Romans 13

The Not So Triumphal Entry

It was the week leading up to Passover and preparations were already well underway. The city of Jerusalem was swarming with people. This was one of three annual feasts where Jews from across the world would come to Jerusalem to remember God’s faithfulness to his people. These feasts were a time of joy, but they were also a time of trepidation.

Many Zealots were among the crowds, violent freedom fighters who sought to overthrow the Romans. They used the feasts to stage political protests, and these would often lead to deadly riots. They reasoned that Passover in particular was supposed to celebrate the liberation of Israel from Egypt, and it was a fitting time to fight for liberation from Rome. In light of this, it is not surprising that tensions were high during Passover. Large contingents of soldiers would be sent in for these days, an ever-present reminder of the terrifying power of the Romans.

PASSOVER SPELT OUT IN SCRABBLE BLOCKS

The Sunday before Passover was particularly special because this was the day Moses appointed for choosing the lamb that would be slain for the family (Exodus 12.3).

The lamb had to be completely spotless, and so it was that thousands of Jews spent the day searching for the perfect lamb. They knew God would only bless them if they were obedient to his commands.

Just outside Jerusalem, at the Mount of Olives, Jesus and his disciples are preparing to enter the city to choose their lamb. We pick up the story in Luke 19.

When he drew near to Bethphage and Bethany, at the mount that is called Olivet, he sent two of the disciples, saying, “Go into the village in front of you, where on entering you will find a colt tied, on which no one has ever yet sat. Untie it and bring it here. If anyone asks you, ‘Why are you untying it?’ you shall say this: ‘The Lord has need of it.’” So those who were sent went away and found it just as he had told them. And as they were untying the colt, its owners said to them, “Why are you untying the colt?” And they said, “The Lord has need of it.” And they brought it to Jesus, and throwing their cloaks on the colt, they set Jesus on it. And as he rode along, they spread their cloaks on the road.

Luke 19.29-36

In order to fully understand this story it’s important to have an understanding of the cultural context in which it takes place. To begin, Jesus was a Jewish Rabbi, and he spent much of his time teaching devout Jews from their Scriptures, which they called Tanakh (we call it the Old Testament). The Jewish people at this time were very religious and they knew their text very well. Many of them had large sections of it memorized and they would often recite the text to make a theological point or teaching.

Hebrew text under magnifine glass

One of the teaching techniques that was used in this time was called “Remez”, which in Hebrew means “hint” or “clue”. If a teacher wanted to make a point using a passage of Scripture they would allude (hint) to the passage either by performing an action it describes or by quoting a line from it.

The disciples, being dutiful students, would pick up on the clue and they would call to mind the rest of the passage. Often the teacher’s point would be contained in the verse just before or just after his hint. Thus, in order to fully understand the teacher’s message, you need to know the context of the passage they are referencing. Jesus uses this technique much more than we realize. Many times we simply don’t know the Bible well enough to pick up on all the subtle references. Fortunately, the disciples did.

This took place to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet, saying,

‘Say to the daughter of Zion, ‘Behold, your king is coming to you, humble, and mounted on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a beast of burden.’

Matthew 21.4-5

Matthew points out that Jesus is giving us a clue about what he was doing. By riding into Jerusalem on a colt, Jesus was acting out the text of Zechariah 9. This is significant for a number of reasons. First, Jesus is saying that he is the king of Israel. He is the long-awaited messiah that will bring salvation to the Jewish people.

But there’s something more. Normally one would expect a king to ride into a city on a dazzling warhorse (Jeremiah 17.25). Instead, Jesus chose to enter on a donkey. At first glance, one may be tempted to think that the donkey represented his humility, but this is unlikely because only wealthy people had donkeys in the time of Jesus. However, the donkey is still significant for another reason.

donkey carying load

In the ancient near east, there was a custom that kings would ride into town on a horse if they intended to wage war but they would ride on a donkey if they came in peace.

