Did Matthew misunderstand Zechariah 9:9?

Did Matthew misunderstand Zechariah 9:9?

In the Gospel of Matthew, before Jesus enters triumphantly into Jerusalem,  we are told that he sent two of his disciples to loose a donkey and a colt and told them to bring them to him. 

Matthew 21: 1And when they drew nigh unto Jerusalem, and were come to Bethphage, unto the mount of Olives, then sent Jesus two disciples, 2Saying 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. 3And if any man say ought unto you, ye shall say, The Lord hath need of them; and straightway he will send them. 

Matthew states that this was to fulfill that which was spoken of by the prophet:

Matthw 21: 4All this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, 5Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass.

The prophet in question that Matthew quotes is Zechariah and the prophecy can be found specifically in Zechariah 9:9:

Zechariah 9:9 9Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass. KJV

As we can see, just as Matthew recorded, both an ass and a colt are referenced. 

However, it is asserted, by some, that Matthew misunderstood this prophecy recorded in Zechariah. The claim being that Zechariah does not, in fact, refer to 2 animals, an ass and a colt, but rather he was utilising Hebrew poetic parallelism to refer to one animal. The ass and the colt, the foal of the ass, are one and the same animal. This is the most common objection to what Matthew recorded  by Jews today.

In his book “Lets get Biblical volume 1 ”  Rabbi Tovia Singer argued against what Matthew recorded. He stated: 

“Matthew claimed in his palm Sunday narrative that Jesus straddled two animals riding into Jerusalem.

Those who are familiar with Biblical Hebrew are aware that there is a common poetic prophecy structure in Tanach where the Third line of the text restates what is said in the second line. This is called “synonymous parallelism” – where two lines of poetry say basically the same thing in different words.”

Tovia Singer- Lets Get Biblical volume 1 page 332 

When we look at the other 3 gospels, Mark, Luke and John, unlike Matthew, we will see that all 3 writers  referenced only one animal and not 2.

Mark 11: 1And when they came nigh to Jerusalem, unto Bethphage and Bethany, at the mount of Olives, he sendeth forth two of his disciples, 2And saith unto them, Go your way into the village over against you: and as soon as ye be entered into it, ye shall find a colt tied, whereon never man sat; loose him, and bring him. 3And if any man say unto you, Why do ye this? say ye that the Lord hath need of him; and straightway he will send him hither. 4And they went their way, and found the colt tied by the door without in a place where two ways met; and they loose him. 5And certain of them that stood there said unto them, What do ye, loosing the colt? 6And they said unto them even as Jesus had commanded: and they let them go. 7And they brought the colt to Jesus, and cast their garments on him; and he sat upon him. 8And many spread their garments in the way: and others cut down branches off the trees, and strawed them in the way.


Luke 19: 28And when he had thus spoken, he went before, ascending up to Jerusalem. 29And it came to pass, when he was come nigh to Bethphage and Bethany, at the mount called the mount of Olives, he sent two of his disciples, 30Saying, Go ye into the village over against you; in the which at your entering ye shall find a colt tied, whereon yet never man sat: loose him, and bring him hither. 31And if any man ask you, Why do ye loose him? thus shall ye say unto him, Because the Lord hath need of him. 32And they that were sent went their way, and found even as he had said unto them. 33And as they were loosing the colt, the owners thereof said unto them, Why loose ye the colt? 34And they said, The Lord hath need of him. 35And they brought him to Jesus: and they cast their garments upon the colt, and they set Jesus thereon. 36And as he went, they spread their clothes in the way. 37And when he was come nigh, even now at the descent of the mount of Olives, the whole multitude of the disciples began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice for all the mighty works that they had seen;

John 12: 12On the next day much people that were come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, 13Took 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. 14And Jesus, when he had found a young ass, sat thereon; as it is written, 15Fear not, daughter of Sion: behold, thy King cometh, sitting on an ass’s colt. 

This is often used to argue that Matthew also contradicts the other 3 gospels.

Tovia Singer further stated:

“As mentioned above, this story contradicts the other Gospels, where Jesus rode into Jerusalem on one animal.” 

Tovia Singer- Lets Get Biblical volume 1 page 332 

So, did Matthew incorrectly interpret Zechariah and reference two animals instead of one? Is this an example of an error in the NT? Did Matthew really contradict the other gospels? 

