12/2/18 Luke 19:28–40
This morning we begin a new church year, a year that will focus on readings from Luke’s Gospel. Luke has some distinctive themes and emphases. One that is central is that Luke wrote his Gospel in a way that would be easily accessible to people in the Roman Empire. The early church held that Matthew wrote his Gospel first, probably just a few years after Jesus’ resurrection, and wrote it in such a way as to show that Jesus was the Messiah, the one whom the Old Testament promised to Israel. But Luke wrote some 25 years later, and his Gospel reflected Paul’s experiences as he had preached the gospel and established churches throughout the Roman Empire. Luke needed to show that the Gospel was not just for Jews, but also for Romans and other Gentiles. As we begin our preparations for Christmas, we’ll begin by considering Jesus, a King for All.
In the coming weeks we’ll see that the beginning chapters of Luke’s Gospel emphatically depict Jesus as a King for All. But our text this morning does so as well, even if it’s perhaps not quite as obvious. One of the things that our text emphasizes in numerous ways is that Jesus is not a warring rival king to Pontius Pilate or the Roman Emperor. For example, at the beginning of our text Luke records that Jesus began the triumphal entry in the humble little village of Bethany, on the east side of the Mount of Olives, a couple of miles east of Jerusalem. Unlike in Matthew, for Luke the triumphal entry begins in humble Bethany. We also note that at the very end of Luke’s Gospel, it’s at the little town of Bethany that Jesus ascends to heaven. Bethany as the town associated with the triumphal entry is associated with praising God, not with organizing a violent rebellion against Pilate or the emperor.
That Jesus is not a rival political king can be seen as the parade continues. In Matthew’s Gospel, the crowds yell hosanna, which means save us Lord, a phrase that could easily be mistaken as advocating Jesus saving Jerusalem from the Romans, like king David driving out the pagan rulers of Israel. But Luke takes various steps here to avoid any political misunderstanding. For example, Luke stresses that the donkey that Jesus rode was one on which no one had ever sat. This clearly anticipates Jesus’ burial in Luke. For it’s only in Luke’s Gospel that we hear of Jesus’ tomb that it was one where no one had ever yet been laid. The donkey on which no one had ever sat anticipates the tomb in which no one had ever been laid. Here Luke emphasizes that Jesus rode into Jerusalem not to conquer politically but rather to die and be buried. Similarly, at the end of the triumphal entry, the crowds exclaim, “Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!” Jesus’ entry is ultimately associated with peace and glory in heaven, not warfare on earth. At Jesus’ birth, the angels proclaimed that Jesus would bring peace to the earth. Now at the beginning of holy week we see that Jesus does this not as a rival king to Caesar. Instead Jesus supports the political peace of the Romans and much more so brings spiritual peace to earth by being our beautiful savior who will peacefully pave the way for our human flesh to ascend to heaven.
In a recent book titled The Last Week, theologian Marcus Borg tells about another parade that was occurring on the opposite side of the city around the time that Jesus entered the holy city. Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor was entering Jerusalem at the head of a column of imperial cavalry and soldiers. Pilate was there with his soldiers in case there was trouble. That was a common occurrence in Jerusalem, especially at Passover, a festival that celebrated the Jewish people’s liberation from an earlier empire. Borg writes, “Imagine the imperial procession’s arrival in the city. A visual panoply of imperial power: cavalry on horses, foot soldiers, leather armor, helmets, weapons, banners, golden eagles mounted on poles, sun glinting on metal and gold. Sounds: the marching of feet, the creaking of leather, the clinking of bridles, the beating of drums. The swirling of dust. The eyes of the silent onlookers, some curious, some awed, some resentful.” (Cited from the sermon “When We Feel Unwanted” by King Duncan on esermons.com)
There were similarities and dissimilarities between the entry of the ruler Jesus into Jerusalem and the entry of the ruler Pilate. We can learn from both. For example, Jesus was like Pilate to the extent that Pilate helped bring a sort of peace to the world, the so-called Pax Romana, or Peace of the Romans. Similarly, Jesus was like Pilate to the extent that Pilate had some care for his subjects. Again, Jesus was like Pilate somewhat in that Pilate’s power teaches us some things about Jesus’ power. These similarities are important, for people in the Roman empire would have been very familiar with regional governors and the emperor they represented. Luke by comparing Jesus to secular rulers in some ways was giving the people an illustration that would have been accessible by nearly everyone. Most Romans would have been unfamiliar with Old Testament history and prominent Old Testament kings like David and Solomon. But they would have known about Roman rulers, and this knowledge could help them understand certain things about Jesus when Luke would make a comparison with these rulers. This was true in spite of the obvious fact that Jesus was also very different from these rulers. Whereas the peace that the Romans brought was in many ways by coercion and temporary, Jesus brought a lasting peace. And whereas the Roman Caesar was ultimately a corrupt dictator, Jesus used his power to sacrifice himself for others so that they might ultimately go to heaven.
