Pause for Thought

How does one define 'passing through'? The account in Luke 4:16-30 concludes with that concept. I have never seen or heard a discussion of that recorded fact. It seems most folk will not pause long enough to consider such a thing. In this short study, we will pause for thought. We will embrace the concept. We will seek definition.

Jesus had gone home to Nazareth and preached famously. To the very people who had known him before the commencement of his public ministry, Jesus read from Isaiah. He stood and read from Isaiah 61:1, then he returned the scroll to the minister and sat down.

All eyes were on Jesus. Estimates place the population of Jesus' Nazareth from 400 to 480. One may imagine a synagogue large enough to accommodate that population. Quite a large crowd would gather there each Sabbath.

After his reading, Jesus angered the locals with his words. They felt insulted. The implication of his speech made them indignant. They somehow transformed, on that holy day, from a church-going crowd into a blood-thirsty mob. However many men had filled that synagogue, they took Jesus physically and dragged him to a high precipice to hurl him over the edge to his death.

Make no mistake: they had Jesus in hand. They had seized him by his wrists. They held him by his shoulders and arms. They shoved him angrily from behind with the bulk of the mob following. When they reached the cliff, he simply passed through that mob and went his way. How is that possible?

Here are some questions I wonder if anyone ever asks. Where were his disciples? Did they struggle to free their master from the mob? There is no mention of them. Some synagogues permitted women and older children to quietly listen from an enclosed upper balcony. Was Mary there? Did Jesus' siblings attend? The text is silent on this point. We are given only two points of reference: Jesus and the mob.

Let us pause long enough to consider what 'passing through' may involve. I leave you with these notions. Definitions include: 'passing through a hole or around something'. Did Jesus bolt through the crowd like a football player? Also, there is the passing through of 'infiltration'. Did Jesus somehow pass himself off as one of the crowd while he made his way to the trailing end of the mob? Had there been sudden confusion among them?

Somehow, Jesus moved through the physical mob in a way that ended with his body being no longer in their center. Had he used a power similar to that of walking on water? We have too little information to form a clear picture but for me, personally, I favor the infiltration scenario.

First Impressions

First impressions are important. Few will deny this truth. In this present study, I want to look at the first impressions of Jesus and what was thought of him by the people when he began his public ministry.

Luke 4:14-15 tells us this, “And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee: and there went out a fame of him through all the region round about. And he taught in their synagogues, being glorified of all.”

So then, even before he was glorified of all, a fame of him had gone out through those regions – word of mouth. But, a fame of what? All we are told to this point is that he had been baptized and that he went into the wilderness and was tempted by the devil, fasting for forty days.

There was certainly something to speak of, in regard to the baptism. For one, the Holy Spirit was seen, in a physical form, to descend upon the man. In addition to this, John had been speaking of one who would follow him – one who would perform greater works.

And just who were those people who came out to see John? There were locals who knew John, there were those who knew that Jesus was his cousin, there were tax collectors for Rome and even soldiers. There were people who knew and followed prophecy. There were people who wished to be free of the yoke of Rome, who eagerly anticipated the Messiah who would set them free.

Was John just a wild man in the wilderness? He was addressed as 'Master.' Folks did not give that title to just any passer-by. It seems that John was taken quite seriously even by the local government. It is not so much of a stretch then to think he may have had some religious training and some unmentioned connection to the religious bodies in authority. Was he a rogue Pharisee? Had he been a Doctor of the law before trading in his fine robes for animal skins?

John had a fame of his own. It might have seemed to the multitudes that he had passed on his fame to another. A point of interest about the baptism of Jesus is that he prayed. Most of us accept that Jesus was a powerful speaker. He had a way with words. I don't imagine that public prayer was present from everyone John baptized. In fact, I get the impression that the prayer of Jesus was a custom or ritual. I see it more as a practice of, say, a Pharisee or Sadducee or the Essenes.

The fame that went out abroad about the baptized Jesus most assuredly included his forty day wilderness trial. Was that a rite of passage? Was it an early Rabbinical trial by fire? It is worth consideration that, just perhaps, Jesus did not simply wander off into the hills to face his demons alone. For there to be a fame of such an accomplishment, let alone knowledge of the act, it is well within the realm of possibility that the trial of Jesus was monitored in some fashion and by some interested party.

According to Luke, when Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit, he took up a regular practice of teaching in the local synagogues. He was called Rabbi, after all. I can only imagine that those who were called 'Master' or 'Rabbi' were so called for a reason – that reason being that they were actually a bona fide Master or Rabbi.