The simple answer is Matthew accurately records a donkey and a young colt and for good reason, the two animals are necessary for the full fulfillment of scripture. This also in no way contradicts the other 3 gospels, despite the fact that they do not record the two animals. If you already accept the NT as accurate, without mistakes then this answer is going to be sufficient. However, if you require a little more detail and explanation as to why the inspired writer of the gospel of Matthew is correct and Tovia Singer is incorrect, then keep reading. 

First of all, we need to deal with what Matthew stated. While some people have offered explanations as to how Matthew didn’t really refer to two animals, he himself was simply using repetition to refer to one animal, Matthew is most certainly referring to two animals and not one. There is no point trying to deny this. The text is clear, there are two distinct and separate animals in the gospel of Matthew. 

Matthew states that they will find an ass and a colt with her(the ass) The colt will be with the ass. 

Matthew 21:  2Saying 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.

Ass, ὄνον onon, is feminine, it is a female donkey, while the colt,  πῶλον pōlon , is masculine. This is a female donkey with a male colt. 

Matthew also uses plural forms. 

Loose (them)  λύσαντες lysantes  and Bring (them) ἀγάγετέ agagete, are both in the plural forms.

In verse 3 we have two references to THEM:

Matthew 21:  3And if any man say ought unto you, ye shall say, The Lord hath need of them; and straightway he will send them.

The Greek αὐτῶν auton and αὐτούς. Autous, both translated as them, are in the plural.

There is no doubt that Matthew mentions two animals and both, according to Matthew, are brought to Jesus. 

While Matthew refers to 2 animals and has Jesus “riding” into Jerusalem on both, it really is a misunderstanding, and probably deliberately so, to assert that Matthew was saying Jesus literally rode on both animals. This is simple figurative language to demonstrate that Jesus came to Jerusalem utilising 2 animals and not one. 

Matthew states that the disciples put their clothes on them, the two donkeys. Both donkeys were used in the carrying of Jesus and his and his disciples belongings. This, in no way necessitates a physical sitting on both. While Matthew does state that they put their clothes on them, the setting Jesus thereon also does not necessitate the physical sitting on both animals. 

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

It is wrong, and shortsighted, to simply focus on the statement by Matthew in his Gospel alone. There is actually a LOT of detail given in Matthew, the other 3 gospels AND in the OT that all need to be addressed in order to accurately address these questions. All the Bible is given to us for us to correctly understand scripture. Scripture interprets scripture.

When we look at the gospel accounts we will notice that all 4 Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John refer to πῶλον pōlon (a young foal). Jesus, while “riding” both animals in the sense of utilising both animals in the carrying of Jesus and the clothes, Jesus himself physically sat upon the colt.  While the other 3 gospels recorded only the sitting on the colt, Matthew also records the female donkey. This is not a contradiction. The other 3 gospels do not mention the female donkey but they do not in any way make it impossible that a female donkey also accompanied the Messiah on his journey. We see this kind of “missing” detail throughout the gospels. Each gospel writer includes the information that he feels is required for the narrative that he is portraying and while often leaving out or adding information that other gospel writers do not, they do not contradict each other, rather they complement each other. 

We see this clearly in the gospel of Mark, where he records the added information that the young colt had never been ridden.

Mark 11: 2And saith unto them, Go your way into the village over against you: and as soon as ye be entered into it, ye shall find a colt tied, whereon never man sat; loose him, and bring him.

This is also reiterated by Luke. 

Luke 19:  30Saying, Go ye into the village over against you; in the which at your entering ye shall find a colt tied, whereon yet never man sat: loose him, and bring him hither.

Neither Matthew nor John include this information in their gospel. This doesn’t mean that these gospels contradict each other on this information. It simply means that 2  gospel writers included the information while 2 did not. 

 It is this piece of added information given to us in these two gospels that will help explain why the second animal is actually required. The colt was clearly a young animal, likely not yet separated from its mother (as Matthew stated the colt was found with a female donkey, probably its mother)  and had not yet been trained to carry a person, it had never been ridden before. It is ,therefore, at least logical that the mother of the colt was used in order to lead the young colt while it physically carried Jesus into Jerusalem. 