We should now provide another example of how our text compares Jesus to a Roman ruler. In the ancient world, the arrival of a royal or other dignitary in a city was an occasion for a grand show to court the favor and/or placate the wrath of the visiting celebrity. At the approach of the dignitary, a band of municipal officials and other citizens, including the social, religious, and political elite, would go out to meet the celebrity well in advance of the city walls. Speeches of welcome would be given by select members of the delegation. The flattering comments went on and on. After this, the guest was escorted into the city to show the guest around. All of this was frequently brought to an end by the visit of the guest to the local temple and an escort out of the city (Brent Kinman, "Parousia, Jesus’ ‘A-Triumphal’ Entry, and the Fate of Jerusalem (Luke 19:28-44)”). Luke’s portrayal of Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem is very similar to this Greco-Roman ceremony for a visiting king. Jesus in our text uses his royal authority to commandeer a colt and give Jerusalem advanced notice of his arrival. And then Jesus is escorted into Jerusalem in a decorated parade full of acclamations. Finally, as Jesus enters into Jerusalem, Luke records him going into the temple and chastises the city for not adequately recognizing “the time of your visitation” by Jesus (19:44). Here Luke again portrays Jesus as a king, this time by clearly comparing Jesus making a royal visit to Jerusalem after the pattern of various dignitaries visiting cities. We today can relate somewhat to this. Oftentimes when the President of the United States visits foreign countries he is received with pageantry, hospitality, and a certain deference. Something similar happened in the Roman Empire at Jesus’ time, even for Jesus himself as the king entering the city of Jerusalem.
We should now ponder a little more deeply why Luke might go to such lengths to make sure that Jesus is not misunderstood to be a warring, political rival to Caesar, but still a king in some ways like Caesar. Various answers come to mind here. Luke could could want to make sure that Jesus is not misunderstood as a warring secular king because the church at Luke’s time didn’t want to be persecuted by the powerful Roman Empire. Similarly, it could be that Luke wanted to set the record straight historically, that the chief priests and the Jewish leaders were the chief culprits in Jesus’ death, not the Romans. This setting the historical record straight could again help Roman relations, or at least help prevent obstacles. While there is probably some truth to both of these answers, I think that Luke had a higher reason for not depicting Jesus as a rival king to Caesar. For Jesus Is a King for All. Luke wants to portray Jesus as a king that people in the Roman Empire can relate to. Luke portraying Jesus as like Caesar in certain respects or like some great leader who sacrifices himself, like Socrates, can help people to more easily understand who Jesus is. Similarly, Luke in taking pains to show that the chief priests were the chief culprits in Jesus’ death wouldn’t give a Roman reader the wrong idea that the gospel is not for them. As a new Roman believer walked the path of discipleship, there would be plenty of time to make the clear theological connection that their sin helped put Jesus to death. But if the story of Jesus was skewed to say that the Romans were chiefly responsible for Jesus’ death, this could easily cause confusion for a Roman reader. And so it is that Luke presents Jesus as like a Roman king in many ways in order that it would be clearer that Jesus Is a King for All.
These things are helpful for us today as well. We don’t have to choose between the options that an earthly ruler is godlike or an earthly ruler is completely worthless. Usually the truth is somewhere between these two extremes. Our leaders today can teach us certain things about the kingship of Jesus, even while we must be very careful to warn that there are very many ways that our leaders as sinners are not like Jesus. By looking having a balanced view about leaders and considering them in the light of the Gospels, we can learn more about who Jesus is. But this isn’t just true of powerful leaders. It’s true of many people around us. There are many human stories around us that can help us understand the gospel. There are lessons that can be taken from many movies, from many songs, from history, from our neighborhoods, and so forth. This should especially be the case for benefitting from the work of the church. Jesus has worked through the church in order to bring all of us into his family. This is a church that does many positive things but also does many terrible things. But through it all, God has made us kings. God the Father first made Adam and Eve royalty in the Garden of Eden, designed for eternal life. And since the fall into sin, the Father sent his Son into the world as a king in order that we might be made kings. This occurred to us in a focused way in our Baptisms, where God brought us into his kingdom for the sake of his Son. In connection with this, God approached us in ways we could understand. God was different from us, majestic in his working, and yet the great King worked through tangible things and tangible stories in order to convert us and make us kings. He didn’t just come among us and immediately condemn everything in this world. Rather, he worked through the things of this world, and especially through his people in the church, in order to bring us his message of love. God didn’t portray himself as favoring others more than us. But rather he loved us even while he loved others. For he is the God of both Jewish high priests and the God of Roman governors. He is the God of both ordinary human beings and kings. And he desires that all might be spiritual kings through his Son. And so it was that we give thanks for Jesus, a King for All.
