[Dr. Anthony J. Toole]

Matthew 21:7
“And brought the ass, and the colt, and put on them their clothes, and they set him thereon.”

Bible says Jesus rode the ass but he did not bring the ass.

[MitzaLizalor]

Originally Posted by Dr. Anthony J. Toole

Matthew 21:7
“And brought the ass, and the colt, and put on them their clothes, and they set him thereon.”

Bible says Jesus rode the ass but he did not bring the ass.

John 12
12 On the next day much people that were come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem,
13 Took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him, and cried, Hosanna: Blessed is the King of Israel that cometh in the name of the Lord.
14 And Jesus, when he had found a young ass, sat thereon; as it is written,
15 Fear not, daughter of Sion: behold, thy King cometh, sitting on an ass's colt.

I'm confused; are you saying that Jesus found the ass's colt and sat on it but that it was brought along by someone else?

[Dr. Anthony J. Toole]

Originally Posted by MitzaLizalor

John 12
12 On the next day much people that were come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem,
13 Took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him, and cried, Hosanna: Blessed is the King of Israel that cometh in the name of the Lord.
14 And Jesus, when he had found a young ass, sat thereon; as it is written,
15 Fear not, daughter of Sion: behold, thy King cometh, sitting on an ass's colt.

I'm confused; are you saying that Jesus found the ass's colt and sat on it but that it was brought along by someone else?

Don't be confused Sister - that's precisely what The Bible says. Jesus rides ass (preferably young ass, or a colt as they say in olden times). Others bring a selection of ass or colt for Jesus, then Jesus mounts one or both of them and goes to town (Jerusalem in those days). It's a sacred thing. Obviously nowadays the ass is replaced with other methods of transport (like Uber) but the principle still applies, Jesus does not bring the ass. Others bring the ass to Him.

[MitzaLizalor]

I see. The procurement of asses was team handed. You have also addressed another point, that of mingling.

Deuteronomy 22:9-11 Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with divers seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled. Thou shalt not plow with an ox and an ass together. Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of woollen and linen together.

(Moses is reposting God's commandment on the topic)

Leviticus 19:18e-19 I am the LORD. Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.

The examples given are not exhaustive and we can imagine what was going on. "Aha," someone would notice. "It says a garment mingled of linen and woollen so I'll make a nice outfit using cotton and fox and swan around in that!" which apart from anything else would be difficult to spin so probably quite expensive. Similarly the cattle. Obviously in Leviticus gender is a transitive verb and I'm happy to link Webster's for reference:

In the reiteration (Deuteronomy) it's made plain that the examples are just that. Examples: as of woollen and linen together does not mean only woollen and linen together. The principle of mingling couldn't be more clearly presented, especially in the light of having to evict all the squatters perched there in The Promised Land who would be pulling out all their cunning stunts to pollute The Israelites. God did not want that. God did not approve of mingling.

In later years Jesus would have an equivalent mission, to transfer His promise from the Scribes et al., across to Christians and recind the covenant He'd made because of their faithlessness. And nitpicking over narrow definitions of words. Their choice, I suppose.

John 1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

Did the principle of mingling still apply? Well yes, in the sense of trying to cross-breed a warthog and an ossifrage (as Webster's explains) or when cultivating the soil. No when making a triumphal entry, History's Unique Event.

Matthew 21:1d-7 (excerpt) Then sent Jesus two disciples, saying unto them, Go into the village over against you, and straightway ye shall find an ass tied, and a colt with her: loose them, and bring them unto me.….and the disciples went, and did as Jesus commanded them, and brought the ass, and the colt, and put on them their clothes, and they set him thereon.

He had already found the creatures, the disciples just had to collect them. These were not two different kinds, they were not being used for agriculture, it was prophesied by Zechariah and Jesus is God.






https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gender
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/engender

[Dr. Anthony J. Toole]

No, you're getting so confused. Let me explain it even clearer to you. What I said was: Jesus, He rides the ass. The ass. Jesus. Is it clear enough? Jesus rides the ass. But He doesn't bring the ass. Did you see that? Shall I go through it one more time?

[Joanna Lytton-Vasey]

I don't understand where the question of cattle gendering with a diverse kind even comes into this. Asses are not cattle. Nor are they miscegenated, like some sort of Mexican.

But to address your original question, Brother Dr Toole, Sir, the answer is quite obviously no, as you so wisely point out in the thread title. If Jesus were with us today, it would be a sad state of affairs if He ever had any dealings with Uber, even as a passenger. I am sure He knows that He can rely on us to provide Him with a comfortable limo and a uniformed driver when the time comes.

[MitzaLizalor]

Originally Posted by Dr. Anthony J. Toole

No, you're getting so confused. Let me explain it even clearer to you. What I said was: Jesus, He rides the ass. The ass. Jesus. Is it clear enough? Jesus rides the ass. But He doesn't bring the ass. Did you see that? Shall I go through it one more time?

Yes, I see. So what was the colt doing? Matthew is explicit that there were two animals. I am aware of the poetic tradition of restating a line phrased differently for emphasis but we know Zechariah was not employing that device because when the prophecy was fulfilled not only were there two animals but they were different sexes.

