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.

The Real Temptations of Christ

Temptations are funny things. Some things that are irresistible enticements for one person don’t even merit a second thought for another. For an ordinary mortal, turning a stone into bread isn’t a temptation, it’s an impossibility. Yet it is these sort of “temptations” that confront Jesus immediately after his baptism in Matthew and Luke.

The Synoptic Temptations

Mark’s account of the temptation in the desert is terse:

And the Spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness. He was in the wilderness forty days, tempted by Satan; and he was with the wild beasts; and the angels waited on him. (Mk 1:12-13)

Both Matthew (4:1-11) and Luke (4:1-13) expand upon this brief statement with three specific temptations of the devil, and Jesus dismisses each temptation with a quote from Deuteronomy:

1. Turn stones into bread. – “one does not live by bread alone” (Deut 8:3)
2. Throw yourself from the pinnacle of the Temple. – “you shall not tempt the Lord” (Deut 6:16)
3. Worship me and gain the kingdoms of the world. – “you shall worship the Lord” (Deut 6:13)

The fact that Matthew and Luke cite both the same temptations and OT quotes is strong evidence that each drew from a common tradition that was unknown to Mark. Biblical scholars call this hypothetical collection of sayings the Q document.

The major difference between Matthew and Luke in this episode is that Luke reverses the order of temptations #2 and #3 so that the climax occurs at the pinnacle of the Temple. So which order was original in Q? Most commentators think Matthew retains the original order as the devil raises the stakes – as well as the altitude – throughout and the Deuteronomy quotes appear in reverse order. As we have seen in the discussion on the infancy narrative, Luke has a fascination with the Temple and Jerusalem, beginning and ending his gospel in the Temple. A significant chunk of his gospel (9:51-19:27) is dedicating to describing Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem, a feature unique to Luke.

If Matthew is closer to the Q source, Luke modifies it in an effort to make the temptations more believable. In Matthew, the devil asks the hungry Jesus to turn all the stones into bread. Not wishing to turn the desert into a bakery, Luke’s devil suggests he only transform one stone. Similarly, Matthew’s devil takes Jesus to a “very high mountain” to show him all the kingdoms of the world. Perhaps knowing that no mountain is tall enough to see the entire world, Luke’s devil shows Jesus all the kingdoms of the world in an instant.

The variation on the order of the temptations is a good sign that we’re not dealing on the level of history, but of theology. The point of the desert temptation scene seems to be that Jesus is recapitulating the history of Israel with his forty days representing Israel’s forty years wandering in the desert. In the context of the citations from Deuteronomy, Moses reminds the Israelites of how, during those forty years, they were humbled by hunger, tested God, and tempted to follow foreign gods. But, unlike Israel, Jesus did not succumb to these temptations.

Opting more for Iago or Emperor Palpatine, contemporary liturgical painter Eric Armusik foregoes a more devilish look for Satan in his The Temptation of Christ (2011).

Temptations in the Fourth Gospel

Both Matthew and Luke retain Mark’s chronology with the temptation in the desert serving as the conclusion of Jesus’ preparation for his public ministry. The Fourth Gospel does not present a similar episode. In John’s gospel, as we previously saw, there is no explicit baptism by John and Jesus gathers his first disciples on his return to Galilee before returning to Judea to begin his own brief baptizing ministry. Although there is no dramatic scene of the devil tempting Jesus in the Fourth Gospel, we do see echoes of the temptation episode scattered in chapters 6 and 7 of John.

1. John 6:1-15 is John’s version of the feeding of the multitude, the only miracle of Jesus that appears in all four gospels. Mk 6:45 (paralleled by Mt 14: 22) says that immediately after the miracle, Jesus made his disciples leave in a boat while he dismissed the crowd. John provides the reason: When Jesus realized that the crowd was about to “take him by force to make him king, he withdrew again to the mountain by himself” (v. 15). This attempt to make Jesus a political leader is thematically similar to temptation #3 above where the devil offers Jesus the kingdoms of the world.

