Introduction1
Do discipleship and caring for creation have something in common? Dave Bookless (2008) and Steven Bouma-Prediger (2023, 131-171) argue that caring for creation is an essential aspect of the Christian discipleship process. Bookless contends that discussions about discipleship often focus on the moral and ethical attitudes that Christians should adopt. However, care for God’s creation is rarely included in Christian discipleship training. This omission is puzzling, as caring for creation is a central theme in the Bible. Therefore, according to Bookless, we cannot truly be disciples of Jesus if we do not care for God’s creation (Bookless 2008, 88-89). Richard Bauckham (2010, 1-2) and Jonathan and Douglas Moo (2018, 23-24) share a similar viewpoint.
Much is unclear concerning a proper definition of Christian discipleship. Budiselić (2023, 33) addresses this topic in his book, Učeništvo na Isusov način, and draws several useful conclusions: a) In Matthew 28, Jesus called us to make disciples, not just converts (2023, 37); b) the Bible does not provide a specific definition of discipleship but illustrates what it should be (2023, 40); c) the purpose of discipleship, as Budiselić concludes (2023, 41), along with various other authors he references, is to become more like Jesus.
Such a simplified yet meaningful definition will guide us in framing the relevant question for this article: If the purpose of the biblical discipleship process is to become more like Christ, what does it mean to follow Him in the mandate of caring for God’s creation? We can explore this question from various angles by examining different aspects of biblical texts and theology.
In this paper, we will focus on the New Testament passage in Matthew 21:1-11. Why does Jesus choose to ride an animal – a donkey – during his entry into Jerusalem, and what does this choice reveal about his relationship with creation? The main contribution of this analysis will be to the field of care for God’s creation through a Christological perspective, specifically looking at Matthew 21:1-11. Our analysis will demonstrate how Jesus, through the symbolism of the donkey in Matthew 21:1-11, reveals his royal identity, humble character, and calls for change, imitation, and a vision of a different eschatological future. Together, these elements suggest that Jesus uses the animal world to reveal his identity and attributes while also communicating the nature of the future world to which he invites his followers.
Several domestic authors have explored the role of animals in the Bible. Notably, Miljenka Grgić and Danijel Berković offer insightful perspectives. In her work, Grgić presents a theology of biblical zoology based on Genesis 1. She argues that animals are God’s treasures and that humans are appointed as their shepherds, entrusted with the care of both animals and the ecosystem. Her conclusions stem from an examination of Genesis 1, where animals are described concerning inanimate nature and humans concerning animals. From this viewpoint, animals are not mere additions; rather, they are an essential part of God’s plan for the world (Grgić 2019, 338-339). In his book, Biblijski bestijarij, Berković aims to provide an encyclopedic overview of the role of animals in the Bible. He contends that the topic extends beyond merely the relationship between humans and animals. Instead, he argues that animals in the Bible have a paradigmatic role, reflecting the theological truths that the Scriptures endeavor to convey (Berković 2022, 57-58).
Using the method of rereading biblical texts through the lens of ecologically conscious exegesis, or “methods of recovery,” as presented by Douglas and Jonathan Moo (2018, 31-40), we will examine the meanings of relevant Old Testament passages, such as Zechariah 9:9 and Isaiah 62:11, among others. So, what is the method of recovery in a nutshell? In light of the growing concern for the environment, Jonathan and Douglas Moo explore the interpretation (hermeneutics) of the biblical text, or how to read and interpret the biblical text within the context of environmental issues (Moo and Moo 2018, 31). They reference the work Greening Paul, authored by David Horrell, Cherryl Hunt, and Christopher Southgate, as a starting point for their discussion (Moo and Moo 2018, 32-34). In this book, they analyze three common approaches to interpreting the Bible concerning environmental concerns: “resistance,” “revisionism,” and “strategy of recovery” (Horrell, Hunt, and Southgate 2010, 11-32).