Throughout the Bible, horses are almost exclusively used for military purposes (Exodus 15.19, Psalm 33.17, Psalm 76.6, Psalm 147.10, Proverbs 21.31, Jeremiah 8.6, Jeremiah 51.21, Zechariah 10.3, Revelation 6.4) while donkeys are often used for peaceful travel (Judges 10.4, Judges 12.14, 2 Samuel 17.23, 2 Samuel 19.26).

This practice gave rise to the idea that the donkey was an animal of peace while the horse was an animal of war. Thus, if Jesus had intended to arrive as a conquering king he most certainly would have ridden a horse.

It is also notable that Jesus chose not to wear any royal robes or armor. Surely if he wanted to “look the part” this would have been a good time to show off his magnificence. Instead, Jesus wore his normal clothes and rode on a very normal donkey. Rather than coming to wage war, Jesus alludes to Zechariah to emphasize that his kingdom will be a kingdom of peace. The next verse underscores this idea.

I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim and the war horse from Jerusalem; and the battle bow shall be cut off, and he shall speak peace to the nations; his rule shall be from sea to sea, and from the River to the ends of the earth.

Zechariah 9.10

Interestingly, Zechariah 9 is itself an allusion to 1 Kings 1. In that chapter, we read of Solomon, the son of David, ridding into Gihon on a donkey to be anointed as king (1 Kings 1.38). Solomon (whose name means peace) would go on to establish the most peaceful and prosperous reign Israel had ever experienced, a reign that came to characterize people’s expectations of the messiah.

From these texts, we can get an understanding of Jesus’ message. He enters Jerusalem as the “son of David” who has come to bring peace, not with a warhorse, but with a simple donkey. While he does not shy away from proclaiming himself as their king, he is showing them that his kingdom will not establish peace through violence. It will not be built with horses and bloodshed.

Let’s follow the story a little further.

As he was drawing near – already on the way down the Mount of Olives – the whole multitude of his disciples began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice for all the mighty works that they had seen,

Luke 19.37

The crowd followed because of the works they had seen, as John tells us.

The crowd that had been with him when he called Lazarus out of the tomb and raised him from the dead continued to bear witness. The reason why the crowd went to meet him was that they heard he had done this sign.

John 12.17-18

The crowd heard that Jesus had just raised Lazarus from the dead. They figured that this must mean he was the promised messiah. Thus they exclaimed:

Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!

Luke 19.38

The spreading of cloaks was also an acknowledgment of royalty (2 Kings 9.13). This leads us to an important point. The crowd recognized that Jesus was their king, but only because of his miracles. They completely missed the allusion to Zechariah and the significance of the donkey (John 12.16).

The story continues:

And the crowds that went before him and that followed him were shouting, “Hosanna to the Son of David”

Matthew 21.9)

The people are shouting the words of Psalm 118.

Save us, we pray, O Lord! O Lord, we pray, give us success! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!

Psalm 118.25

“Save us, please” is the English rendering of the Hebrew phrase “Hosanna”. In Christian circles, it is often assumed that they wanted to be saved from their sin, but that is simply an unfortunate example of us reading our theology into the story. In the context of that day, “Hosanna” very clearly meant “save us from the Romans”.

This gives us an important insight into understanding this story. These people were not simply praising Jesus. They were asking him to save them. Specifically, they were quoting a messianic Psalm that promised God would deliver them from their enemies (Psalm 118.5).

We have to keep in mind that the Jews, and especially the Zealots, had a completely different idea about what the coming messiah would be like. To them, the messiah was to be a conquering king who would use military might to overthrow the Romans.

They imagined a person who would not only endorse the rebellion but would become its leader. “Salvation” for them is to be saved from Rome. “Messiah” for them is a king who would use violence to defeat their oppressors and thus bring liberty and peace.

There’s an important detail in this story that helps to reinforce this understanding.

So they took branches of palm trees and went out to meet him.

