Why the Triumphal Entry Matters Politically Without Reducing Jesus to Politics
Primary texts: Matthew 21:1–11; Mark 11:1–11; Luke 19:28–44; John 12:12–19
Key Old Testament texts: Zechariah 9:9; 1 Kings 1:32–40; 2 Kings 9:13
1) Aim of the series
This series reads familiar Gospel scenes with historical realism: Judea in the first century was not a “religion-only” environment. It was a world of empire, public order, competing authorities, and symbolic claims. The question is not whether the Triumphal Entry had political implications, but what kind—and how Jesus redefines kingship rather than abandoning it. (Wright, 1996; Carter, 2006). (spckpublishing.co.uk)
2) Clarifying terms: what “political” means here
In this context, “political” does not mean party politics or modern ideologies. It means questions of:
- authority (who has the right to rule),
- public loyalty (who is acclaimed as “king”),
- order and stability (especially at Passover),
- jurisdiction (who can arrest, try, and execute).
That is precisely the world the Gospels describe: Rome governs Judea; Herodian rulers govern neighbouring districts; the high priestly establishment administers Temple life and internal adjudication, yet depends upon Roman approval for capital sentencing. (Bond, 1998; Goodman, 2007). (Cambridge University Press & Assessment)
3) The political map behind the text (why Jerusalem is “high risk”)
During Jesus’ ministry and death, Jerusalem was in the Roman province of Judaea under a prefect/governor (Pilate in AD 26–36). (Bond, 1998). (Cambridge University Press & Assessment)
That matters because:
- The Temple leadership held significant local authority, but Rome held the ultimate coercive power, including crucifixion.
- Passover brought mass crowds and heightened liberation memory; Roman leaders prioritised preventing disorder. (Goodman, 2007). (Internet Archive)
So when Jesus enters Jerusalem publicly and is acclaimed with royal language, it lands inside a charged administrative reality—not merely a devotional moment.
4) The Triumphal Entry as a deliberate “sign-act”
The entry is not accidental travel logistics; it is staged symbolism.
a) The donkey signals kingship—of a particular kind
Matthew explicitly ties the donkey to Zechariah 9:9: “your king comes… gentle… riding on a donkey.” That is a kingship text. The point is not that Jesus rejects kingship, but that he defines it as peaceable and restorative, not militarised conquest.
b) The crowd’s actions are royal in tone
Across the accounts, the crowd’s acclamation and gestures operate like a public recognition event. Even if expectations varied within the crowd, the symbolism is kingly: homage on the road; celebratory branches; messianic titles. (Borg and Crossan, 2006; Wright, 1996). (AbeBooks UK)
c) This inevitably presses the question of rival authority
Rome did not need Jesus to be raising an army for the symbolism to be sensitive. In a province managed for stability, public royal acclamation during Passover is the kind of thing authorities monitor carefully—especially when the Temple aristocracy fears Roman reprisal and loss of position. (Bond, 1998; Goodman, 2007). (Cambridge University Press & Assessment)
5) Preaching thesis for Episode 1
Big idea: Jesus enters as King—yet he exposes and overturns the world’s assumptions about what a king is.
Three preaching movements (sermon-ready):
- The world’s model: power as display, coercion, and fear-management.
- Jesus’ model: authority expressed through humility, truth, and peaceable courage.
- Our test: which “kingship logic” shapes our lives—domination or self-giving love?
A helpful scholarly framing is that the Gospels can critique imperial assumptions while still remaining distinct from zealot violence: Jesus’ kingdom confronts empire, but not by becoming an empire. (Carter, 2001; Horsley, 2003). (Bloomsbury)
6) Contemporary applications (grounded, not forced)
- Leadership in churches: If Jesus’ kingship is legitimate yet gentle, then spiritual authority cannot be sustained by manipulation, celebrity, or control.
- Public witness: Peace is not passivity. The donkey is not retreat; it is a public declaration of a different reign.
- Personal discipleship: Many believers want Jesus as “rescuer” without Jesus as “king”. The entry presses a decision: will I receive his rule on his terms?
7) Reflection and meditation (5 minutes)
Read slowly: Zechariah 9:9; Matthew 21:5–9.
- Where am I tempted to seek a “war-horse” solution—force, pressure, image, leverage?
- What would a “donkey-shaped” obedience look like this week—humble, clear, courageous, peaceable?
- Where do I need to realign my idea of authority to Jesus’ pattern?
References
Bond, H.K. (1998) Pontius Pilate in History and Interpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Cambridge University Press & Assessment)
Borg, M.J. and Crossan, J.D. (2006) The Last Week: A Day-by-Day Account of Jesus’s Final Week in Jerusalem. New York: HarperOne. (AbeBooks UK)
Carter, W. (2001) Matthew and Empire: Initial Explorations. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International. (Bloomsbury)
Carter, W. (2006) The Roman Empire and the New Testament: An Essential Guide. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press. (Amazon)
Goodman, M. (2007) Rome and Jerusalem: The Clash of Ancient Civilizations. London: Allen Lane. (Internet Archive)
Horsley, R.A. (2003) Jesus and Empire: The Kingdom of God and the New World Disorder. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press. (Google Books)
Wright, N.T. (1996) Jesus and the Victory of God. London: SPCK. (spckpublishing.co.uk)