What do these three options suggest? Resistance refers to the efforts by some, particularly liberationist and feminist theologians, to impose their ideologies onto the biblical text against the clear direction of the Scriptures despite these ideas not being present in such forms (Moo and Moo 2018, 33). Revision involves reading the biblical truth through the lens of our contemporary context and priorities. In this case, we as readers impart new meanings to the text, while demonstrating how these meanings align with the overall message of a specific book of the Bible. Meaning arises from the interaction between the text and the reader, as highlighted by Horrell, Hunt, and Southgate (Moo and Moo 2018, 33). Recovery illustrates the notion that the Bible fundamentally emphasizes the importance of caring for our planet and God’s creation. However, this message has often been overlooked in favor of other priorities (Moo and Moo 2018, 33).
Moo and Moo (2018, 34) do not agree with the conclusion put forward by Horrell, Hunt, and Southgate. The main issue with their conclusion lies in the phrase “giving new meaning to the biblical text.” They believe that the Bible has a consistent meaning within its context, which remains unchanged regardless of the reader’s perspective. Their approach is more aligned with a “recovery strategy.” They argue that the Bible contains awareness about the importance of caring for God’s creation and the environment. Consequently, we should read the Bible with an ecological consciousness, utilizing standard tools of biblical exegesis (Moo and Moo 2018, 34).
1. Matthew 21:1-11 as the Fulfilment of Old Testament Prophecy
To understand why Jesus chose to enter Jerusalem on a donkey, we can refer to Matthew 21:4-5, which mentions that this act was meant to fulfill a prophecy. Before diving into our analysis, it’s important to examine how Matthew utilizes the Old Testament in these verses.
In Matthew 21:2-5, we read that Jesus instructed his disciples to fetch a donkey and her colt for his entry into Jerusalem. The author notes that this event occurred to “fulfill” (Gr. πληρόω) what was spoken by the prophet. Nolland (2005, 834) points out that line 4 represents the ninth of ten formulas of this type in the Gospel of Matthew where an action is interpreted through a quotation from the Old Testament. Thus, Jesus’ choice to ride a young donkey for his royal entrance into Jerusalem is intended to fulfill the Old Testament Scriptures (Hagner 1995, 593).
McCuistion (2016, 1) points out that Matthew’s use of the concept of πληρόω, or fulfillment, serves to illustrate how the story of the nation of Israel continues in Jesus. Matthew’s Gospel primarily addresses Hellenic Jews in the diaspora and Christians of Jewish origin, aiming to strengthen their understanding of Jesus by connecting him to the roots found in the Old Testament. McCuistion interprets the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy in Jesus through a typological lens. For instance, he identifies Jesus as a messianic figure who offers a better Law in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5–7). Additionally, he draws parallels between Jesus’ exodus from Egypt and Israel’s exodus from Egypt, noting that, unlike Israel, Jesus withstands temptations in the desert. Through this comparison, Jesus emerges as a fuller expression of Israel’s role as the Messiah and king. McCuistion (2016, 1-2) concludes that Matthew connects his listeners to the history of Israel, bringing it to life and fullness in Jesus. Other scholars have also conducted extensive studies on Matthew’s use of the Old Testament.2
An important exegetical question arises regarding which Old Testament text Matthew is referencing. According to Nolland (2005, 835), Matthew combines elements from Zechariah 9:9 and Isaiah 62:11. Both McCuistion (2016, 7) and Hagner (1995, 593) make similar observations. Hagner notes that the initial part of the quote is derived from Isaiah 62:11, while the latter portion comes from Zechariah 9:9, possibly recalled from memory or liturgical worship. Both texts, within their broader contexts, proclaim the coming of the Messiah, the Savior (Hagner 1995, 594). Stendahl (1991, 39) points out that church fathers such as Origen, Eusebius, and Jerome identified certain irregularities in Matthew’s quotations of the Old Testament. Furthermore, Stendahl (1991, 40) suggests that evangelists and apostles generally preferred the Hebrew text over the Septuagint (LXX) when quoting the Old Testament. He argues that their citations reflect their interpretation of the original text’s meaning rather than being direct quotations.
