In a previous study I showed that an analysis of all four Gospel narratives, as they pertain to Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem during his final week of public ministry, points to Jesus entering Jerusalem and the Temple on three different days. Moreover, if we take John 12:14 into consideration, these three entries occurred over the course of four days. It seems when Jesus went to Bethany, the following day was the Sabbath, because Jesus had to search for the donkey and its colt. The text says: “when he had found him” (John 12:14), meaning the colt wasn’t tied at a specific place, but allowed to run free for the Sabbath day.
We can conclude that Luke at Luke 19:41-48 records a different entry from Jesus’ first entry into the city (Matthew 21:1-17; Luke 19:28-40), because of reasons stated previously. Namely, Jesus was already inside the city (Matthew 21:10), before the Jewish authorities objected to what was going on (Matthew 21:15-16; cf. Luke 19:39). During Jesus’ first entry into Jerusalem that year, the pilgrims in Jerusalem wanted to know who Jesus was (Matthew 21:10), because he wasn’t known to the Jewish pilgrims from around the Empire (the Diaspora). Luke 19:41-44 calls for Jesus’ rejection, but ignorance isn’t rejection. People who don’t know Jesus can’t reject him.
On the other hand, why would Jesus weep over the city during his Triumphant Entry. The people certainly didn’t reject Jesus, when they went out to meet him during his second entry into Jerusalem (John 12:12-15). So, if Jesus wept over the fact that the people had rejected him as their Messiah, that occasion couldn’t have prefaced this joyous and victorious entry!
Jesus wept over Jerusalem (Luke 19:41-44), because those who received him the day before, rejected him by the time of this, his third entry into the city. His rejection by the people in Luke 19:42 is what gives meaning to his judgment in Luke 19:43-44. The people couldn’t have rejected someone they didn’t know (Matthew 21:10-11), and neither could coming out of the city to welcome Jesus be construed as a rejection (John 12:12-15). The only recourse we have to give meaning to Jesus’ weeping on his way to the city is, no one came out to welcome him upon his third entry into the city. If the people didn’t come out of the city to greet Jesus, it is implied the people in the city no longer believed he was their Messiah. Therefore, Jesus wept over the ultimate consequences of that estimation of him (cf. Luke 11:49-51; 13:34).
After Jesus entered the city on the day of his Triumphant Entry, some of the pilgrims wanted to see him, but when Jesus announced that he must be lifted up, meaning that he would die, the pilgrims replied that they couldn’t receive a Messiah who would die (John 12:34). If he was supposed to be their Savior, how could their Messiah save them, if he died?
Of course, Jesus advised them to walk in the light they were given. Namely, they were shown that he was the Messiah through the miraculous signs he had done. If they didn’t walk in that light (i.e. believe because of that witness), darkness would befall them and he, Jesus the Messiah, would be hid from their eyes (Luke 19:42; John 12:35-36).
In Luke 19:43-44 Jesus spoke of a coming war when the whole city would be destroyed. He was referring to a time of judgment upon the nation. The same Greek word (G1984), which Luke uses at Luke 19:44, is used in the Septuagint at Isaiah 10:3. There, Isaiah spoke of a time when the nation would be destroyed. He mentioned the coming of the Lord in judgment in the person of Nebuchadnezzar. In the context of the New Testament, Jesus referred to the judgment he would bring upon the nation, as a result of the high priest’s judgment upon him (cf. Matthew 26:64). Peter also wrote of this same visitation, and he refers to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple by Rome in 70 AD (1Peter 2:12).
Smoodock's Blog 