous. Caiaphas had been right in seeing the possibility that Jesus’ popularity might persuade Rome to intervene. Though Jesus would later clarify the point that his kingship was not political or militarist, it would, however, have profound implications for empires and kingdoms everywhere. Jesus’ universal kingship would relativise all kingdoms. No longer would their power be absolute. All kingships would be subject to the values embodied in the reign of Jesus: recognition of the transcendence of God, justice for all, compassion for the needy, love without exception and non-violence in all relationships and social interactions.

Though the narrative had largely concentrated on the problems facing Christian believers as they related to their Jewish brothers and sisters, the community lived within the wider ambit of the Roman Empire. Their claim that Jesus was Lord was a disturbingly dangerous claim to make, and was already the cause of sporadic persecution.

The text distinguished two sections in the crowd: those who had witnessed the raising of Lazarus and those who had heard of it second hand. For the evangelist, the raising of Lazarus was a critical factor in hastening Jesus’ death.

The Pharisees’ comment carried a note of irony. By referring to the world, they may have intuited Jesus’ universalist meaning, or their remark may simply have indicated the size of the crowd. As the narrative would immediately indicate, Jesus’ action would mark the beginning of a new opening of saving activity to the wider Greek world.

Next >> John 12:20-36