Hagner (1995, 594) also observes that Matthew omits the first part of Zechariah 9:9, choosing instead to highlight the second part, which focuses on the humility of the coming king. He argues that Matthew does this to emphasize the humble nature of the Messianic King. Furthermore, Matthew employs the first part of Isaiah 62:11 as a warning, stating, “Say to Daughter Zion,” rather than using Zechariah 9:9: “Rejoice greatly, Daughter Zion,” to call God’s people to follow. In this way, Matthew does not prioritize the joy of the king’s arrival but, instead, he brings attention to the need for self-examination regarding one’s relationship with the Messiah, while simultaneously inviting them to follow the humble King.
In conclusion, Matthew uses the Old Testament to demonstrate to his readers that Jesus fulfills prophetic predictions about both the Messiah and the King. Through his humble rule, he calls for both imitation and reflection on one’s standing before God.
2. The Role of the Donkey and Jesus’ Royal Identity
The central question we explore in this article is why Jesus chose to enter Jerusalem on an animal – a donkey, and what this teaches us about his relationship with creation. In Matthew 21:4-5, we learn that this act was meant to fulfill Scripture. We will elaborate on what Jesus communicates through this action and what Matthew intends to convey to his readers.
In a broader context, particularly in Matthew 21:10, we see that this passage serves to reveal Jesus’ identity with the question, “Who is this?” As we have pointed out earlier, Jesus here reveals his identity as the Messiah and King from the line of David. Davies and Allison (1997, 112), emphasize that this act is a public declaration of his messianic role, not through words but rather through a symbolic performance. It is meant to prompt Jerusalem to decide who Jesus truly is.
An additional argument that Matthew, by describing this public act, wants to confirm Jesus’ messiahship and his royal status, that is, belonging to the line of David, is the mentioned concept of πληρόω. McCuistion (2016, 1) analyzes Matthew’s use of the word πληρόω throughout the Gospel, arguing that Matthew uses this term mainly in his “assertions about the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecy about the Messiah” in Jesus of Nazareth.
Davies and Allison (1997, 112-113) discuss the genre of this biblical account, comparing it to similar narratives found in the Bible and the ancient Near East. They argue that this Gospel account aligns with ancient depictions of a king, ruler, or hero entering a city. For instance, they cite examples such as 1 Kings 1:32-49 (Solomon), Zechariah 9:9 (the eschatological king), and 1 Maccabees 5:45-54 (Judas the Maccabee, as well as the entry of Alexander the Great into Jerusalem). Common elements in these accounts typically include the entrance of military conquerors, the approach of a king, public celebrations, entry into the city, and ritual cleansing. The synoptic accounts fit within this genre (Davies and Allison 1997, 112). However, Matthew’s account in chapter 21 has specific characteristics that set it apart. First, this Gospel report does not describe a military conquest. Rather, it emphasizes the humble nature of Jesus as the messianic king. Second, the Synoptics dedicate considerable attention to the choice of the animal, a detail not seen in other accounts except for 1 Kings and Zechariah. Third, instead of performing a sacrifice in the Temple, Jesus protests against its misuse (Davies and Allison 1997, 112-113).
It is important to recognize the Old Testament tradition behind Matthew 21:1-11. For instance, in 1 Kings 1:33, King David orders that Solomon be mounted on a mule – an animal that is a cross between a donkey and a horse – to authorize Solomon as his successor. Jesus employs a similar imagery during his entry into Jerusalem, indicating that he is the rightful heir to the throne of David. Thus, the role of the donkey in this passage is multifaceted; it serves as a biblical character through which Matthew answers the question of who Jesus of Nazareth is: the rightful royal heir from the line of David.
