Monday, May 3, 2010

In My Father's House (part 4)

All of the stories to be found in the narratives presented by the Gospels are there for a reason. Each one has a specific communication, and taken together as a whole, they all point towards a larger message. Luke, who without a doubt was heavily influenced by Paul, for which the crucifixion and Resurrection were everything, points consistently to the Resurrection, which we can see as we re-trace our steps through this story of Jesus.

Firstly, we find that this particular trip to Jerusalem was made at Passover. At what season did the crucifixion of Jesus take place? It took place at Passover. In fact, it was immediately after the Passover. Additionally, because it was the custom of the family to make this trip every year at Passover (2:41), this would help to explain why Mary, the mother of Jesus, was able to be at the foot of His cross, as recorded in the Gospel of John, even though we have no other record that she was ever with Jesus or His disciples and followers when He made His trips to Jerusalem and the region of Judea. Clearly, she had made the trip to Jerusalem for the Passover, as was her custom. In the story, at the conclusion of the feast, though His parents had left, we know that Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem. This would happen again at the end of His life. Following the Passover, Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem. This time, of course, He was not in the Temple courts, but rather, He stayed behind for His crucifixion and His burial.

With this consideration of His staying behind in Jerusalem for His crucifixion and His burial, it’s interesting to consider the words that Jesus spoke to His parents when they found Him. We will look at them here, but we will return to them again, to draw out an even greater depth of understanding. A number of Bible translations (NET, NASB, ASV, RV, WEB, ESV, and more) has Jesus asking His parents, “Didn’t you know that I must be in My Father’s house?” (2:49b); but there are a significant number of translations (KJV, AKJV, Rheims, Darby, Webster, Weymouth, and Geneva---naming a few) that translate this with Jesus making reference to His Father’s “business” rather than His “house.” The text itself appears to be vague at this point, as the Greek has Jesus indicating, by His response, that His parents should not be in the least bit surprised that He is concerning Himself with that which is of the Father. The words for either “business” or “house” do not appear in the text, so it is an understanding that must be supplied by the translator. Either way, one cannot be overly dogmatic at this point. Considering the use of “business,” in connection with His staying behind in Jerusalem for His crucifixion and burial makes an eminent amount of sense, as most assuredly, when Jesus entered into these things, He was definitely about His Father’s business.

The first time that Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, and His mother and father were not immediately able to locate Him, “they began to look for Him among their relatives and acquaintances” (2:44b). At the times of the feasts, individuals or families would not travel by themselves from Galilee to Jerusalem and back. They would travel in groups. The men would form one group and move at a quicker pace, whereas the women would form a second, more slowly-moving group (with babies and younger children), and catch up with the men at the conclusion of the day’s travels. It would have been at the end of the first day’s travel from Jerusalem that it would have been discovered that Jesus was not with them. Such an over-sight could have occurred relatively easily, as Jesus’ mother would have presumed that He was with His father, while His father would have presumed that He was back with His mother. So it was natural that they first look for Him among their relatives and acquaintances, before discovering that He was not with them.

Making the connection with the second time that He stayed behind in Jerusalem (having gone to the cross and into the grave), based on the messianic movements and expectations of the day, we can reasonably assert that, once again, there was a search made among His relatives and acquaintances. What does this mean? There are at least two ways to think about this. The first is that, in order to keep the “Jesus movement” going, those that were ardent in their support for Him would have looked among His relatives and close friends in order to find and choose a new leader of the movement. Ultimately, we can see that this happened, but not right away, as Jesus’ brother James, who was not one of His followers during Jesus’ lifetime, was eventually looked to as the head of the Church in Jerusalem. The second way to think about this is that the Romans, as well as the Jewish leaders that were involved in putting Jesus to death, would have expected Jesus’ followers to appoint a new leader, so as to continue His movement (at least temporarily), partly in order to avoid the shame and dishonor associated with backing a fallen leader. These groups would have diligently searched out Jesus’ relatives and acquaintances, to have them executed as well, so as to stifle any further “problems” in association with Jesus. This would explain the disciples’ hiding and cowering in fear, behind locked doors.

No comments:

Post a Comment