John 12.13

In the days of Jesus, palm branches had a certain religious symbolism because they were connected to some of the Jewish feasts (Leviticus 23.40). More importantly, however, the Zealots used palm branches as their symbol of Jewish nationalism. Waving the palm branch was the equivalent to waving their country’s national flag.

The palm branch was regularly used on Jewish coins, like a maple leaf on Canadian coins or an eagle on American coins. Palms had also been used during the Maccabean revolt to celebrate their victory over the Syrians (1 Maccabees 13.51, 2 Maccabees 10.7), and that story undoubtedly encouraged their nationalistic fervor.

Thus, palm branches came to represent the patriotism that fueled the fight against the Romans, and it was this patriotism that was on full display that Sunday. The crowds were not interested in welcoming a suffering servant. They went out to welcome a patriot.

With this in mind, we can see why they were so thrilled at Jesus’ miracles. If their king could raise the dead, he could surely deliver them from the Romans.

Further, when we understand the mindset of the Jews we should no longer be surprised that those who hailed him as their king on Sunday would ask for his crucifixion on Friday. The motives of the Jews did not change, only their impression of Jesus. Once they discovered he was not aligned with their cause they had little reason to choose him over Barabbas.

So the stage is set. The city is packed with people and Jesus is riding in on a donkey. Everyone is in an uproar because they think he is the long-awaited messianic king. After all, he had just raised Lazarus from the dead. A revolt is brewing. The Zealots are stirring up the crowd. Finally, the day of deliverance has come. Now is the time to make some noise. The revolution is beginning!

But this is really dangerous. Roman soldiers are everywhere. If this thing turns into a riot it will be a very bloody night. The Pharisees in particular were worried about how the Romans would react (John 11.48).

And some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to him, “Teacher, rebuke your disciples.”

Luke 19.39

In other words, get them to be quiet. Settle them down. This is getting out of hand.

And then we read this.

He answered, “I tell you, if these were silent, the very stones would cry out.”

Luke 19.40

The stones would cry out? What a peculiar little phrase. Does he really think the stones would praise him, or is there something we’ve missed? As it turns out, this phrase is taken directly from the Jewish Scriptures, and anyone who was well studied in the text would quickly pick up on the Remez.

“Woe to him who gets evil gain for his house, to set his nest on high, to be safe from the reach of harm! You have devised shame for you house. By cutting off many peoples you have forfeited your life. For the stone will cry out from the wall, and the beam from the woodwork respond: “Woe to him who builds a town with blood and founds a city on iniquity!”

Habakkuk 2.9-12

The Pharisees had asked Jesus to rebuke his followers for being too loud. But instead of telling them to be quiet, Jesus rebukes them with the words of Habakkuk. Rather than condemn their vigor, Jesus alludes to the message of the stones to condemn their intentions.

Woe to him who builds a town with blood and founds a city on iniquity!

Woe to you, oh Jerusalem, people of God, if you seek to establish the kingdom with violence. Woe to you, oh Zealots, freedom fighters, if you seek to gain your freedom through bloodshed. Woe to you, oh Christian, if you think you can establish God’s kingdom with human strength (Jeremiah 17.5, Zechariah 4.6). Woe to you if you think you can use force and coercion to make people good. Woe to you if you seek to justify war and violence.

If there remains any doubt in your mind as to Jesus’ thoughts about their fervor, take a look at the very next lines of the story.

And when he drew near and saw the city, he wept over it, saying, “Would that you, even you, had known on this day the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes.”

Luke 19.41-42

The Greek word translated as “wept” is “klaio”, and it refers to a tearful mourning caused by deep sorrow and grief. This is not the climax of a triumphal entry. This is a painful recognition that his people simply didn’t get it. They did not know the way of peace (Isaiah 59.8).

Jesus continued to meditate on the words of Habakkuk, and they likely called to mind a parallel passage in Micah.