Mark and Luke also record the information regarding the disciples being confronted about loosing the colt. This is not recorded in the other two gosepls.

Mark 11: 5And certain of them that stood there said unto them, What do ye, loosing the colt? 6And they said unto them even as Jesus had commanded: and they let them go

Luke 19: 31And if any man ask you, Why do ye loose him? thus shall ye say unto him, Because the Lord hath need of him. 32And they that were sent went their way, and found even as he had said unto them. 33And as they were loosing the colt, the owners thereof said unto them, Why loose ye the colt? 34And they said, The Lord hath need of him.

It must be noted that neither Mark or Luke quote the prophecy in Zechariah. So it would seem that while they are recording the event and the facts they feel are needed in their narrative, they do not state that this was done to fulfill prophecy. 

John does quote the prophecy but he only quotes one half of the prophecy.

John 12: 15 Fear not, daughter of Sion: behold, thy King cometh, sitting on an ass’s colt.

John is focused purely on the fulfillment of the literal part of the prophecy that Jesus would be literally sat upon the colt. 

John does state that that the disciples didn’t understand but after Jesus was glorified they remembered that it was written of him 

John 12: 16These things understood not his disciples at the first: but when Jesus was glorified, then remembered they that these things were written of him, and that they had done these things unto him.

However, In verses 4 and 5 of his gospel, Matthew, explicitly states that the two animals are the fulfillment of the prophecy. 

Matthew 21: 4All this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, 5Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass.

So either Matthew was wrong and he misunderstood the prophecy in Zechariah, as Tovia Singer would assert, or he was correct and the prophecy in Zecharia does, in fact, refer to 2 animals not just one. 

Scholar Robert H Gundry wrote

“it is quite unreasonable to suggest that Matthew, who demonstrably had a good command of Hebrew, added the extra animal to fit a text he radically misunderstood”.
(Gundry, The use of the Old Testament in St. Matthew’s Gospel)

Let’s start by looking at the prophecy in Zechariah. 

Did Zechariah refer to only one donkey? 

We need to look at the text of Zechariah 9:9 itself. 

Zechariah 9:9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass. KJV

The KJV uses the conjunctive “and” here to separate the two animals, an ass “and” a colt.

However, the JSP Tanakh 1917 uses the word “even”, this, rather than separating the two referents, the ass and the colt,  into two animals, would rather conflate the two referents into one animal, the second referent simply adds details to the first. 

Zechariah 9:9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion, Shout, O daughter of Jerusalem; Behold, thy king cometh unto thee, He is triumphant, and victorious, Lowly, and riding upon an ass, Even upon a colt the foal of an ass. JPS Tanakh 1917

The JPS has used Hebrew parallelism in order to interpret the meaning of the verse as referring to just one animal. Firstly referred to an ass and then more specifically a colt. 

This rendering is also found amongst many modern versions of the English translations. This includes but is not limited in any way to the NIV and ESV.

Zechariah 9:9 Rejoice greatly, Daughter Zion! Shout, Daughter Jerusalem! See, your king comes to you, righteous and victorious, lowly and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey. NIV

Zechariah 9:9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion! Shout aloud, O daughter of Jerusalem! Behold, your king is coming to you; righteous and having salvation is he, humble and mounted on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey. ESV 

The Hebrew translated as “even  upon” by the JPS and “and upon” in the KJV is  וְעַל־ wə-‘al-

This is made up of the conjunction wə- and the preposition ‘al-

“And” and “upon”.  

We do see וְעַל־ wə-‘al-  rendered as “and upon ” as meaning, in addition to, throughout the OT. I shall give just a few examples of where the JPS, itself, does exactly that. 

Genesis 19:24 Then the LORD caused to rain upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven; JPS Tanakh 1917

Genesis 27:16 And she put the skins of the kids of the goats upon his hands, and upon the smooth of his neck. JPS Tanakh 1917

Clearly in both of these verses there is a first referent and then a second referent that is distinct and separated from the first referent. The two referents are not the same referent.

Sodom and Gomorrah are not the same, they are two separate referents, just as the hands and the smooth of the neck (of Jacob) are clearly not the same. They are distinct and separate referents.