The royal significance of the donkey is also evident in Zechariah 9:9, which is referenced in Matthew 21:5 and John 12:15 as being fulfilled in Jesus. Furthermore, we can trace a typological connection in Matthew 21:1-11 back to Genesis 49:10-11, where themes of the royal line of Judah and the ideal king to whom all nations will submit are present (Beale and Carson 2007, 63). The phrase “the Lord needs” in Matthew 21:1-3 highlights that Jesus, as king, has the right to the property of his subjects, who are to put it at the service of their sovereign. This idea is comparable to a situation involving King David in 2 Samuel 16:1-12 (Beale and Carson 2007, 63).
The donkey in the Bible was commonly used as a pack animal. For instance, in Genesis 42:26, we read about Joseph’s brothers transporting grain on a donkey (Ryken 1998, 215). However, biblical tradition reflects Eastern customs where donkeys were also used in royal ceremonies and during city entrances. An example of this is found in 1 Kings 1:33; 2 Samuel 13:19 and 19:26. David placed his son Solomon on a mule to signify that he was the rightful heir to the throne (Ryken 1998, 215).
3. The Role of the Donkey and Jesus’ Royal Character: King of Humility and Peace
Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem on a donkey is a symbolic act that highlights his rightful royal status. Why this is so will shortly be explained. This choice of transportation reflects his character and the nature of his kingship. In the Gospel of Matthew, the author references Zechariah 9:9 to affirm Jesus’ royal identity, portraying him not just as a king, but as a unique kind of ruler. Zechariah describes the messiah not as a conquering warrior on a horse, but as a humble figure who arrives on a donkey. This imagery emphasizes the Messiah’s mission to bring peace, as he dismantles weapons of war and extends his rule to all nations (Zech 9:9-10).
Different authors make notice of the tendency to cite the prophecy of Zechariah about the Messiah and the King. Hagner (1995, 594) claims that Zechariah’s prophecy foretold of a Messiah who was a lowly King. Luz (2005, 7) observes that the word πραΰς3 (praus), meaning “lowly” stands at the center of Matthew’s quote. McCuistion (2016, 7) comes to the same conclusion, stating that the humility of Jesus the Messiah and King is one of the central themes of Matthew’s Gospel, quoting verses such as 4,14-17; 8,17; 12,17-21; 20,28. Jesus is therefore the messianic king (βασιλεύς)4 who is humble (πραΰς). The same word, πραΰς, is mentioned by Jesus when he refers to himself in Matthew 5:5 and 11:29 (Hagner 1995, 594). Jesus of Nazareth is not king only through his lineage that goes back to David but through the manner of his rule. His rule is gentle and lowly, like that of David and Solomon. However, he transcends even those. He not only imitates his forefathers in humility but also surpasses them by bringing lasting peace. By quoting Zechariah 9:9-10, Matthew sets the interpretive framework for his text. Zechariah 9:9 speaks of a humble king, while verse 10 describes a king who brings peace. In this context, Jesus is the King. However, he does not ride a horse – symbolizing war – nor does he establish his rule through violence. Instead, he embodies the humility of Zechariah 9:9-10, similar to Moses in Exodus 4:20, and represents peace (Ryken 1998, 215).
The donkey that Jesus rides into Jerusalem reveals these character traits. Jesus enters as a rightful king, much like Solomon, but not to confront Caesar. Instead of a war horse, he humbly mounts a donkey to bring peace. Thus, the donkey, as an animal, symbolizes Jesus as a humble king who seeks to restore peace. Furthermore, this act prophetically points to a future time when Jesus will cleanse and restore the Temple, ultimately bringing complete restoration to creation and establishing peace – not only between man and God but also between man and the rest of creation.
