Our Homeboy Jesus

If you have ever watched one of those movies “based on a true story,” you may have noticed a disclaimer in the end credits that goes something like this:

This is a dramatization inspired by certain actual events. Some of the names have been changed and some of the events, dialogue and chronology have been fictionalized for dramatic purposes.

It’s a fact of life that the motion picture medium is different from the written word. An author can explain background at length on the printed page in ways not available to the director in a two-hour movie. So the script writer will reshuffle events and combine characters to tell the story in a fashion that will be intelligible to an audience who has little or no familiarity with the original events.

Inspired by Actual Events

Luke takes that approach with the Third Gospel. It opens (1:1-4) with an acknowledgement of the existence of other gospels (“many have undertaken to set down an orderly account of the events”) and explains “I too decided, after investigating everything carefully from the very first, to write an orderly account.” He will incorporate the pre-existing material into his own work, but Luke feels he has a free-hand to shape the material to suit his theological needs because his sources did the same.

Biblical scholars know that one of Luke’s sources was the gospel of Mark. We’ve seen how Luke follows Mark’s structure in beginning his account of the public ministry with John the Baptist and Jesus’ baptism, followed by Jesus being tempted in the desert. Here is where Luke departs from Mark’s chronology. After the temptation in the desert, Mark announces the arrest of John the Baptist and Jesus’ return to Galilee (Mk 1:14). Over the course of the next few chapters, Mark documents the calling of the first disciples and various healings and parables. It is not until chapter 6 that Mark recounts Jesus’ return to Nazareth where he is rejected (6:1-6). Matthew follows Mark’s chronology and doesn’t report Jesus’ rejection in Nazareth until halfway through his gospel (13:54-58).

In contrast, Luke goes his own way in placing Jesus’ rejection in Nazareth (4:16-30) as the kickoff of his public ministry. Why? One reason seems to be that Luke wants to use this scene to highlight two themes of his gospel: Jesus as fulfillment of the OT and Jesus as the “sign to be contradicted” promised in Simeon’s prophecy (Lk 2:34). A second reason is that it portrays Jesus as “teacher,” another favorite theme for Luke (Jesus is described as “teacher” 13 times in the gospel).

Fictionalized for Dramatic Purposes

Luke takes the barebones of the Marcan account (“he began to teach in the synagogue and many who heard him were astonished”) and fleshes it out with details: Jesus stood up to read, was given the book of Isaiah, reads the passage (a composite of Isaiah 61:1-2 and 58:6), gave the book to the attendant, and sat down with all eyes fixed upon him. ). In the synagogue, the reading of Scripture would be done standing while the interpretation would be done while seated. Luke builds the tension as the audience – both in the synagogue and readers of the gospel – wait to hear Jesus say, “Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.”

Initially, his audience seemed impressed and ask, “Is this not Joseph’s son?” One gets the impression of “hometown boy makes good.” After this, though, the episode gets a little incoherent.

In the Marcan source, the reaction of the Nazarenes is more along the lines of “who does he think he is?” They call him “the carpenter, the son of Mary” and take offense with him. That’s when Jesus says, “A prophet is not without honor, except in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house.” The implication is that his immediate and extended family also rejected him (in Mark’s gospel, Jesus’ family thought he had lost his mind) and Jesus marveled at the lack of belief in Nazareth.

The rejection in Nazareth makes sense in the context of Mark (and Matthew) because this occurs after Jesus has already spent considerable time touring Galilee preaching and healing. But in Luke, no miracles or healings have yet been reported. His initial reception in Nazareth seems quite receptive.

“Well, that escalated quickly.” Jesus is Rejected in his Hometown, woodcut from Images of Scriptural History (1593) planned by Jerome Nadal, S.J. 

Things Get Ugly

That’s when we see material that only appears in Luke’s version of the story. Jesus cites a proverb (“Physician, heal thyself!) and discerns the crowd desires to see him perform miracles like he did at Capernaum. But Luke has not reported any miracles performed in Capernaum! This is a giveaway that this passage originally occurred later in the ministry and, although Luke moved it to the beginning of the ministry, he didn’t bother to eliminate the inconsistency.