The JPS can then, at least, be used to demonstrate that וְעַל־ wə-‘al- , can mean “and” as in addition to, a second referent in addition to a first referent and that the two referents are not referring to the same referent. 

If we take a look at the rendering of Zechariah 9:9 in Brentons Septuagint we will see that it also includes the conjunctive “and”.  

Zechariah 9:9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Sion; proclaim it aloud, O daughter of Jerusalem; behold, the King is coming to thee, just, and a Saviour; he is meek and riding on an ass, and a young foal. Brentons septuagint

The Greek reads:

Χαῖρε σφόδρα, θύγατερ Σειών· κήρυσσε, θύγατερ Ἰερουσαλήμ· ἰδοὺ ὁ βασιλεύς σου ἔρχεταί σοι δίκαιος καὶ σώζων αὐτός, πρᾳὺς καὶ ἐπιβεβηκὼς ἐπὶ ὑποζύγιον καὶ πῶλον νέον.

The Greek text includes the conjunction καὶ between the two animals. 

This would, just like the KJV mean that we have an ass but in addition to,  “and”,  there is also a young foal (colt) in reference. Brentons Septuagint inclusion of the “and” also would infer two animals.  

This does at least support the possibility of 2 animals being referred to.

Hebrew Poetic parallelism

The next thing for us to do is look at the claim regarding Zechariah’s use of Hebrew parallelism to refer to the same animal as both a donkey and a colt. 

What is Hebrew Parallelism? 

Let’s have a look at what a leading Jewish source states:

“It is now generally conceded that parallelism is the fundamental law, not only of the poetical, but even of the rhetorical and therefore of higher style in general in the Old Testament. By parallelism in this connection is understood the regularly recurring juxtaposition of symmetrically constructed sentences. The symmetry is carried out in the substance as well as in the form, and lies chiefly in the relation of the expression to the thought. The same idea is expressed in its full import—that is, in its various aspects and turns—not in a continuous, uninterrupted sentence, but in several corresponding clauses or members with different words. Hencethe name “parallelismus membrorum” or “sententiarum.” It has also been aptly called “sinnrhythmus” (Ewald). For the parallel members are related to each other as rhythmical protasis and apodosis, as προῳδός and ἐπῳδός.”

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/11902-parallelism-in-hebrew-poetry

The Jewishencyclopedia also affirms that there are 3 kinds of parallelism. 

According to the logical interrelation of the members there are distinguished three kinds of parallelism:

• (1) The synonymous, in which the same sentiment is repeated in different but equivalent words:(Ps. xxv. 5; comp. ib. exiv.; Num. xxiii. 7-10; Isa. lx. 1-3; etc.). “Shew me thy ways, O Lord; Teach me thy paths”Frequently the second line not merely repeats but also reenforces or diversifies the idea:(Prov. i. 31);”They shall eat of the fruit of their own way, And be filled with their own devices”(I Sam. xviii. 7; comp. Isa. xiii. 7, lv. 6 et seq.; Ps. xcv. 2). “Saul hath slain his thousands, And David his ten thousands”
• (2) The antithetical, in which the parallel members express the opposite sides of the same thought:(Prov. xi. 3; comp. ib. x. 1 et seq.; Isa. liv. 7 et seq.; Ps. xx. 8, xxx. 6). “The integrity of the upright shall guide them, But the perversity of the treacherous shall destroy them”Frequently there are one or more synonymous elements in both members, thus making the contrast more emphatic:(Prov. xxix. 27; comp. ib. x. 5, xvi. 9, xxvii. 2). “An unjust man is an abomination to the righteous, And he that is upright in the way is an abomination to the wicked”
• (3) The synthetical (called also constructive and epithetical), in which the two members contain two disparate ideas, which, however, are connected by a certain affinity between them:(Prov. i. 7; comp. ib. iii. 5, 7; Isa. l. 4; Ps. i. 3, xv. 4).”The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom: But the foolish despise wisdom and instruction”

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/11902-parallelism-in-hebrew-poetry

What we see then, for Zechariah to be referring to only one animal, is that  it must be the Kind 1 of parallelism, synonymous parallelism that is being used. Term A (the Ass) is equivalent to the term B (the Colt). This as we have seen would be the assertion of Rabbi Singer. 