2. The feeding of the multitude in Mark, Matthew and John – but not Luke – is immediately followed by the miracle of Jesus walking on water. The next day, the crowds follow Jesus to the other side of the sea. Thus begins (6:26-34) the Bread of Life discourse in John. The crowd asks Jesus for a sign, saying that Moses gave them manna in the desert. Jesus in the Fourth Gospel does not quote Deut 8:3, but his response is similar to his dismissal of temptation #1 that it is not earthly bread that gives life, but that which comes down from heaven.

3. After completion of the Bread of Life discourse in John 6, the brothers of Jesus suggest that he travel to Jerusalem for the festival of Tabernacles to work his signs and show himself to the world (7:1-9). Jesus rebuffs their suggestion because his “time has not yet come.” The similarity here is the enticement in temptation #2 to become a spectacle by performing a public act of power in Jerusalem.

The parallels between the three Q temptations and those presented in John are quite interesting. For the modern reader, the temptations as presented in John are more believable than the dramatic temptations presented in Matthew and Luke. But the gospels were not written as biographies of Jesus. They were written to present Jesus’ message of salvation. In such a document, presenting a confrontation between the devil and Jesus gets the theological point across more efficiently than describing three separate occasions in the life of Jesus wherein he was tempted to perform miracles for his own benefit or to gain political power.

Or, as I learned from Spider-Man: “With great power there must also come great responsibility.”

Jesus the Baptist

[This is the conclusion of the previous article that discussed how the evangelists tried to suppress the embarrassment posed by John's baptism of Jesus. It also covered what we can know about John the Baptist from the gospels. Since this article depends on the previous one, I recommend you read it first.]

John's Rival

If Jesus accepting baptism from John was embarrassing, what about Jesus being a disciple of John and performing his own baptisms? The synoptic gospels portray Jesus presenting himself to John for baptism and then being tempted in the desert for forty days before starting his public ministry. But the Fourth Gospel offers a different sequence of events and additional details about the relationship between John and Jesus.

The Fourth Gospel states that Jesus’ first disciples – Andrew and an unnamed disciple – were previously disciples of John (1:35-42). Andrew recruited his brother Peter and their network of like-minded individuals to become Jesus’ core group. While the evangelist makes it look like John simply pointed Jesus out to two of his disciples and they followed Jesus, the reality must have been that Jesus spent enough time in John’s company to win over two or more of his disciples.

Later in the gospel (Jn 3:22-30), we have the odd story that Jesus and his disciples set up a baptizing ministry in Judea. John’s disciples learned of this rival ministry and complained to John that “everyone is coming to him” (v. 26). John shrugged it off the same way Jesus shrugged off complaints that others were exorcising in his name (Mk 9:38-41). But, in an awkward transitional passage (Jn 4:1-3), Jesus abandoned his baptismal ministry in Judea and returned to Galilee. The reason given – because the Pharisees heard he was more successful than John? – doesn’t make much sense.

Embarrassed by the idea that Jesus was imitating the Baptist, the final redactor of the Fourth Gospel inserted an editorial comment (v. 2) that it was really Jesus’s disciples, not Jesus, doing the baptisms. It seems the idea of Jesus being a disciple of John and performing his own baptisms so cut against the idea that Jesus was a unique and greater figure than John that the other three evangelists suppressed the tradition altogether. Can we really be sure, then, that Jesus abandoned the ritual act of baptism when he started his Galilean ministry? If baptism was not a part of his ministry, why would his last words in Matthew (Mt 28:19) be the command: “make disciples of all nations, baptizing them”? And why would the early Church adopt baptism as the initiatory ritual for new Christians?

Putting it all Together

If we put the pieces together, we have the figure of John, who became better known as “the Baptist” due to his signature ritual, bathing people with water as a symbol of a future baptism in the Holy Spirit from a more powerful figure who would come after him. Undergoing baptism was an acknowledgement that the recipient accepted John’s message of repentance in the face of the immanent judgment of God wherein those bearing the fruits of repentance would be saved and the rest burned in fire.