EXAMPLE 1

Psalm 77
5a I have considered the days of old,
5b The years of ancient times.

The author is contemplating history.

EXAMPLE 2

Proverbs 30
15a The horseleach hath two daughters, crying, Give, give.
15b There are three things that are never satisfied,
15c Yea, four things say not, It is enough.

A progression of numbers used for poetic effect. Obviously if there are four things there are also three things. The poet could just have written "Four things are never satisfied" but that wouldn't be poetry. The meaning remains unchanged.

ZECHARIAH'S PROPHECY (cited by Matthew)

Zechariah 9
9a Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion;
9b Shout, O daughter of Jerusalem:
9c Behold, thy King cometh unto thee:
9d He is just, and having salvation;
9e Lowly, and riding upon an ass,
9f And upon a colt the foal of an ass.

Zechariah could be saying that the colt upon which Jesus will ride is the foal of an ass (which obviously it must be) for similar effect. Clearly any colt born from an ass will be an ass itself – unless it's a hinny, but miscegenation is not mentioned here.

MATTHEW'S TESTIMONY

Matthew 21
2a [Jesus speaking] Go into the village over against you,
2b And straightway ye shall find an ass tied,
2c And a colt with her:
2d Loose them, and bring them unto me …
4o This was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying,
5a Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee,
5b Meek,
5c And sitting upon an ass,
5d And a colt the foal of an ass.

No question here, the ass is female. There is also a colt. We know exactly what Zechariah foresaw: two animals. Unless you're suggesting that Matthew was attempting to write something in Greek to look like a prophecy had been fulfilled but didn't actually know what had been prophesied? At least not in its original language? That would be rather disingenuous on the part of Matthew.

[MitzaLizalor]

Originally Posted by Joanna Lytton-Vasey

I don't understand where the question of cattle gendering with a diverse kind even comes into this.

Because sometimes it's suggested that Jesus rode a horse. The colt was a horse. This contradicts God. The colt could be born from an ass yet be the progeny of a horse. I wanted to pre-empt any such suggestion and point out that if the two creatures were different they'd be bearing an unequal burden, something prohibited in the Commandments regarding mingling of unequal things. Ox and ass, wool and flax. Donkey and horse. It's not fair on the weaker element.

[Dr. Anthony J. Toole]

Originally Posted by MitzaLizalor

Because sometimes it's suggested that Jesus rode a horse. The colt was a horse. This contradicts God. The colt could be born from an ass yet be the progeny of a horse. I wanted to pre-empt any such suggestion and point out that if the two creatures were different they'd be bearing an unequal burden, something prohibited in the Commandments regarding mingling of unequal things. Ox and ass, wool and flax. Donkey and horse. It's not fair on the weaker element.

Look it's simple and you're deLIBerately trying to make a nonsense of it. Just accept it. What's wrong with you?

[MitzaLizalor]

Christians accept the Biblical record. Without it, how should there be a Christ? Matthew states that Jesus rode an ass and a colt the foal of an ass. He sent the disciples to collect the creatures but as John points out

John 12:14 And Jesus, when he had found a young ass, sat thereon; as it is written

to confirm the Biblical prophecy. God is always consistent, even in the tiniest detail cared to be examined; are you saying His prophets got it wrong?

Or (even worse) that the apostles somehow lied – after so many years to get their stories straight, of course they'd agree! If you think they contradict one another you'd need to show where.

[Dr. Anthony J. Toole]

Originally Posted by MitzaLizalor

Christians accept the Biblical record. Without it, how should there be a Christ? Matthew states that Jesus rode an ass and a colt the foal of an ass. He sent the disciples to collect the creatures but as John points out

John 12:14 And Jesus, when he had found a young ass, sat thereon; as it is written

to confirm the Biblical prophecy. God is always consistent, even in the tiniest detail cared to be examined; are you saying His prophets got it wrong?

I see you are still having your problems with this. God is 100% consistent and only a fool would ever suggest otherwise. Are you suggesting otherwise? No, good.

So formalities done, let's get down to the mat and feel out your issue with Jesus and his young ass.

[MitzaLizalor]

Thank you for replying. Yes, there could be no irregularities in what God has provided for us so that we'd know about Jesus. My understanding is very limited but for Him there are no horizons.

Psalm 147:5 Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite.

Satan, at this time of year, likes to get everyone going. Mammon is shoved forward to promote an orgy of greed—fortunately Christians are immune—but heretics are also livened up with even more asinine gobbledygook than usual. I tried to anticipate them, perhaps clumsily, and got a little off topic.

What motivates the Uber driver? Money. Why else would they do it? Jesus was not motivated by money and clearly the ass was free. But there is another aspect, recorded by John, appropriate to the season. Often people will embarrass poor folk by giving them gifts they don't want. Jesus knew about this and had a reprimand for those wishing to divert funds.

John 12:3-7 Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment. Then saith one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, which should betray him, Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor? This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein. Then said Jesus, Let her alone: against the day of my burying hath she kept this.