It is my contention, however, that Zechariah 9:9 is not an example of synonymous parallelism at all. In order for it to be a synonymous parallelism, it would require the restating of the “lowly, riding” that precedes “upon an ass”. Humbly, Sitting on, or meekly, carried by, or some other similar adverb/verb would need to be usitlised here.  The fact that this part of the first clause is missing from the second, negates this from being considered a synonymous parallelism. 

Let’s take a look at a verse that is an example of Synonymous Parallelism

Job 3:11 Why died I not from the womb? why did I not give up the ghost when I came out of the belly? KJV

Notice that the second statement reiterates the entire first statement

Why died i not = why did I not give up the ghost
from the womb? = when I came out of the belly?

Let’s take a look at another example

Ecclesiasties 10:18 By much slothfulness the building decayeth; and through idleness of the hands the house droppeth through. KJV

Again the second statement reiterates all of the first statement

By much slothfulness = and through idleness of the hands
the building decayeth = he house droppeth through.

This just doesn’t happen in Zechariah 9:9

Zechariah 9:9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.

It COULD be an example of parallelism of greater precision. This is where the next line adds greater precision to the preceding line, but even this fails in the full context of the verse.

I contend that it is an example of clause A complementing clause B where both clauses have different referents but work together to form a whole. 

If we go back and look at the writing of Tovia Singer in his book regarding Zechariah 9:9 he also states:

Unfortunately, many Christians fail to read the verse that follows Zechariah 9:9, which begins with the word “And.” This conjunction indicates that Zechariah 9:10 is umbilically connected to the previous verse. The prophet completed this prophecy in Zechariah 9:10 declaring that, “he (the Messiah) shall speak peace to the nations, and his rule shall be from the sea to the west and from the river to the ends of the earth.” 

So let’s do exactly that, and look at Zechariah 9:10  

Zechariah 9:10 And I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem, and the battle bow shall be cut off: and he shall speak peace unto the heathen: and his dominion shall be from sea even to sea, and from the river even to the ends of the earth.

It should not be hard to see from this verse the clear complementary aspect of the two referents.  Term A, the chariot from Ephraim, while complimenting term B, the horse from Jerusalem, they are two different and distinct referents. They are distinct and separated from one another. 

Chariot – Horse
Ephraim – Jerusalem

This verse, the verse immediately following Zechariah 9:9 and also part of the prophecy as Tovia Singer stated,  would actually support the interpretation that while the Donkey and the colt compliment each other they are in fact distinct and separate from one another just as the chariot from Ephraim and  the horse from Jerusalem do in the very next verse. 

On further analysis, the whole of verse 9 works in this way

Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion;  –  shout, O daughter of Jerusalem:

Zion is mount in Jerusalem and so Zion and Jerusalem complement each other

he is just, – and having salvation;  two complementary aspects of the Messiah’s being.

He is a just king and brings salvation. 

Then we get the ass and the colt.

When we look at what is being stated by Zechariah in this passage, we will see the reason for the complementary referents. 

The reference to Ephraim and to Jerusalem refers to the two kingdoms of Israel. The Northern kingdom , Ephraim and the Southern kingdom, Jerusalem. The Chariot of Ephraim is used as a symbolic reference to their own power, and their warlike Kings, just as the Horse from Jerusalem means the same (translated as warhorse by the NIV and ESV).

God states that he will cut these off. The two kingdoms will neither have their own powers or kings.  

And this gives us the reason for the two donkeys. Donkeys, rather than horses, would be seen as a sign of humbleness rather than power and might that the horse and chariot would denote.
Jesus rather than coming on a horse as a mighty warrior king, he came as a humble king on a donkey. 

God clearly stated that they would not be saved by power or by horses.

Hosea 1:7 But I will have mercy upon the house of Judah, and will save them by the LORD their God, and will not save them by bow, nor by sword, nor by battle, by horses, nor by horsemen.

We see further statements by God, referencing cutting off the horse and chariots from them. 

Micah 5:10 “It will be in that day,” declares the LORD,

         “That I will cut off your horses from among you

         And destroy your chariots.

Rabbi Alexandri explained that if the Jewish people merited redemption then the Messiah would come in the clouds. If they did not he would come riding on a donkey. 