The Preaching of St. John the Baptist by Alessandro Allori (1535-1607)

Jesus then appears on the scene, takes John’s message to heart, and accepts baptism by John. Most likely he stays on with John for a while, long enough to win over some of John’s disciples. Jesus begins his own baptizing ministry in Judea, and some resentment arises among John’s disciples. Then for reasons unknown – perhaps due to the arrest of John by Herod – Jesus abandons his baptism ministry in Judea and begins his public ministry of preaching and miracle working in Galilee. Whereas John waited for people to come to him, Jesus decided that he would go to where the people were instead.

John was an ascetic, eating simple foods like locusts and wild honey (Mk 1:6) and avoiding strong drink. Jesus, on the other hand, was not an ascetic. Unlike John, he did not fast nor avoided wine. He did not isolate himself in the desert, but had table fellowship with tax collectors and sinners. From his prison cell, John began to have doubts. He had expected the imminent arrival of “the mightier one” who would separate the wheat from the chaff. Reports of his former pupil did not match that expectation, so John sent messengers to ask, “Are you the one who is to come, or should we wait for another?” Jesus responded with an inventory of his miracle-workings and concluded, “Blessed is anyone who takes no offense at me.” In a gentle fashion, Jesus asks that his former teacher not be shocked that the end times have indeed arrived, but not quite in the fashion John had envisaged. There is no reply from John.

Implicit in Jesus’ beatitude on those who are not scandalized by him is the threat that those who cannot accept him will not share in the kingdom of God. The John who went to his death believing his life’s mission to be a failure is not the John presented elsewhere in the gospels who leapt in Elizabeth’s womb, or begged to be baptized by Jesus, or proclaimed, “Behold the lamb of God!”

John shows his influence on Jesus in the latter’s preaching of the imminent coming of the Kingdom of God and the call to repentance. John’s influence is also seen in the early Church’s adoption of baptism as an initiation rite. Jesus may have gone is own way, but he spoke highly of the Baptist, saying that he was more than just a prophet and that none was greater than John. But, for all that, John’s vision of the one to come after him was faulty. The “mightier one” would not be laying the axe to the tree or separating the wheat from the chaff, but would be making the blind see, the deaf hear, and the lame walk.

John is the bridge between the time of the Law and the Prophets and the time of the Kingdom of God. The Baptist was the greatest in the time of the Law and the Prophets, but a new era has dawned. In the time of the Kingdom of God, even the least person will be greater than John. That is what Jesus promises.

Beginning from the Baptism of John

[As I wrote up this week’s article, it quickly grew to be twice the length of a normal article, so I will divide it into two posts. The second half will be posted in a day or two.]

In Acts of the Apostles 1:15-26, the disciples had to choose a replacement for Judas. Peter lays out the qualifications: “one of the men who have accompanied us during all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us” (vv. 21-22a). Indeed, all four gospels start the public ministry of Jesus with John baptizing in the wilderness. But in so doing, they expose an awkward fact: John baptized Jesus.

Damage Control

In being baptized by John, Jesus assumed an inferior position as a disciple of John. This was an embarrassment to the early Church, particularly in its dealings with the followers of John the Baptist during the spread of the ministry. Jesus accepting John’s baptism for the repentance of sins also raised awkward questions about the sinlessness of Jesus. This inconvenient truth of Jesus being baptized by John required some “damage control” on the part of the evangelists.

Mark (1:9-11) gets the baptism of Jesus out of the way as quickly as possible and uses the occasion to reveal Jesus’ vision of God declaring, “You are my Son…I am well pleased.” Matthew (3:13-17) presents John humbling himself before Jesus, saying, “I need to be baptized by you.” In true Matthean style, Jesus intones that John must baptize him “to fulfill all righteousness.” The Gospel of John (1:29-34) avoids the subject altogether. In the Fourth Gospel, the evangelist has the Baptist recount how he saw the Spirit descend upon Jesus like a dove – the same language used in the synoptic accounts of Jesus’ baptism – but the evangelist avoids saying this occurred at the moment of Jesus’ baptism.