It’s at this point (v. 24) that Jesus delivers the “no prophet without honor” line from Mark except Luke leaves off the part (in italics in the quote above) about the prophet being rejected by his kin since, in Luke’s gospel, the family of Jesus were believers. Vv. 25-27 are also lines only found in Luke as Jesus compares himself to the prophets Elijah and Elisha who were sent to help non-Israelites.

In the final verses (28-30) we finally see those in the synagogue filled with rage, determined to throw him off a cliff. Because Nazareth wasn’t built on a cliff, this may be an example of Luke’s fuzzy geography, or he may have wanted to foreshadow the crucifixion. Luke’s vague description of Jesus’ escape (“he passed through the midst of them and went on his way”) should not be considered a miracle because that would have given the Nazarenes the miracle they were hoping to see.

Looking back on how Jesus’ message was received over the course of forty years, Luke summarizes the gospel message in this passage. Jesus was rejected by his own but found acceptance among Gentiles. Jesus proclaimed himself as the fulfillment of OT promises, but provoked the fury of his co-religionists. Initially drawing crowds eager for the next miracle, the same crowds turned against him and sought to destroy him. Jesus escaped with his life this time because his hour had not come, but the clock is ticking.

Samson the Nazorean?

One aspect of Matthew’s style is to quote a passage from the OT prefixed with words to the effect: “All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet who said...” Matthew does this more than any of the other evangelists, some 10 to 14 times (depending on what qualifies as a citation). In most cases, it breaks up the narrative flow and the passage reads better without the citation.

Almost certainly, these OT quotes were added by Matthew and were not part of the tradition he received. For example, Mark 1:14 records the beginning of Jesus’ ministry in Galilee after John the Baptist’s arrest. This verse is paralleled in Luke 4:14, also without a Scripture citation. But when Matthew records the same incident in his gospel at 4:12-16, he states this was done to fulfill what Isaiah prophesied in Is 8:23-9:1 (9:1-2 in some translations).

In a previous article, I covered Mt 1:22-23, the first of his 10-14 fulfillment citations. Mt 2 offers three or maybe four more prophetic citations. Let me briefly discuss each one.

1. From you will come forth a ruler who will shepherd my people (2:6)

This is an oddball passage. First, it does cite the OT but lacks the “all this took place to fulfill…” formula. This is one of those cases scholars are not sure should count as a prophetic fulfillment.

Second, the citation references two separate verses from the OT:

• “But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, who are little to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel.” (Micah 5:1; 5:2 in some translations)
• “You shall be shepherd of my people Israel” (2 Samuel 5:2)

Matthew made some minor changes like replacing Ephrathah with “land of Judah” for the better understanding of his readers, but nothing substantial.

This passage is one piece of evidence that there was an expectation in the 1st century CE that the messiah would be born in Bethlehem. John 7:41-42 provides independent evidence of the same expectation. Matthew and Luke wrote their infancy narratives in part to affirm that Jesus was in fact born in Bethlehem, although he was better-known as a resident of Nazareth. 

2. Out of Egypt I have called my son (2:15b)

An almost verbatim citation of Hosea 11:1. The only thing worth mentioning is that the “son” in the original is a reference to Israel and its exodus from Egypt. Matthew, like his contemporaries, was not overly concerned with interpreting a verse in its original context. 

3. Rachel crying for her children (2:18)

Again, we have a fairly accurate citation of Jeremiah 31:15. In the original context, Jeremiah is possibly referring to Judah’s defeat by the Babylonians; Ramah was a staging point for the deportations from Jerusalem (Jer 40:1). Also, in the original context, the figurative Rachel is being told to stop weeping because her children will return from the enemy’s land (vv. 16-17). There is no such hope in Matthew’s situation.

4. He will be called a Nazorean (2:23b)

The evangelists use the terms “Jesus the Nazarane” and “Jesus the Nazorean” interchangeably. Matthew, however, only uses the Nazorean form. And he only uses it here at the beginning of his gospel and again towards the end (26:71).

This is the oddest fulfillment citation yet because there is no clear OT verse that Matthew is citing. Did Matthew just make it up? The best guesses for his OT sources are:

• “He will be called holy.” (Isaiah 4:3)
• “I have been a Nazirite of God.” (Judges 16:17)

Now, if those two OT verses don’t seem anything at all like Matthew’s citation, you’re not alone. This will require a bit of explanation.

