John F. Pearce, of Danbury, Conn., is troubled over what appears to him a contradiction between John and the synoptic writers as to the time at which Jesus reached Bethany and rode thence into Jerusalem. He asks me to explain the matter. In seeking to do so, it is best to take up the account in John and understand it clearly before we look at those in the other Gospels. We shall thus know precisely what points of likeness or unlikeness exist between them.

      John's first statement is that "six days before the passover Jesus came to Bethany." If the passover began on Friday, which is certain, though it has been questioned by a few writers, then six days before the passover fixes the arrival of Jesus at Bethany on Sunday. [405] This follows from the universal custom of the Jews, in stating the number of a series of days or years, to include in the aggregate both the first and the last, even when only a small part of either was actually included. According to this method, a count of six days ending Friday must begin with Sunday.

      John's second statement is that "they made him a supper there," and the supper was the one during which Mary anointed his feet with costly ointment. Though not explicitly stated, the presumption is that this supper was given on the evening after his arrival. Then, we are told that "on the morrow a great multitude that had come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, took branches of the palm-trees and went forth to meet him." The triumphal entry follows, and the day was Monday.

      Bro. Pearce says that he has "defended Palm Sunday." But if John's account is correct, he can do that no longer. It is palm Monday, if it is palm anything. Thus one of the Roman Catholic traditions, which is without foundation in fact, passes away.

      Now let us turn to the synoptic Gospels, and see if they differ from John's. Mark and Luke both say that "when they drew nigh unto Jerusalem, unto Bethphage and Bethany, at the mount of Olives, he sendeth two of his disciples, and saith to them, Go your way into the village that is over against you, and straightway as ye enter into it ye shall find a colt tied whereon no man ever sat: loose him and bring him." The public entry immediately follows. Into which of the two villages they were to go, neither of these two accounts would enable us to know. But Matthew is at this point specific. He says nothing about Bethany, but says: "When they drew nigh to Jerusalem, and came to Bethphage, unto [406] the mount of Olives, then Jesus sent two disciples, saying to them, Go into the village that is over against you," etc.; which shows that Bethphage was the village in which they found the colt. The two villages were close together, but Bethphage, as its recently discovered ruins attest, was nearer to Jerusalem.

      It now appears that all three of the synoptists begin their accounts of this transaction on the day in which the ass was procured and the ride into Jerusalem took place. They say nothing as to what day of the week it was, or how long before the passover. The difference, then, between them and John is only this, that John mentions the arrival of Jesus at Bethany the day previous to the procuring of the ass, and also the supper that was given him There is not a shadow of contradiction or of inconsistency.

      But this is not the whole story. While Mark, like the other synoptics, says nothing about the day of the week, he makes a series of chronological statements, extending from the day of the public entry to the first day of the passover, which corroborate perfectly the six days of John. To show this let us suppose Monday to be the day of public entry, and make the count. He says, at the conclusion of his account of the ride, that Jesus "entered into Jerusalem, into the temple; and when he had looked round about upon all things, it being now eventide, he went out to Bethany with the twelve" (11:11).

      This brings us to the close of Monday; and it shows, by and by, that the public entry took place in the afternoon. Mark next says that "on the morrow, when they were come out from Bethany, he hungered," and then comes the incident of the barren fig-tree (12-14). This now is Tuesday. They go into the city, he casts out the traders whom he had seen there the evening [407] before, and the statement follows that "every evening he went forth out of the city" (19). Then comes the statement that "as they passed by in the morning, they saw the fig-tree withered away from the roots" (20). This is Wednesday. They pass on into the city (27), and the discussions follow which occupy the rest of the eleventh chapter and all of the twelfth. Then he goes out to the mount of Olives, and delivers the discourse about the destruction of Jerusalem and his second coming (13:1-37). At the close of this discourse, still Wednesday, Mark says, "Now after two days was the feast of the passover and the unleavened bread" (14:1). But "after two days" from Wednesday, in Jewish count, would be Friday. So we have counted in Mark five consecutive days--Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday; and if we add to these the sixth day previously mentioned by John, but omitted by the synoptics, we have John's account reproduced.

      Let me say, in conclusion, that in every instance of a contradiction charged against the gospel narratives, a thorough study of the passages involved demonstrates the falsity of the charge.

[SEBC 405-408]