Luke (3:21-22) has one of the oddest approaches to the story. He doesn’t deny that Jesus was baptized, but he does avoid stating that John did the baptizing. Like Matthew, he recounts some of John’s preaching and adds some ethical teaching, but then he ushers John off the stage with his arrest by Herod Antipas. In the gospels of Mark and Matthew, John’s imprisonment is announced right after Jesus’ baptism, but Luke contorts the chronology (and logic of the story) by placing the baptism of Jesus after John is out of the picture. It’s not a goof because in several speeches in Acts of the Apostles, the speaker (like in the example above) recalls how the gospel story began with John’s baptism of repentance, but in every case Luke avoids mentioning that Jesus was also baptized by John.

“The Baptism of Christ” (1515) by Joachim Patinir

The Historical John the Baptist

What do we really know about John the Baptist? Just as with Jesus, the gospels provide most of the information we have of the Baptist, but the Jewish historian Josephus also mentioned John in Antiquities (18.5.2). Josephus’ description of John’s ministry of baptism, his popularity and his execution by Herod Antipas is consistent with what the gospels tell us.

Both the synoptic gospels and the Fourth Gospel cite Isaiah 40:3 as the rallying cry of the Baptist: “The voice of one crying in the wilderness: Prepare the way of the Lord, make straight his paths.” The Qumran community – from whose library we got the Dead Sea Scrolls – also used this quote from Isaiah to explain why they formed their community in the desert.

Mark provides only a small sample of John’s preaching (Mk 1:7-8) describing “a mightier one” who is coming after him, one whose sandals John is not fit to untie (the role of a slave was to untie the master’s sandals and wash his feet). John’s water baptism is a promise of the baptism in the Holy Spirit that will come with his successor. This saying is repeated in Matthew and Luke who both used Mark as their source material, but also in the Fourth Gospel (John 1:26-27), suggesting that this tradition is very old.

Both Matthew and Luke have more to say about John’s preaching, using almost the same words. Biblical scholars hypothesize that the two evangelists used a lost collection of sayings – dubbed Q, from the German word Quelle (“source”) – that Mark did not know about. Two “Baptist blocks” of material from Q related to John can be found in Mt 3:7-12 (which matches Lk 3:7-9 and Lk 3:15-18) and Mt 11:2-19 (which matches Lk 7:18-35).

The First Baptist Block of Sayings

The beginning of the first Baptist block portrays John as a fiery preacher of the imminent wrath of God: “The axe is laid to the root of the trees and every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire” (Lk 3:9). The second half of the first Baptist block continues the fiery theme with the “mightier one” clearing out the threshing floor, gathering the wheat into the granary and burning the chaff. The implication is that to avoid the coming judgment one needs to repent and bear the fruit of repentance; simply being a “child of Abraham” will not save you.

Luke interrupts the first Baptist block of material from Q with vv. 10-14, verses which have no parallel in Matthew. In Luke, John offers ethical advice on how one can act to show repentance. He tailors his advice to reflect his audience. For the multitudes, share your coat or food. For the tax collectors, collect no more than is required. For soldiers, no extortion or intimidations; be content with your pay. This ethical advice has an echo in Josephus who wrote that the Baptist preached “cultivating virtue and practicing justice toward one another and piety toward God.”

Josephus provides a political reason for Herod’s arrest and execution of the Baptist: “Herod began to fear that John’s powerful ability to persuade people might lead to some sort of revolt.” Herod considered it wiser to arrest John before the situation got out of control and imprisoned him in the mountain fortress of Machaerus on the east side of the Dead Sea. Mark (6:17-29) and Matthew (14:3-12) provide more details on the reasons behind the imprisonment and death of the Baptist, but Luke is satisfied in only the briefest note (3:19-20).