4. The Role of the Donkey and Jesus’ Call to Change, Imitation and Eschatological Future
As we have indicated after the last part, this symbolic entry to Jerusalem was a deliberate act. To better understand its intention, we will consider the wider context of Matthew 21, as well as some eschatological emphases of the Old Testament texts we used. Nolland (2005, 35) notes that Matthew, in his use of the Old Testament, not only analyzes the Scriptures concerning the historical context they reference but also addresses them in light of the contemporary situations faced by himself and the community to whom he is writing. Additionally, he employs the prophetic Scriptures to point towards the future that Jesus, as the Messiah and King, intends to lead us into. In Matthew 21:13, Nolland (2005, 35) identifies a critique of the Temple’s status quo, emphasizing the need for a different and better future. He argues that the passage reflects an assertion of an ideal, promised future that serves to challenge the existing status quo (Nolland 2005, 36).
Jesus is not merely upset in this instance, which is why he turns over the tables. Much like his entry into Jerusalem – a symbolic act meant to convey his rightful royal authority and the nature of his rule – this incident also serves as a prophetic gesture aimed at communicating the Temple’s current state and the necessity for its restoration. For example, Old Testament prophets frequently used symbolic actions, such as Jeremiah carrying a yoke, to deliver their messages. In this context, Jesus signifies the Temple’s unclean condition and the urgent need for its cleansing or renewal. Davies and Allison (1997, 133-134) agree that a connection between these two acts within chapter 21 can be drawn. Specifically, Jesus entering Jerusalem as a king is symbolically affirmed by his riding a donkey, while his entry into the Temple represents a prophetic act of cleansing it. Both acts reveal Jesus’ identity and his intentions. Furthermore, Davies and Allison (1997, 134) point out that the Temple symbolizes the center of the world. It is important to clarify that Jesus is not fundamentally opposed to the institution of the Temple itself, but rather to its misuse. As highlighted in the previous section, Matthew legitimizes Jesus’ actions by referencing Scripture and will do the same in the coming Jesus’ conflict with the chief priests and scribes. Hagner (1995, 598-599) observes that this prophetic act by the king points to the eschatological goal of Jesus’ mission.
Recognizing the prophetic and eschatological dimensions of these symbolic actions provides clarity in interpreting our role in caring for God’s creation. Viewing the Temple as the symbolic center of the world – which can also be an image of Eden – reveals a prophetic act that transcends the immediate actions and setting, highlighting what Jesus seeks to convey about his intentions as king. The world is marred by corruption, but this does not imply it should be abandoned for some alternate reality. Instead, it requires renewal and restoration. Jesus’ symbolic act of riding a donkey illustrates the nature of this renewed world. It envisions a world characterized by peace rather than conflict, fostering humble relationships among its inhabitants.
In this context, the donkey symbolizes Jesus as a legitimate and humble king who not only reconciles man with God but also reconciles man and the rest of the creation. As the true King, Jesus rules justly, and the donkey, representing the rest of the creation, submits to his authority. Thus, the purpose of Matthew is not merely to affirm that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah and the Son of David as foretold in Scripture, but also to demonstrate through his ministry that the existing religious and social systems require restoration. Jesus leads these systems toward a new creation, as seen in Matthew 21:13 and 21:42.
Taking all of this into account, one must conclude that the interpretation of Jesus’ messianic entry into Jerusalem on a donkey extends beyond mere fulfillment of Scripture. It offers a glimpse into the future that he is guiding us toward, along with his call for us to follow him as disciples. As the Messiah and King, Jesus is on a mission to restore order to all things and lead his fallen creation toward a “new creation,” where peace between God and man, as well as harmony between man and the rest of God’s creation, will be realized. Jesus anticipates this peace as a true man by demonstrating how to rule humbly over creation, while the submission of the donkey demonstrates how the creation submits to Jesus’ humble rule.
So, what should we as disciples of Jesus Christ take from these insights? Luz (2005, 8) notes that this symbolic act by Jesus carries both persuasive and educational significance. From Jesus’ humility, we can learn how to position ourselves regarding the systems present in our world. In this text, we see the rejection of Jesus by the teachers of the Law juxtaposed with the recognition and acceptance of him as the Messiah and King by his disciples. Therefore, disciples of Jesus Christ are called to obey and follow their humble Messiah and King, participating in his mission to cleanse and establish peace in the world – both between God and man and between man and the rest of God’s creation.
