We are introduced to the story of Jesus in the Temple with Luke informing us that “Jesus’ parents went to Jerusalem every year for the feast of the Passover” (2:41). We can extrapolate from this that this is not the first time that Jesus has gone to Jerusalem, with his parents, for the celebration of the Passover. Is it really reasonable to think that a “carpenter,” which is the title given to Joseph, made this journey ever year? Well, we need to remember that Jesus’ father, Joseph, is not a “nobody” in Israel. He is of “the house and family line of David” (2:4b). Therefore, it would not be an unusual thing for him to make the trek to Jerusalem each year. So this is not Jesus’ first trip to Jerusalem. Yet for some reason, Luke seizes on this particular journey, and the story of this journey, telling us that “When He (Jesus) was twelve years old, they went up according to custom” (2:42).
As we move forward, we learn that this trip did not go exactly according to plan, which serves to explain why Luke chooses to tell us the story of Jesus’ twelve-year-old trip to Jerusalem, even though it was something that was customarily done by the family. While we learn the story from Luke, we remember the purpose of his writing and we keep the crucifixion and the Resurrection very close to the surface of our thoughts. We read that “when the feast was over, as they were returning home, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem. His parents did not know it, but (because they assumed that He was in their group of travelers) they went a day’s journey. Then they began to look for Him among their relatives and acquaintances. When they did not find Him, they returned to Jerusalem to look for Him” (2:43-45).
We can only imagine His mother’s mind-set at this terrible thought concerning what has happened upon this visit to Jerusalem. The first time she visited Jerusalem with Jesus, she heard and was amazed as a man named Simeon refers to her son as the “salvation” that God “prepared in the presence of all people: a light, for revelation to the Gentiles, and for glory to Your people Israel” (2:30-32). Anna had spoken of Jesus as “the redemption of Jerusalem (2:38b). Before those things could be said, Mary had heard the voice of an angel that “the child to be born will be holy; He will be called the Son of God” (1:35b). The same voice informed her that “He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will never end” (1:32-33). Her relative Elizabeth has said to her “who am I that the mother of my Lord should come and visit me?” (1:43) Shepherds had visited her at the birth of her child, telling her what they had heard from angels, that the Savior was born in the city of David, and that He is Christ the Lord (2:11). We know that “Mary treasured up all these words, pondering in her heart what they might mean” (2:19), and we can be sure that the pondering never ceased throughout the whole of her life.
Now, however, she has lost this child. This is terrible. Though Jesus has been to Jerusalem before, it is a big city, overflowing with people that are there to celebrate the Passover. Mary, herself overcome with fear, is certain that her Son must be fearful as well. In the midst of her fear, she forgets what it is that Luke reports to us, that between His birth and the age of twelve, “the child grew and became strong, filled with wisdom, and the favor of God was upon Him” (2:40). In that moment, we can be quite certain, all Mary can think about is getting to her Son and making sure that He is safe. With this, as we imagine Mary pondering the great and swelling words that had been spoken concerning Jesus, we can surmise that her and Joseph’s return to Jerusalem was frantic. Luke tells us that it took them a few days to find Jesus. In fact, it was “After three days they found Him in the Temple courts, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions” (2:46).
Now, at first glance, this should seem quite unusual and a bit suspicious. Children were not afforded respect in those days. Yet here it is reported that Jesus is not only sitting and listening to the teachers, but that He is even going so far as to ask them questions. Can this be true to life? Is this believable? We can be certain that no other twelve-year-olds were allowed to ask questions in the Temple courts, if they were even allowed to sit among the teachers, so why is this grace extended to this particular child? Most likely, it is because He is of David’s family line. He is of Israel’s true royal lineage, in a day when the kings of Israel were considered to be nothing more than usurpers upon King David’s throne. Together with that, because God’s messiah is called the Son of David, and because messianic expectations were quite high in that day, owing to the conclusion of the four hundred ninety years of Daniel’s prophecy, a place among the teachers might very well be granted to a boy (on the cusp of adulthood) that can make a legitimate claim of descent from King David. Now, that’s not to say that Jesus would be granted the floor and treated with the utmost of honor and respect, but that as long as He did not make Himself too much of a nuisance, He would be tolerated.
No comments:
Post a Comment