Rabbi Alexandri says: Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi raises a contradiction between two depictions of the coming of the Messiah. It is written: “There came with the clouds of heaven, one like unto a son of man…and there was given him dominion and glory and a kingdom…his dominion is an everlasting dominion” (Daniel 7:13–14). And it is written: “Behold, your king will come to you; he is just and victorious; lowly and riding upon a donkey and upon a colt, the foal of a donkey” (Zechariah 9:9). Rabbi Alexandri explains: If the Jewish people merit redemption, the Messiah will come in a miraculous manner with the clouds of heaven. If they do not merit redemption, the Messiah will come lowly and riding upon a donkey.

Sanhedrin 98a:13

What we see in Zechariah 9:10 is that there are two kingdoms. There are two donkeys that accompany Jesus into Jerusalem as they represent the two kingdoms. Jesus comes as a humble king for both the Northern and Southern kingdoms, with two donkeys, one for each kingdom. Jesus, however, only rides one as this signifies Jesus is the King of a unified kingdom.  The new Colt, that has never been ridden. The new kingdom. 

Let’s go back and continue the analysis of Zechariah 9:10. 

The conjunction “and” which Tovia Singer appealed to, is of course the Hebrew “wə”. 

Zechariah 9:10 And I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem, and the battle bow shall be cut off: and he shall speak peace unto the heathen: and his dominion shall be from sea even to sea, and from the river even to the ends of the earth. Kjv 

This conjunction word is also used between the chariot from Ephraim and the horse from Jerusalem. The Hebrew reading  וְסוּס֙ wə-sūs  “and the horse”.

Clearly the prefix wə is understood as being conjuntive, referring to “and” as in an addition to. Referent A is distinct and separate from referent B 

Referent A, Ephraim, is the Northern Kingdom while referent B, Jerusalem, being the Southern Kingdom.

The NIV includes the “and” between the chariots from Ephraim and the warhorses from Jerusalem, but it does not translate the “and” at the beginning of the verse. 

Zechariah 9:10 I will take away the chariots from Ephraim and the warhorses from Jerusalem, and the battle bow will be broken. He will proclaim peace to the nations. His rule will extend from sea to sea and from the River to the ends of the earth. NIV 

The ESV does exactly the same.

Zechariah 9:10 I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim and the war horse from Jerusalem; and the battle bow shall be cut off, and he shall speak peace to the nations; his rule shall be from sea to sea, and from the River to the ends of the earth. ESV 

Brentons Septuagint includes both “ands” in this verse

Zechariah 9:10 And he shall destroy the chariots out of Ephraim, and the horse out of Jerusalem, and the bow of war shall be utterly destroyed; and there shall be abundance and peace out of the nations; and he shall rule over the waters as far as the sea, and the rivers to the ends of the earth. Brentons septuagint 

The Greek includes a Kai at the beginning of the verse and separates the two referents with a Kai.

καὶ ἐξολεθρεύσει ἅρματα ἐξ Ἐφράιμ καὶ ἵππον ἐξ Ἰερουσαλήμ, καὶ ἐξολεθρεύσεται τόξον πολεμικόν, καὶ πλῆθος καὶ εἰρήνη ἐξ ἐθνῶν· καὶ κατάρξει ὑδάτων ἕως θαλάσσης καὶ ποταμῶν διεκβολὰς γῆς.

The JPS also includes both “ands” in this verse.

Zechariah 9:10 And I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, And the horse from Jerusalem, And the battle bow shall be cut off, And he shall speak peace unto the nations; And his dominion shall be from sea to sea, And from the River to the ends of the earth. JPS Tanakh 1917 

As the text of Zechariah, is at least ambiguous,  it is unwise to simply assert that Matthew was correct or incorrect based solely on the text of Zechariah itself. Those that believe there was one animal are going to assert Matthew was wrong, those who believe there were two animals in the prophecy are going to assert Matthew was correct. 

What should be done is to investigate the texts of both the NT and the OT for more information in order to get a better understanding of what Zechariah referred to and why Matthew explicitly referred to two animals instead of one. 