The Second Baptist Block of Sayings

The second “Baptist block” can be divided into three units. In the first unit (Lk 7:18-23), the imprisoned John sends his disciples to ask Jesus if he is “the one to come.” Jesus tells them to report what they see – the blind see, the lame walk, etc.

The second unit (Lk 7:24-28) is a carefully crafted composition consisting of Jesus’ rhetorical question (and three different answers) to the crowds concerning John: “What did you go out to see?” The final answer emphatically praises John as more than a prophet, saying none born of women is greater than him, yet the least in the kingdom of God is greater than John.

In the third unit (Lk 7:31-34) Jesus compares the current generation to children in the marketplace. Like the children who refused to dance to the flute, John fasted and avoided strong drink. Like the children who refused to mourn, the Son of Man (Jesus’s term for himself) did not fast and drank wine. John was called a mad man and Jesus was called “a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.”

[In part two, we will look at a tradition buried in the Fourth Gospel that seems to have been suppressed in the synoptic gospels and put the pieces together to give us a picture of how John influenced Jesus.]

Lost and Found

It is said that “nature abhors a vacuum.” The same can be said for would-be biographers of Jesus. The earliest gospel – that of Mark – begins the story of Jesus with his baptism by John. Since then, there has always been a curiosity among Christians to know what happened in the life of Jesus during those “hidden years” before his public ministry. In fact, a whole genre of literature called “hidden life” stories sprang up to describe what happened to Jesus in the years between his birth and his public ministry.

“Hidden Life” Tales

The purpose of “hidden life” stories – not only of Jesus, but of other great men in history – is to illustrate how the seeds of the adult’s success are to be found in the child. A familiar example to Americans is the story of George Washington, originated by Parson Weems, in which the young George admits to his father that he cut down the cherry tree:“I cannot tell a lie.” The tales of Jesus’ hidden life illustrate how, even as a child, he came to reveal his true nature in his own words and actions, unlike in the infancy narratives where the revelation had to happen through an intermediary.

The best-known of the hidden life stories of Jesus is the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. It recounts anecdotes of the boy Jesus from age 5 to age 12. The anecdotes of the very young Jesus portray him as a brat using his powers in a punitive fashion to blind or maim those that annoy him, but as he ages he begins healing and raising people from the dead. He also performs miracles that help his own family such as stretching a beam of wood to fit a bed Joseph was building. Interwoven through these miracles are attempts by various teachers to instruct the young Jesus, resulting in Jesus doing the teaching. The last anecdote in the apocryphal gospel is based on Luke’s account of finding of Jesus in the Temple (Lk 2:41-52).

“You are going to be so grounded when we get home.” Jesus Found in the Temple by James Tissot (1836-1902)

Some scholars believe that the miracle of turning water into wine at the wedding in Cana (John 2:1-11) is another example of a hidden life story that found its way into a canonical gospel. This is the only miracle story in the NT that involves the mother of Jesus. In a hypothetical “hidden life” anecdote, Mary would have asked Jesus to supply wine and he would have given instructions on what to do, just as he instructed Joseph on how to address the problem of the short beam in the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. If such is the case, John thoroughly rewrote the material to change the hidden life “gift miracle” anecdote into a “sign” of Jesus’ glory (“sign” and “work” being John’s preferred designations instead of “miracle”).

Luke’s Gospel version 2.0

Many biblical scholars believe that Luke originally intended to end his infancy narrative with the return of the Holy Family to Nazareth after fulfilling their duties in the Temple (Lk 2:39-40). Luke employs the literary device of an inclusio by beginning the infancy narrative in the Temple and ending it in the Temple. Similarly with his characters, Luke began with the elderly couple of Zechariah and Elizabeth and brought it full circle with the elderly couple of Simeon and Anna. He parallels the announcement, birth and prophecy of the future career of John the Baptist with the announcement, birth and prophecy of the future career of Jesus. Vv. 39-40 wrap up the infancy narrative and prepare the reader for the adult Jesus presenting himself to John for baptism.