Nazirite comes from the Hebrew word nazir, meaning “set apart as sacred.” (It should definitely not be confused with the German Nazi Party!) The Nazirite vow is explained in Numbers 6:1-21 and involves abstaining from the products of grapes, cutting of the hair, and contact with the dead. The vow was usually taken for a short period of time, but there were some (like Samson and Samuel) who were life-long Nazirites. The quote above from Judges is Samson’s statement to Delilah as to why he does not cut his hair.

World’s worst haircut. Samson was a Nazirite and Matthew saw this as foretelling Jesus would be a Nazorean? Victor Mature and Hedy Lamarr (inventor of spread-spectrum technologies) in Cecil B. DeMille’s Samson and Delilah.

When this verse was translated into Greek, some manuscripts took a literal approach and translated nazir as Naziraios, while other manuscripts freely translated it as hagios (“holy one”). Keeping in mind the interchangeability in the Greek versions of hagios/Naziraios, when Matthew looked at Is 4:3, he could read it as “He will be called a Naziraios.” This is very close to what Matthew wrote down: “He will be called a Nazoraios.” 

Essentially, Matthew is getting a two-fer as the word Nazoraios both describes Jesus as coming from Nazareth, and it also depicts him as the “Holy One of God.” Some explanation of Jesus coming from Nazareth was necessary because, unlike Bethlehem, Nazareth is never mentioned in the OT at all. If the prophets foresaw the virginal conception, birth in Bethlehem, the massacre of the innocents, and the flight into Egypt, then they must certainly have foretold that Jesus would come from Nazareth. The “Holy One of God” title is a very unusual one for Jesus, appearing only in Mark 1:24; Luke 4:34; and John 6:69.

This convoluted way of interpreting Scripture was common in Matthew’s day. It was based on the idea that all of Scripture had God as the one author and spoke with one voice, although in many accents. As a scribe, Matthew would see himself as discerning a pattern in the Scriptures that pointed to God’s plan for the birth and ministry of his Son.

An Epiphany of Sorts

The word epiphany comes from the Greek word meaning “appearance” or “manifestation.” In the Church calendar, the feast of Epiphany is traditionally celebrated on January 6 in commemoration of the coming of the magi to the Christ Child and marks the end of the 12 days of Christmas. Called “Three Kings Day” in some countries, the festival celebrates the first manifestation of Christ to the Gentiles. In conversational usage, “epiphany” means a sudden flash of understanding or insight through a simple or commonplace experience.

Visit of the Astrologers

Mt 2:1-23 provides the story of the visit of the magi, the flight to Egypt and the massacre of the innocent. The evangelist jumps straight from Joseph naming Jesus after his birth in 1:25 to the magi arriving in Jerusalem in 2:1. The magi, or wise men, were most likely astrologers, not kings. Matthew doesn’t say how many there were or their point of origin other than that they were “from the east.” The popular idea that there were three wise men is based on the three gifts the magi brought: gold, frankincense and myrrh. Later traditions (from the 6th century CE) provide them with names such as Melchior, Gaspar, and Balthasar, different ethnicities and ages (old man with a white beard, young beardless man, and man with black skin).

The Adoration of the Magi, tapestry (designed by Edward Burne-Jones 1888, woven 1894)

Noting the rising of a particular star, the magi determined that it signified the birth of the “king of the Jews.” Thus, it was observations of the natural world that led the Gentile astrologers to the messiah. But, the natural world reveals only so much; the magi must inquire of King Herod the Great in Jerusalem as to the exact location of the child. God’s revelation in Scripture is needed for them to complete their journey.

Herod calls together his “chief priests and scribes” – the same antagonists that the adult Jesus will face in his ministry – and is told that Bethlehem is the birth place based on Micah 5:2. Although Herod and his scribes have the Scriptures, they do not believe and hence cannot use that information themselves. Herod learns the exact time of the star’s appearance – presumably the date of the child’s birth – from the magi and asks them to report back to him once they have found the newborn king.

The magi set out towards Bethlehem and the star led them to the exact location (2:9). Many have speculated if the “star” was a supernova, comet, or planetary conjunction. None of these could be used to pinpoint a particular house in Bethlehem. And it is a house in Bethlehem, according to v. 11. In Matthew’s telling, Mary and Joseph were residents of Bethlehem.