The Hebrew בֶּן־  אֲתֹנֹֽות׃  ben- ’ă-ṯō-nō-wṯ. , found in Zechariah 9:9 is found in only one other place in the OT, Genesis 49:11 and thus creating a thematic connection between the two verses.  Genesis 49:11 is also a Messianic verse,  proclaimed by Jacob.

Genesis 49:11 Binding his foal unto the vine, and his ass’s colt unto the choice vine; he washed his garments in wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes: KJV

Again the KJV uses the conjunction “and” and thus separating the foal (עִיר֔וֹ ‘î-rōw, a male donkey) from the colt of his donkey). 

But yet again, the language here is ambiguous and it most certainly could be interpreted as one animal using repetition or two distinct animals.

The Greek Septuagint yet again includes the conjunction Kai

δεσμεύων πρὸς ἄμπελον τὸν πῶλον αὐτοῦ, καὶ τῇ ἕλικι τὸν πῶλον τῆς ὄνου αὐτοῦ· πλυνεῖ ἐν οἴνῳ τὴν στολὴν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐν αἵματι σταφυλῆς τὴν περιβολὴν αὐτοῦ.

This kai is translated as “and” in Brentons septuagint 

Genesis 49:11 Binding his foal to the vine, and the foal of his ass to the branch of it, he shall wash his robe in wine, and his garment in the blood of the grape. Brentons Septuagint 

Of interest it should be noted that if we look a the 2 other English translations that we did with Zechariah 9:9, the NIV and the ESV, while the NIV excludes the “and” just like it did in Zechariah, the ESV, while it excluded the “and” in Zechariah does include it here in Genesis 49:11. 

Genesis 49:11 He will tether his donkey to a vine, his colt to the choicest branch; he will wash his garments in wine, his robes in the blood of grapes. NIV

Genesis 49:11 Binding his foal to the vine and his donkey’s colt to the choice vine, he has washed his garments in wine and his vesture in the blood of grapes. ESV 

Maybe more of interest is that the JPS Tanakh 1917 also includes the “and” here in Genesis. 

Genesis 49:11 Binding his foal unto the vine, And his ass’s colt unto the choice vine; He washeth his garments in wine, And his vesture in the blood of grapes; JPS Tanakh 1917

Here,  I would understand this as a double reference the donkey tethered to the vine is the same colt that is tethered to the choice vine, just as washed his garment in wine is the same as his vesture in the blood of grapes. However,  a point worthy of note here is that the first reference to the foal is male, however, the second in reference to the colt, literally reads the colt of his female donkey. So the colt is the colt of the female donkey that is his. The text is clearly referencing a colt and his mother. By inference, there are in fact two donkeys in view in this verse. 

This is also the case in Zechariah 9:9. The first reference to “ass” is  male but the colt is referred to as being the colt of an ass, the ass here is female. It is, in fact, also plural so literally reads the colt of female donkeys. This is simply demonstrating that the female ass herself is of a line of female donkeys.  But the female donkey is clearly referenced through inference. 

When it comes to parallels, we can often see Jesus as being depicted repeating acts that are first found in the OT.

When it comes to the two donkeys we can actually find its parallel back in 2 Samuel 16 (in full context 15-17) .

Here we are told of a story where David, the King, having just left the mount of olives, on his way FROM Jerusalem is met by Ziba, his servant who brings to David two donkeys. 

2 Samuel 16: 1And when David was a little past the top of the hill, behold, Ziba the servant of Mephibosheth met him, with a couple of asses saddled, and upon them two hundred loaves of bread, and an hundred bunches of raisins, and an hundred of summer fruits, and a bottle of wine. 2And the king said unto Ziba, What meanest thou by these? And Ziba said, The asses be for the king’s household to ride on; and the bread and summer fruit for the young men to eat; and the wine, that such as be faint in the wilderness may drink. 3And the king said, And where is thy master’s son? And Ziba said unto the king, Behold, he abideth at Jerusalem: for he said, To day shall the house of Israel restore me the kingdom of my father. 4Then said the king to Ziba, Behold, thine are all that pertained unto Mephibosheth. And Ziba said, I humbly beseech thee that I may find grace in thy sight, my lord, O king.

It is surely no coincidence that we have King David, heading from the mount of olives after leaving Jerusalem accompanied by two donkeys.  The rejected King David leaves Jerusalem and goes to the mount of olives. Jesus the accepted king comes from the mount of olives to Jerusalem. The rejection of Jesus as the king happens within Jerusalem itself. 

