Did Jesus ride one or two donkeys into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday?

Hidden in plain sight

Each of the four Gospels tells the story of what today is known as Palm Sunday. This is described as Jesus' triumphant entry into Jerusalem on the first day of the week before his crucifixion.

Depictions in books and in film show Christ riding an ass as he enters the holy city, and palms are placed on the path. Matthew, however, in chapter 21, provides a detail not mentioned in Mark, Luke, or John about this event.

1 And when they drew nigh unto Jerusalem and were come to Bethpage, unto the mount of Olives, then sent Jesus two disciples,

2 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.

5 Tell 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.

This confrims the prophecy found in (Zechariah 9:9)

Rejoice greatly, Daughter Zion!

Shout in triumph, Daughter Jerusalem!

Look, your King is coming to you;

He is righteous and victorious,

humble and riding on a donkey,

on a colt, the foal of a donkey.

Was there one doneky or two?

During that dispensation of time donkeys were considered animals of peace and horses beasts of war. Matthew, quoting Zechariah, mentions two animals, but some interpret the prophet to be saying Jesus rode one animal, a donkey, which was a colt, the foal of a donkey.

A question would be, why was Zechariah redundant? Why would he need to explain that a colt was the foal of a donkey? Wouldn't that be obvious? The prophet may have been speaking of only one ass, and his words could be explained by Hebrew Parralielism which is saying the same thing more than once.

How would two beasts be utilized?

If there were two beasts of burden, how was this possible, and why did Mark, Luke, and John not mention the details? I once heard a pastor say that the gospel writers told their stories based on their personal point of view.

Consider how several people can be witnesses to an accident but tell it in slightly different ways. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John all explain the crucifixion, but the narratives are not 100% identical. So, how can we reconcile these accounts of the same day without implying that someone was mistaken?

There are several theories on the issue

When it comes to the foal and her colt, there are three main theories on why there may have been two of them. One is that perhaps Jesus rode on one animal, and coats were placed on the other as they entered the city.

Another idea is that Jesus did not want to separate the foal from its mother, so he rode the colt, and the donkey walked along beside them. A colt that had never been ridden was a sign of purity, and keeping the mother with it would have soothed the young ass.

The third theory is that Jesus used the older donkey to ride up the mountain and sat on the colt as he rode into Jerusalem. If Matthew misinterpreted Zechariah, who may have used parallelism, then none of this matters.

Each of these explanations sounds plausible, but at this point, there is no way to know for certain which one is accurate. What is known is that He rode into Jerusalem as the people hailed Him King.