The way we read this account in Luke gives the sense of immediacy – as of a young student who moves directly from graduation to his first job. Of course, Luke does not indicate whether the passage of time is in weeks or months. I think it would be interesting, at this point, to compare parallel passages from the other gospels.

In Matthew 4:12, 13 and 17 we see this first impression of Jesus: “Now when Jesus had heard that John was cast into prison, he departed into Galilee; and leaving Nazareth, he came and dwelt in Capernaum, which is upon the sea coast, which is in the borders of Zabulon and Nephthalim. From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”

This is the version found in Mark 1:14-15, “Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.”

In the first chapter of the gospel of John, the fact of Jesus' baptism is inferred rather than directly stated. Also, there is no mention of Jesus' forty days in the wilderness. However, we do see a progression of events marked with the expression 'next day.' First, John preaches the coming of the one that is to follow him, fielding queries from the Pharisees, priests, and Levites.

Next, John sees Jesus and directs the attention of the people to him, saying that Jesus, specifically, is the man he had been preaching about. Then, on the following day, John says to two of his disciples, “Behold the Lamb of God.” Those two desert John and follow Jesus. They spend the night with him. Where he was staying and whether or not he was renting a room, I've no idea, but it was one of those two who began to spread the word that the Messiah had been found.

The one to whom the first report of a Messiah went was Simon, a fisherman on the sea of Galilee. Obviously, they were on the move as, on the next day, Jesus went into Galilee and found Philip who brought in Nathanael. And finally, the next 'next day' that we encounter is the one that brings Jesus and his new disciples to the wedding in Cana. It is that 'next day' that is intended to sum up the progression. I would ask at this point, why had Jesus' mother come all the way from Nazareth to attend this wedding – but that is another study altogether.

The Luke version concerns itself more with the topic of fame than do the other versions. Still, it is easy to deduce from any of the gospels that Jesus was being noticed, followed and talked about.

Tradition places the location of the Jesus baptism as Bethabara, sometimes thought to be Bethany beyond Jordan, but at any rate, east of the Jordan river where the Jordan was parted by Joshua, Elijah, and Elisha. It is thought to be a one day journey from Bethabara to Cana, but from Bethany to Cana, a trip of two to three days. Considering the generalized location of the baptism, where would the wilderness most likely have been?

We get this from Wikipedia, “These discussions began to take on a different shape in the late 1990s, when mine clearing operations east of the Jordan enabled archaeological digs to unearth an ancient church marking baptism on a site where the Jordan River flowed in the first century, matching the place marked on the Madaba map. The local Arabic name of the site is Al-Maghtas, "the immersion/baptism". This rapidly led to a growing consensus among archaeologists, scholars and church leaders that this site, just east of the Jordan River and slightly north of the place where it empties into the Dead Sea, is most likely to be the place where John the Baptist was baptizing.”

Both Bethany and Bethany beyond Jordan are near the Dead Sea and within walking distance of Qumran.

Whatever we do in life, people see us and form opinions, either good or bad. All of us make first impressions. Jesus was from the beginning known to be the fulfillment of Jewish prophecy. His life progressed prophetically, from his place of birth to his place of baptism and trial, to his place of burial. People talked about these things into the small hours of the night. They followed the life of Jesus with keen interest. No other first impression has lasted as long or endured such scrutiny. Jesus is, to this day, still “glorified of all.”

The Unmarked Reputation

Not much is given us on the early years of Jesus. All the Bible will divulge is the incident when he was twelve. Yet, there is one verse, Luke 2:40 to be specific, that speaks of his years before age twelve.

Too many race past this verse assuming it only reflects the passage of time. It gives us so much more, in fact, this particular verse attributes to the young Jesus nothing less than a reputation. Let us quickly check a dictionary on the meaning of that word. It is given as “the common opinion that people have about someone or something,” and “the way in which people think of someone or something,” also the “overall quality or character as seen or judged by people in general,” as a “recognition by other people of some characteristic or ability,” and lastly “a place in public esteem or regard.”

There are four points that make up the reputation of Jesus that was held in common by the public in general. Luke 2:40 says, “And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him.” It is clear to see that each point is something visible and recognizable. Each point was a consensus.

'The child grew': that was a thing seen with the eye. His parents saw it, his neighbors saw it, the people who followed prophecy and, no doubt, checked in on Jesus saw it. Then, the child 'waxed strong in spirit': simply put, the child had a keen mind. He was clever, a quick study – perhaps a natural at solving problems thought to be beyond the scope of childhood. The normal happy chatter and games of children are usually relegated to a level of importance that is far below the daily concerns of adults. A child with such a mind would have been noticed and news of it voiced abroad.