Hear this, you heads of the house of Jacob and rulers of the house of Israel, who detest justice and make crooked all that is straight, who build Zion with blood and Jerusalem with iniquity. Its heads give judgment for a bribe; its priests teach for a price; its prophets practice divination for money; yet they lean on the Lord and say, “Is not the Lord in the midst of us? No disaster shall come upon us.” Therefore because of you Zion shall be plowed as a field; Jerusalem shall become a heap of ruins, and the mount of the house a wooded height.

Micah 3.9-12

Like Habakkuk, Micah condemned the leaders of Israel who sought to establish Jerusalem with bloodshed and violence. Because of them, Micah prophesied that Jerusalem would become “a heap of ruins”, and that the temple would be reduced to a hill in a forest. Having just made the same indictment as Micah, Jesus now alludes to these verses by making the same prophecy.

For the days will come upon you, when your enemies will set up a barricade around you and surround you and hem you in on every side and tear you down to the ground, you and your children within you. And they will not leave one stone upon another in you, because you did not know the time of your visitation.

Luke 19.43-44

As we know, this prophecy was fulfilled with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD.

The historical context of this story is what makes it so shocking. The Romans were crucifying Jews by the thousands. They imprisoned them and taxed them and enslaved them. The Jews had every reason, every right, to overthrow the Romans. The Zealots would today be praised for their willingness to “protect” their people. This was not a fringe group of radicals trying to cause mayhem. These were God-fearing, freedom-loving patriots living under foreign occupation who were fighting to defend themselves and their families.

The Zealot uprising was a just war if there ever was one.

Some would go so far as to say that Jews were morally obligated to fight the injustice of the Romans. But if that is the case then Jesus was a sinner because he refused to join the Zealots. In the eyes of his friends, he had not only betrayed the Jewish cause, but he had actually sinned by failing to fight the Romans. According to them, Jesus simply made the wrong choice. He should have ridden into Jerusalem on a warhorse. I dare say many Christians today would have preferred that.

But Jesus had a different way. Jesus came to Jerusalem on lamb selection day to be the lamb of God (John 1.29), though the Jews wanted to turn him into a ferocious lion. They sought to establish God’s kingdom with violence and bloodshed but this was an approach Jesus consistently rejected. Rather than lead a military conquest, Jesus subjected himself to the Romans (John 18.36).

He did not resist being crucified, even though he had every right to. He taught his followers to pay taxes and turn the other cheek (Matthew 22.21, Matthew 5.39). He instructed us to submit to unjust rulers and go the extra mile (Matthew 5.41). Let them imprison you, let them kill you, and rebuke those who would start a very justified rebellion against them (Matthew 26.52). If that isn’t a radical commitment to non-violence, I don’t know what is.

So how does the story continue? Well, 2000 years go by, and it becomes a tradition in the church to wave palm branches and sing “Hosanna” in remembrance of Palm Sunday. Every year, we sing songs about Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem, we wave the sign of the Zealot and we sing the words of the Zealot.

Fortunately, the ideas these symbols once represented are no longer in the minds of Christians celebrating this occasion. And yet, one has to wonder how it is that many of us are still eager to use violence and state power to conquer our enemies. I sometimes wonder if we have learned anything from Jesus’ radical message of peace. I wonder if Jesus is still weeping over his people.


About the Author

Patrick Carroll has a degree in Chemical Engineering from the University of Waterloo and is an Editorial Fellow at the Foundation for Economic Education.

You can follow him on Twitter @PatrickC1995 or on his Facebook page The Prudent Navigator.

Not of This World Part 1: Legitimacy of the State

Not of This World Part 1: Legitimacy of the State

Studying the Kingdom of God over the years has led me to conclusions that put me at odds with the mainstream understanding of discipleship. My recent conclusion is that Gospel and Christ-centered discipleship is Anarchism in its purest form. But what’s so alarming about my conclusion?

No Kings but Christ


1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? Do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:

4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for his is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath up him that doeth evil.