Conclusion
In this article, we posed a question regarding the role of the donkey in Jesus’ messianic entry into Jerusalem, as described in Matthew 21:1-11. We concluded that the donkey serves at least three important purposes. First, it underscores Jesus’ rightful royal and messianic identity. Second, it highlights the nature of Jesus as both Messiah and King. Third, it symbolizes the eschatological purpose of Jesus, which is to renew creation and establish peace between God and man, as well as harmony among man and the rest of God’s creation.
First, in this text, Matthew aims to demonstrate how Jesus fulfilled Old Testament prophecies regarding the Messiah and King through his entry into Jerusalem. He referenced parts of Isaiah and Zechariah as evidence. Additionally, we noted that this concept has broader roots in Old Testament traditions. For example, Genesis 49:10-11 contains Jacob’s prophecy about the descendants of his son Judah, indicating that the ruler’s rod will remain until the rightful heir comes, who will tie his donkey to the vine. Similarly, in 1 Kings 1:33, David confirms Solomon as his rightful heir by having him ride on a donkey’s colt. Through this public act, Jesus signals to Jerusalem that he is the true messianic king from the line of David. Our analysis revealed that Jesus used the donkey to communicate his royal identity, indicating that God desires to reveal himself and his identity through the animal world.
Second, we have established that Matthew, quoting Zechariah 9:9, guides our interpretation in further understanding the role of the donkey in this context. The king described by Zechariah is not a warlord riding on horseback, but a humble servant who, according to Zechariah 9:10, brings peace to the nations. The donkey here reflects Jesus’ character. We often think of humanity primarily as bearers of God’s image. However, this text reveals that the rest of creation can also fulfill this role. All of nature reflects God’s character. Sin has introduced chaos and enmity into creation. In the original creation, humans, as the image of God, were meant to rule over and direct the rest of creation, which was intended to submit to their authority. This indicates that animals also have a role in reflecting God’s character, contributing to our understanding of the divine image in humanity. Both humans and animals can reflect God’s character: humans’ rule over the creation, while animals accept that authority – it is to be noted that the donkey willingly served Jesus. For this dynamic to function, a humble messiah and king is necessary – one who will restore peace not only between man and God but also between man and the rest of creation. Therefore, our analysis suggests that through the donkey, Jesus reveals his humble character, indicating that God intends to use the animal kingdom to express his attributes or character.
And third, Jesus is the Messiah who restores his creation. In Matthew 21:12-13, he cleanses the Temple. His entry into Jerusalem in Matthew 21:1-11 serves as a symbolic act, communicating both his lawful royal authority and the nature of his rule. This prophetic gesture highlights the dire condition of the Temple and the need for renewal. Therefore, Jesus’ messianic entry to Jerusalem on a donkey should be interpreted not only as the fulfillment of Scripture but also as a glimpse into the future that the Messiah and King is guiding us towards, calling us to follow him today. As the Messiah and King, Jesus’ mission is to restore order to all creation, leading the fallen creation towards a “new creation” where true peace will be consummated – not just between humanity and God but also between humanity and the rest of creation. Jesus anticipates this peace as a true man exemplifying how a true man rules with regards to the rest of the creation, i.e. humbly, and how creation submits to this humble rule. From this analysis, we conclude that through the donkey, Jesus called for change, imitation, and a different eschatological future.
In our analysis, we have argued that the donkey serves to affirm Jesus’ royal status, to illustrate the manner of his rule through humility and restoration of peace, and to signify the eschatological consummation when, after Jesus’ second coming, peace will be fully realized between God and humanity, as well as between humanity and the rest of creation. As disciples of Jesus Christ, we face a similar challenge as the people of Jerusalem at that time: recognizing and following Jesus as the humble king who brings peace.