'Filled with wisdom.' There was no public education then, there was not so much as a rudimentary level of book smarts, and yet, the public opinion of Jesus was that he was wise. I doubt that his wisdom would have merited canonical mention had only his Mom or Dad thought he was wise. There had to be a consensus of public esteem. No trivial matter would it have been to find wisdom in an uneducated child of that day. People would have sought to derive some advantage from it. You can bet Jesus was questioned and engaged on matters of import.

Finally, 'the grace of God was upon him' Jesus carried himself well. His manner was convincing. He sported a certain charm of demeanor. Quite a reputation for a child not yet twelve. For the normal boy of that day, knowledge would have consisted only of those things learned from the mother, the father, or heard in the Sabbath services. Such a reputation did not necessarily mean that he was liked for it by every illiterate, hard-working person of the community: daily concerns and the political clime of the time were just too pressing.

All of this culminated in Jesus' coming of age as seen in this excerpt from a Bible Gateway article on the topic: “Jesus is twelve years old. If the Mishna is relevant to the first-century Jewish practice, which is likely in this case, then religious instruction would have become more intense for Jesus upon his reaching twelve (m. Niddah 5:6; m. Megilla 4:6; m. `Abot 5:12). The custom of bar mitzvah for a thirteen-year-old Jewish boy was not in place at this time (Fitzmyer 1981:440).”

There is more to the reputation of young Jesus as we see in verse 52. After the incident of the temple at age twelve, Jesus returned with his family to Nazareth and was subject to them – but – his reputation continued to grow. He was generally known to have become even wiser. He increased in stature, which may mean, as Merriam-Webster puts it, “the level of respect that people have for a successful person.”

Not only that, but Jesus also was liked and respected in his community. There was the evidence of public consensus that Jesus increased in not only in favor with God, but also in the regard of friends and acquaintances. All of this early reputation may have ultimately been relegated to public life. His public ministry, at the age of thirty or so, might have been somewhat of a head-scratcher for the community he grew up in.

There is nothing in the scriptures of the life of such a one with such a reputation. Had there originally been texts that church authorities later deleted, it begs the question 'just what did they wish to hide?' Despite the lack of specifics in Jesus' early life, I am still encouraged that something, even as generic as this, remains. The few words of this study tell a big truth.

A Mother's Child

On this Mother's Day, many mothers around the world are blessed and revered by their children. Moreover, the fathers and husbands revere the mothers and wives. It is clearly seen that there is something special about them, something worthy of praise. No mother in history has received more praise than the mother of the savior of mankind. Yet, her praise is indirect – that is through the son.

In Luke 2:34, an old man named Simeon blessed the child Jesus according to the customs and laws of that day. He had been assured by the Holy Spirit that he would not die until he saw with his own eyes the Lord's Christ. Simeon, a devout Jew who awaited the consolation of Israel, clearly saw Jesus as a light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of Israel (the people.)

When Simeon blessed Jesus, Mary shared that blessing in her heart. When Simeon praised Jesus as Christ and savior, Mary felt it and tucked it away as a special treasure and reason for joy. Mothers shine the brightest in their children. The praiseworthy Mom dotes on her children and gives her all for their benefit. The formative years of a child belong to the mother, insomuch that we may be sure much of who Jesus was came by way of who Mary was.

So Mary, proud of her son, humbled and awed, stood before Simeon, Joseph by her side, and received each and every word with acute interest. She was surprised by the words that came through his lips, but not unduly – she had, after all, spoken with an angel of the Lord. Simeon served to justify her thoughts – thoughts she handled every day since the words of the angel.

It was the Jewish thought and law that the first-born male was accounted holy to the Lord. Mary began with that. Then an angel comes along and tells her Jesus would be considered not only holy but the very son of the Most High. Now, she stood before Simeon and heard his words added to everything else.

This child was set for the fall and the rise of many in Israel, a sign that would be spoken against, so that the thoughts of the hearts of many might be revealed, including Mary's thoughts. She would know that her thoughts had been right all along; she would know her son as the son of God and savior of her people. Perhaps through the coming years, Mary would become the most educated person on the topics of Christ and salvation. She would ask; she would search it out; she would store it away in her heart.

Let us take a moment to consider the concepts that were bodied forth in this section of scripture. To say they are curiously worded would be an understatement. A light to lighten the Gentiles: we see this reflected in the first chapter of the gospel of John, verses one through twelve. Isaiah also wrote of this light in Isaiah 49:6 when God said, “It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.”