It must also be noted that evidence shows that first century rabbinic Judaism did not actually embrace Hebrew poetic parallelism. 

Referring to Rabbinic texts Davies and Allison wrote,

“contain numerous tendentious renderings of Scripture which ignore the rules of poetry in favor of excessively literal interpretation… some rabbis found two animals in Zech 9:9.” (Matthew Volume 3: 19-28, Davies and Allison)

Interestingly, the same Jewish source I have already cited affirms the following information:

The first to see this law clearly and to distinguish between its basic forms was the Anglican bishop Robert Lowth (“De Sacra Poesi Hebræorum Prælectiones,” 1753, Lecture xix.; and “Preliminary Dissertation to Isaiah,” 1778, pp. 12-26). Unknown to him Christian Schoettgen referred to this principle in a general way (“Horæ Hebr.” 1733; comp. Diss. vi., “De Exergasia Sacra,” pp. 1249-1263: “exergasia quid sit, omnes Rhetorum libelli docent, conjunctio scilicet integrarum sententiarum idem significantium”). But even before that Ibn Ezra and Ḳimḥi had characterized this feature of Hebrew poetry by the expression “kaful” (“doubling”) or, more fully, “kefel ‘inyan be-millot shonot” (“doubling of the thought with other words”). Both, however, regarded it merely as an elegant form of expression (“derek ẓaḥot”). On Abu al-Walid see Bacher, “Aus der Schrifterklärung des Abulwalid,” p. 39. 

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/11902-parallelism-in-hebrew-poetry

We therefore need to understand the event in light of first century Jews who would have witnessed the event. Jesus, riding into Jerusalem as an act of evidence for him being the Messiah and King had to have made sense to those witnessing the event in real life. 

We know that the crowds outside clearly understood this to be a fulfillment as they proclaimed the coming king. All four gospels record this. 

Matthew 21: 9And the multitudes that went before, and that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna to the Son of David: Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest.

Mark 11: 9And they that went before, and they that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna; Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord: 10Blessed be the kingdom of our father David, that cometh in the name of the Lord: Hosanna in the highest.

Luke 19: 38Saying, Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord: peace in heaven, and glory in the highest.

John 12:  13Took 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. 

Therefore, those that saw this event believed Jesus was fulfilling the actions of the Messiah’s entry into Jerusalem, which would have been well known to them. He was clearly fulfilling Zechariah 9:9 in the way that THEY understood. 

Whether or not Zechariah wrote of one or two donkeys is actually irrelevant. The fact is, first century Jews would have understood that 2 donkeys were in focus in the Zechariah prophecy, either because there is no synonymous parallelism, as I contend amd Zechariah specifically stated that there were two donkeys, or because that was how the verse would have been understood exegetically at the time that Jesus rode into Jerusalem. 

So, regardless of whether or not Zechariah originally wrote of one or two animals, Jesus, the Messiah, was always going to enter Jerusalem “riding” on two donkeys.  Figuratively he would ride upon the two donkeys while physically he would be carried by the Colt. The colt, which had never been ridden before,  upon which Jesus literally sat, had to be accompanied by his mother in order that he could be led from the mount of olives to Jerusalem carrying Jesus the king. The donkeys accompanied Jesus from the mount of Olives, unto Jerusalem, just as the two donkeys accompanied King David on his journey from the mount of olives to Jerusalem. However, Jesus was always going to ride the colt. 

 
While Mark, Luke and John all focused on and recorded the Colt upon which Jesus sat, Matthew recorded both animals. By recording that Jesus “riding” upon both animals fulfilled scripture, Matthew either correctly recorded the two animals as per the prophecy in Zechariah or he recorded the event in such a way as to allow for the understanding of first century Jews to envisage the verse in Zechariah being fulfilled. Matthew doesn’t intend for it to be understood that Jesus literally rode on both animals, rather he intended that it would be understood that Jesus literally rode on the colt while its mother was present and utilised in the carrying of Jesus into Jerusalem upon the colt. 

If you liked this study please subscribe here

You can buy my books on Amazon there is a link here 

Join our Patreon membership here or you can buy me a coffee through paypal