I've never used the Uber but appreciate that some drivers may smell funny. Or so I've heard. I'd be surprised if it were spikenard. Very surprised indeed!

[WilliamJenningsBryan]

Look, Jesus had handlers - just like rock stars that go on tour. The Bible (KJV1611) makes clear that there were two animals, an ass and a colt. As to why is not clear - we can speculate, but if God was not clear it's only because the reason is not important. Donald Trump flies in Air Force One - but there is always a backup, and maybe the colt served as a backup.

Jesus' handlers provided the ass and the colt, and whether they were hired, rented, bought, or donated is really of no concern in this - as well as if there were any quid pro quo in any of these transactions (for the same reason as noted above). Technically speaking, Jesus "owns" all of the asses and colts on earth - they're His by virtue of Him being the creator of the universe.

[Dr. Anthony J. Toole]

Originally Posted by WilliamJenningsBryan

Technically speaking, Jesus "owns" all of the asses and colts on earth - they're His by virtue of Him being the creator of the universe.

Finally some sense on this God-forsaken thread! Thank you Mr. Jennings Bryan. The Bible is absolute on Jesus' ownership of the ass.

[Joanna Lytton-Vasey]

Originally Posted by WilliamJenningsBryan

Look, Jesus had handlers - just like rock stars that go on tour. The Bible (KJV1611) makes clear that there were two animals, an ass and a colt. As to why is not clear - we can speculate, but if God was not clear it's only because the reason is not important. Donald Trump flies in Air Force One - but there is always a backup, and maybe the colt served as a backup.

Maybe the colt was used to carry Jesus's bags? I mean, perhaps it served like the trunk of an automobile. You can see that the Bible wouldn't see fit to bother mentioning that. When the President flies in Air Force One, nobody mentions that his bags were loaded in the hold.

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Originally Posted by Dr. Anthony J. Toole

Matthew 21:7
“And brought the ass, and the colt, and put on them their clothes, and they set him thereon.”
Bible says Jesus rode the ass but he did not bring the ass.

I find that people are more bothered by
"and put on them their clothes"

(I will refer to both as horses, and assume a plurality of horses, as I do not wish, at this point to wade in with authority.)

The problem is with "them". Does "and put on them their clothes" mean
(i) they (the disciples) laid their (the disciples') clothes upon both horses,
(ii) they dressed the horses in their (the disciples') own clothes,
(iii) they dressed the horses in their (the horses') clothes. (bridle/saddle, etc.),
(iv) They laid their clothes on the ground and put the ass and the colt on them,
(v) They felt certain that the ass and the colt were perfect (This verse is said to be the origin of “To put your shirt on something”, which is an expression used in horse –racing.), or
(v) something else.

The understanding is not helped by the next verse:
M't:21:8: And a very great multitude spread their garments in the way; others cut down branches from the trees, and strawed them in the way.

Here, the referent of “their” is clear: it is “a very great multitude”, and they all put their clothes on the ground. You can see why this might be – the streets of the town were similar to those in a Detroit ghetto, so the clothes would smooth the surface and the horses would not falter. But there would have been no need for the Disciples to put clothes on the ground if all Jesus had to do was get on a horse.

The final mystery is whether the multitude consisted of men only, or men and women. I mention this as you will remember that there are verses speaking against “seeing someone’s nakedness.” Or perhaps they had brought along some spare clothes.

[MitzaLizalor]

If the colt had never been ridden before it would be unlikely to have "clothes" (saddle, bridle) so human clothes are more likely. The crowd would still be throwing their garments down in any event. Isn't it fairly warm in Jerusalem?

[Joanna Lytton-Vasey]

Originally Posted by MitzaLizalor

If the colt had never been ridden before it would be unlikely to have "clothes" (saddle, bridle)

But Sister Mitza, even a newborn babe, who is born naked (if you'll excuse the vulgarity) is given his clothes. I would assume that, even if the colt had been previously un-ridden, the necessary accoutrements would have been available?

The crowd would still be throwing their garments down in any event. Isn't it fairly warm in Jerusalem?

But surely nobody would wish to smother a colt in the discarded raiment of the mob, for fear of over-heating the animal and thus causing it to collapse? This would very much have disrupted the proceedings.

[Dr. Anthony J. Toole]

The mystery deepens.

John 2:6
"He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked."

Obviously not literally, if ass is available (or a colt, respectively). But Jesus is literally wanting us to be like Him. That means we should seek for others to bring us the ass. Am I stuck on the ass gag too long? So, it appears Jesus is telling us: take it but don't bring it. But then who among ye will bring the ass?

There's more - can't speak right now.

[MitzaLizalor]

Originally Posted by Joanna Lytton-Vasey

surely nobody would wish to smother a colt

I'm sorry, I may not have been clear.

verse 8 And a very great multitude spread their garments in the way; others cut down branches from the trees, and strawed them in the way.

The multitude threw their clothes down on for the creatures to walk on then thronged around celebrating Jesus. Unless they brought extra clothes for the purpose, the garments spread out (like a sort of red carpet effect) would not be worn during the celebration.