The glory of your people Israel: may correctly be viewed as 'the best representative' of the people of Israel. Jesus was, in his place, a model to be aspired to. Jesus was the perfect model of the type of Hebrew, Israeli, Jew, Christian, and man of any nation that God desired.

The fall and the rising again of many in Israel: This speaks to us of building, especially of demolition that clears the way for something new. The ministry of Jesus was set against many in fact. We see the church elders, the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the scribes, the lawyers and Doctors of the law all thoroughly bashed by the truths of Jesus. They lost quite a bit of standing in the eyes of the locals and perhaps more so in the eyes of the Roman authorities. Religious authority, as a whole, fell – but they recovered and were better for the humbling. History teaches they were set on a path of improvement: individual-faith-in-God-wise.

Christ was not only the new and improved Israel, he was the new and improved non-Hebrew (and this was how Mary's son was to prove himself the light from God) for anyone anywhere who believed, to them he gave the power to become children of God. He included everyone, even the enemies of faith. There was but one test: nothing overly complicated, just 'believe'.

It was not necessarily a bad thing that Jesus was set for a sign to be spoken against. The whole thing about spiritual demolition and reconstruction is getting a heart to commit. One must not only take a stand, but one must be known for that stand. The religious authorities dressed in their finest religious garb, but underneath, they were the enemies of God. That had to come out. Ultimately, we all must know exactly where we stand.

Our hearts can betray us with a multitude of superfluous and duplicitous thoughts, all of them camouflaged to the end of personal advantage – but that is neither 'yea' or 'nay'. One must choose – and one must believe in one's choice.

Mary believed, but she was prejudiced – it was her son. The Pharisee, Nicodemus, believed – but he had to struggle with what he thought he believed. He had amassed a lifetime worth of head knowledge that only left him unsure. The desperate father of a demon-possessed son wanted to believe, and cried out in tears, “help thou mine unbelief.” Do you want to believe?

Honor your mother, praise her and know that in the doing you prove you are more aligned to faith than not. You are more the child of God than you let on. You may be struggling with preconceptions that hinder your reconstruction. God is love and Christ is our example of the son of love. If mothers teach us anything, it is how we are who we are because of love.

Heavenly Politics

I turn my attention to a small verse in the second chapter of Luke. It is always the little things – things we overlook, things we take for granted or at face value – things that speak volumes.

Here is an angel of God speaking to shepherds in the fields at night. An innumerable host appears with the angel, lighting up the night sky in a fearsome manner. They are promoting the birth of Christ to the locals. A little word of mouth goes a long way. Their advertisement is magnificent and frightening.

It is a small account, but no telling of the Nativity is complete without it. It is heard often at the season of Christmas, it is sung about, and preached in churches, and I suppose – if you focus on the manger or the angels, you might miss the actual wording of the celestial beings.

In the Bible, the words 'host' and 'hosts' refer to armies. To be sure, the hosts of God came to earth in the old testament to fight the armies of the world. So when we talk about the heavenly hosts, we are actually speaking of a war machine. When we turn our thoughts to such matters, politics comes to mind.

We recall that the hosts of heaven once fought among themselves. It was civil war among angelic factions, as one seceded from the union and battled for its own identity. Such are matters that must be solved politically. Just as one such political tool is the crack commando squad of highly trained elite forces, so another tool that has often proved useful is negotiation.

The highest ranking authority will set terms and conditions for a peace treaty. Something is given, and something is expected in return. Wars end with peace treaties. It is through such negotiations that hostilities come to an end so the important things may once again occupy the mind.

When you hear the story of the angels praising God before the shepherds, you might at first be impressed that these celestial beings all worship and serve God. You might think these thoughts in a vacuum, that is, without reference to the politics of Heaven.

Was Christ a peace offering that brought about an end to celestial hostilities? Had some of the angels set themselves against mankind? Were we like the slaves of the American Civil War – property over which some fought to hold and some fought to free?

The wording of the heavenly hosts in the presence of the shepherds is the impetus for this study. They could have said anything. They could have said what they said in a number of different ways. Yet, they chose to use these words: “And on earth peace, good will toward men.”

One has to ask: 'peace' as opposed to what? 'Good will' as opposed to what? Had the tides just turned? Had there not been good will toward men? Had there been, instead, hostility toward mankind? Was earth a battlefield upon which there was now peace, an end to hostilities? Was that peace a peace between warring celestial factions?

And finally, was not the advent or birth of Christ as man as much a boon for the angels as it was for mankind? It certainly seems to have united them in a cause they could all agree on: “Glory to God in the highest.”