About those gifts...Matthew is not explicitly citing Isaiah, but may have him in mind: “all those from Sheba shall come bearing gold and frankincense and proclaiming the salvation of the Lord” (Is 60:6, LXX). We’re all familiar with gold. Frankincense was usually burnt as incense in religious ceremonies. Myrrh, an aromatic spice, was used as incense, as perfume, and as a cosmetic. Mixed with wine, it was offered as a painkiller to Jesus on the cross (Mark 15:23) and, with aloes, was used to embalm Jesus (John 19:39). Certainly, they were gifts befitting a king.

Refugees in Egypt

After the magi failed to return to Herod, he ordered the death of all boys two years of age or younger in the vicinity of Bethlehem. If the population of Bethlehem was about 1000, the number would be less than 20 boys. There are no records of Herod ordering this, but he was notoriously paranoid and it sounds like something he could have done. Matthew tells us that Herod decided on two years based on the time of the star’s first appearance (v. 16). The clues in the story tell us that Jesus would have been one or two years old, not the newborn babe in the traditional nativity story.

Joseph was warned of the danger by an angel in a dream and told to take his family and flee to Egypt until further notice. Only after the death of Herod (in 4 BCE) does the angel re-appear to Joseph in a dream and instruct him to return to Israel “for those who were seeking the child’s life are dead” (v. 20). This is a clear echo of Exodus 4:19 when Moses is told the same thing while he is an exile in Midian.

Joseph planned to return to Bethlehem until he learned that Herod’s son Archelaus was ruling over Judea. An angel had to instruct Joseph in one more dream that he should go instead to Galilee, whereupon he made his home in Nazareth. Why didn’t the angel simply tell Joseph in one dream to go directly to Galilee from Egypt? The awkwardness probably stems from Matthew adding vv. 22-23 to material that he inherited. Matthew is taking pains to explain to his audience how Jesus could have been born in Bethlehem – because that’s was Joseph’s home – yet was known to have come from Nazareth. (Luke uses the census to explain how Joseph and Mary, residents of Nazareth, found themselves in Bethlehem for Jesus’ birth.)

Mosaic Pattern

The imagery in Matthew’s narrative is reminiscent of stories surrounding Moses. It is not mentioned in the OT, but the Jewish historian Josephus, writing around the time of Matthew (80-90 CE), told the story of an Egyptian pharaoh who was informed by one of his fortune-tellers that a child born of the Israelites would be the downfall of the Egyptians. This caused the pharaoh to order the deaths of the male babies. But Moses’ father Amram was visited by God in a dream and told that his unborn child would be the one feared in the Egyptian prophecy. Later, as an adult, Moses fled to Midian to save his life, only returning to Egypt once he was told that those seeking his life were dead.

Much later still, when Moses was leading the Israelites to the promised land, Balak the king of Moab, called upon Balaam, a practitioner of the magical arts (the NT would call him a magus), to curse Israel (Numbers 22-24). Instead of cursing the Israelites, Balaam blessed them, predicting that “a star shall rise out of Jacob and a scepter shall come forth from Israel” (Num 24:17). This was understood as referring to the Davidic monarchy, but later was re-interpreted as a prophecy of a messianic king in the line of David.

Gospel in Miniature

Having reviewed Mt 1-2, we can see why the infancy narrative is called “a gospel in miniature.” In these two short chapters, Matthew explains various christological titles ascribed to Jesus: Christ, Son of Abraham, Son of David, Son of God, and King of the Jews. He also shows the reactions to this revelation, both good (the magi) and bad (Herod). Despite having the guide of the Scriptures, Herod (representing the Jews) rejects the messiah and tries to kill him, but he is accepted and paid homage by the magi (representing the Gentiles). This reflects the situation in Matthew’s community, which is predominantly Gentile. Although his opponents tried to kill Jesus, God protected him and later brought him back.

Studying the infancy narrative here and in Luke more than 30 years ago, was sort of an epiphany for me. I began to see that the imagery and symbolism had layers of meaning far deeper than I could have imagined. They were no longer background stories for nativity plays and Christmas specials. Understanding their true purpose helped me put the adult Christ back into Christmas.