That nice symmetry is broken with the insertion of the story of finding the boy Jesus in the Temple. This passage also introduces some inconsistencies with what went before (more on that later). It does not assume the reader is familiar with anything that happened previously in Luke’s gospel, and in fact is more intelligible if one reads it as an independent story. Yet, it has Lucan language throughout, so if the story was part of the tradition that Luke received, he reworked the material to fit it into his gospel, reprising the transitional verses about Mary keeping the events in her heart (compare Lk 2:51c with 2:19) and Jesus growing in wisdom (compare Lk 2:52 with 2:40).

In My Father’s House

The story itself is straightforward. Being an observant Jewish family, Mary and Joseph traveled to Jerusalem every year to celebrate Passover. When Jesus was twelve, unbeknownst to his parents he stayed behind in Jerusalem. Thinking he was with relatives or friends, they went a day’s journey from Jerusalem before realizing he was not with the traveling party. Returning to Jerusalem, they found him three days later (presumably, one day out, one day back, one day searching) in the Temple precincts, sitting with the “teachers” – not “scribes” or “lawyers” – listening and asking questions.

Luke says simply, “And all who heard him were amazed at his understanding and his answers” (2:47 NRSV). The Infancy Gospel of Thomas, however, gilds the lily somewhat in its version: “And those listening to him were amazed how he questioned the elders and explained the main points of the law and the riddles and the parables of the prophets.” In the apocryphal gospel, Jesus can’t simply listen and ask questions, he has to explicate the law and prophets.

Now comes the climax of the story. Mary chides Jesus for causing them worry and Jesus responds that it is only natural he should be in his Father’s house. Luke says that his parents did not understand what he said to them (2:50). Given that earlier in the gospel Gabriel explicitly tells Mary that Jesus “will be called Son of God” (1:35), why would his parents not understand when he says he says the Temple is his Father’s house? It doesn’t make sense in the context of Luke’s gospel where we have already been told the messianic secret, but does make sense if this was once an independent story meant to introduce the gospel message that Jesus is the son of God.

Having introduced this self-revelation on Jesus’ part, Luke now has a problem. It was well-established in the gospels that no one knew Jesus’ true identity during his ministry. Even his disciples did not really understand it until after his resurrection. But if Jesus knew who he was even as a boy, why did no one know who he was as an adult? Luke’s solution is to make this a one-off event and send him back to Nazareth with his parents where he would be obedient to them (2:51). He’s the mild-mannered Clark Kent growing up in Smallville, hiding from the world the secret that he is really Superman.

Our Lady of Sorrows

In the story of the census (Lk 2:1-5), Luke intends to demonstrate that Joseph and Mary – and by extension all Christians – are obedient to Roman law. In the story of the presentation in the Temple (2:22-40), Luke intends to show that Joseph and Mary were also faithful observers of Jewish law as well. The brief verse 2:21 on the circumcision and naming of Jesus is a hinge verse that could either conclude the birth narrative (2:1-20) or introduce the presentation narrative.

Hannah and the Presentation of Samuel

To understand the background of Luke’s scene of the presentation of Jesus in the Temple, we have to return again to the story of Hannah in the OT (1 Samuel 1:1-2:11). As we have seen previously, Hannah was the favored, but childless, wife of Elkanah. On a visit to YHWH’s sanctuary at Shiloh, Hannah promised that if she were to bear a male child, she would dedicate him to God as a nazirite. Seeing Hannah praying in the sanctuary, the aged priest Eli assured her that her prayer would be answered. After Samuel was weaned, Hannah took him to the sanctuary and presented him to Eli, and Samuel remained in service to YHWH.