5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath but also for conscience sake.

6 For this is cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually up this very thing.

7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due: custom to whom custom: fear to whom fear: honor to whom honor.

Romans 13: 1-7 KJV

As nearly all Christian Anarchists can attest, the usage of Romans 13 has been thrown in our faces countless times as a sort of no contest card by those in support of the state. However, I argue that their perverted usage of this chapter is nothing short of ignorant when it is read from the King James Version(KJV). 


As we see in Romans verse 1 (KJV), our souls are subject to the higher powers and the “powers that be are ordained by God”. In Matthew 23:10 we are told: “Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.” If Christ is the only man that we call Master then who is the higher power that we are subject to? It surely can’t be the “governing authorities” that you will read of in the New American Standard Bible (NASB) and English Standard (ESV) translations. 

In Romans verse 2 of the KJV, we are told: “whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God.” For it to be true that resisting a government’s laws also means we are resisting the ordinance of God, then the laws put in place by any government would have to be God’s laws. This would including taxation (theft), incarceration (kidnapping), murder (the death penalty) and genocide (war). These clearly fly directly in the face of Romans 13:9 (KVJ) which states:

Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shall not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet: and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.

There are countless examples of atrocities committed, not only by those currently in power, but those who have been in power in the past, who have used Romans 13 as justification for their actions and to garner support. There are countless examples, from German pastors of the 1930’s and 40’s amassing support for the Third Reich, to the defense of slavery in the American south, all the way to 2018, when Attorney General Jeff Sessions quoted Romans 13 (poorly), in order to defend the separation of families and the caging of children. A mild understanding of history and the atrocities committed by those in power is all it takes to see that the Government cannot possibly be who Paul is directing us to obey, i.e. Christ. Even as Paul tells us that rulers “are not a terror to good works,” we must remember that, ultimately, it was the Roman State that killed Christ for his good works. 

We will now examine Romans 13:4 (KJV) in relation to Romans 12:19 (KJV). Romans 12:19 (KJV) states:

“Dearly beloved avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written Vengeance is mine: I will repay, saith the Lord.”

When we turn to Romans 13:4 (KJV) we see it is written:

“...he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.” 

I remember the first time I read Romans 12 and 13 back to back, and as soon as I read “revenger” in Romans 13 (KJV) the first thing that came to my mind was: “I JUST READ ABOUT THIS GUY!”. If vengeance belongs to the Lord, which we are told us explicitly in Deuteronomy 32:35 (KJV), how can Romans 13 (KJV) possibly be talking about anyone else? When we look at Romans verses 6 and 7(KJV), Paul has laid out exactly who we should recognize as the higher power. This higher power is the one who we are supposed to pay tribute and custom. In Mark 12:17 (KJV) we are told to:

“render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s.”

In Luke 23:2 (KJV), as Christ is taken before Pilate, the chief priests proclaim:

“We found this fellow perverting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar.” 

It is because of this verse in Luke that we know Christ was in fact repudiating the state’s claim to tributes as well as customs. Paul continues in Romans 13:7(KJV), he tells us that we owe “fear to whom fear” is due. As Christ told us in Matthew 10:28 (KJV), “fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell,” if we are to pay fear to anyone then it is to God and God alone and not those who kill the body, i.e. the state.

The last thing we are told by Paul in verse 7 (KJV), is that we owe “honour to whom honour” is due. Christ tells us, in John 5:23 (KJV), “that all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.” This stands to reason that Paul would not be telling us to honour the state after Christ had already given us instruction to honour Him and the Father. 

As Christians, Paul gave us a step by step guide to giving glory to God in this particular chapter of Romans. However, it is of no great surprise that such a powerful chapter has been perverted to be used as propaganda by those who seek to rule. Yet, when we read from the King James Version of the Bible, it allows us to understand that Paul was most definitely not referring to any “governing authorities” when he addressed the Romans.