Answering Unreasonable Reason (Pt 1)

(A continuation in no particular order from this post)

[Sub-disclaimer: I haven't taken as long of a time as I probably should in researching the historical context, nor have I compared my thoughts and ideas with those of biblical scholars. I welcome comments and questions and will include them in edits of this post when asked and addressed.]

The first item I navigated to in this article was "Passion Week: Jesus’ Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem with Animals"

The article claims:

"Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem had to adhere to prophecy, but which one?
Mark 11:2-7, Luke 19:30-35 - Following Jesus’ instructions, the disciples bring him one animal
Matthew 21:2-6 - Following Jesus’ instructions, the disciples bring him two animals
John 12:14 - Jesus doesn’t instruct the disciples at all and gets a single animal himself
Mark 11:7, Luke 19:35, John 12:14 - Jesus rides a single animal when entering Jerusalem
Matthew 21:7 - Jesus rides two animals at the same time"

Here are links to the passages mentioned via BibleGateway.com. 

One must investigate further why each author composed seemingly different information and as mentioned in the disclaimer in the previous post, this is best by studying the text and meeting with those who study daily.

Look at the text: (extremely paraphrased and summarized)

Mk 11:2-7 and Lk 19:30-35 basically say the same thing: ...you will find a colt tied... ...Untie it and bring it...

Mt 21:2-6 ...you will find a donkey tied, and a colt with her. Untie them and bring them to me...

Jn 12:14 ...Jesus found a young donkey and sat on it...

Mk 11:7; Lk 19:35 ...and he sat on it.; they set Jesus on it.

I too, would have some objections to the seemingly conflicting statements; however, one should always keep in mind that it is always healthy to ask questions, especially in regards to text, extra-especially in regards to text that one should put his or her faith in as the Word of God. So, when reading the Bible, it is a good thing to investigate the text instead of simply "blindly believing" what it says. Personally, I think if someone claims to have blind faith in regards to the Bible, I think they may not have actually read the Bible and would be susceptible to believing anything said for or against the Bible. This is not to say we shouldn't accept the Bible for what it says, but we should have good reason why we accept what is said in the Bible.

I am no animal expert, let alone have any informed opinion on donkeys; however, I would think that a colt on which no one has ever ridden would be extremely difficult to take anywhere, as it would probably be frightened. Consider whoever may have owned the foal and jenny (mother donkey); more than likely, the colt was getting close in age or at age to sell or train to carry supplies. If complete strangers came to such a young animal, accustomed to being with its mother, they would have a hard time coaxing the animal to come with them. So, it would be easier to take the mother (older and use to strangers) in order to lead the colt. I would actually throw in, "But stealing is against the 10 commandments and Jesus basically says go take something that doesn't belong to them." However, I would respond that Jesus told them what to say when someone questioned what they were doing, which the people responded as Jesus said they would.

Now, why did the different authors include different perspectives of the same event? That would be a mystery no one can answer; however, would it be odd to have the exact same text from 4 different authors, especially in the same collection of writings (book/books)? I don't mean to sound like I am deflecting, so I will address this point with a bit a reasoning. I would have to study the dialect and phraseology; but, I would speculate, the different perspectives and way of speaking would have something to do with the way the text is presented. One person's "motorcycle" could be another's "bike" and yet another's cycle. Riding in a parade is the same, yet not the same, as riding on a float in a parade or riding a horse in a parade.

Why did John disregard the other gospel's accounts of the disciples fetching the donkey(s)? If you read John's Gospel, he focuses on the love aspect of Christ and the fact that Jesus is God. He probably didn't care to include specific details of the donkey(s); however, he did include the fact that Jesus rode in on the donkey(s) in fulfillment of the scriptures.

What is the importance of this information? The number of donkeys? Who got them? How many did he sit and ride in on?

The collection of text points to one collective point (sorry if that sounds redundant, I'm tired):

Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey in fulfillment of the scriptures.