Luke presents a version of that OT scene, but confuses two different customs: the purification of the mother and the presentation of the firstborn male child. Leviticus (12:1-10) specifies that, following birth, a woman is ritually unclean for forty days, after which time she shall present at the sanctuary the offering of two young pigeons or doves (see Lk 2:24). Exodus (13:11-15) demands the consecration of all firstborn sons, but Numbers (18:15-16) allows the firstborn to be redeemed from service to YHWH for five shekels. Bringing the child to the sanctuary is not a requirement.

Just as Luke employed the census to bring Joseph and Mary from Nazareth to Bethlehem, he now utilizes the purification ceremony to bring the couple to Jerusalem. This allows him to end the infancy narrative in the Jerusalem Temple, just as he began the infancy narrative in the Temple with Gabriel’s annunciation to Zechariah. Since Jesus is being redeemed and not dedicated, there is no need to present him in the Temple, but Luke wants to parallel the story of Hannah presenting Samuel to Eli, with the aged Simeon standing in for the priest Eli.

Simeon and the Oracle of the Pierced Soul

Simeon is described in OT terms: “upright and devout and waiting for the consolation of Israel.” He is also described as something of a prophet, so Luke is joining the themes of Law (purification of the mother, presentation of the firstborn) and the Prophets. Simeon takes the child Jesus in his arms and utters two prophetic oracles. We have previously discussed the first oracle (Lk 2:29-32), the Nunc Dimittis, as well as the second oracle (Lk 2:34-35) foretelling that Jesus will bring about division.

In Catholic iconography, the Virgin Mary is frequently portrayed with a sword through her heart. This represents Simeon's prophecy in Luke 2:35 that a sword will pierce her soul.

The most obscure part of Simeon’s second oracle is the parenthetical line addressed to Mary: “indeed, a sword will pass through your own soul.” The most common interpretation of the sword piercing the soul is the pain of sorrow that Mary will experience as she stands at the foot of the cross and witnesses the death of her son. The problem with this interpretation is that the scene of Mary at the foot of the cross comes from the Gospel of John (19:25-27), not Luke. Since a verse from Luke should not require a completely different gospel for interpretation, we should look within Luke’s gospel to explain the verse.

First, some background on the imagery. The closest OT parallel is Ezekiel 14:17 wherein the sword is one of the judgments – the others being famine, wild beasts, and plague – God will send to punish the land; some will die but others will live. So it is not just a punishment, but a discriminating judgment. What Luke seems to be trying to say is that the sword of division will also affect Mary; she must choose if she will accept or reject Jesus.

There is one scene in the public ministry where Mary appears in all three synoptic gospels. This is the scene where Mary and the brothers of Jesus come to him. In the Marcan form of this (Mk 3:31-35), his family comes out of concern that Jesus is “out of his mind” (Mk 3:21). Because his family fails to understand his mission, Jesus rejects his family. He asks rhetorically, “Who are my mother and my brothers?” before looking at the crowd around him, saying, “Here are my mother and my brothers.” In the Lucan version (8:19-21), the rhetorical question and gesturing to the crowd are eliminated, leaving only Jesus’ proclamation, “My mother and my brothers are those who hear the word of God and do it.” In Luke’s gospel, Mary and his brothers are part of Jesus’ family not merely because of a biological connection, but because of their response to the gospel.

Unlike Mark who has a negative view of the immediate family of Jesus, Luke sees them as model believers and shows them as part of the early Church awaiting the spirit on Pentecost (Acts 1:14).

Anna and the Return to Nazareth

The elderly prophetess Anna is mentioned only briefly. Perhaps Luke wanted both her and Simeon in the Temple at the end of his story to balance the aged Zechariah and Elizabeth at the beginning of his story. Or, perhaps he didn’t want to end the infancy narrative on the foreboding note of Simeon’s second oracle.

For someone so briefly mentioned that not even her dialogue is quoted, Luke provides curious detail in her biographical note, providing the name of her father and her tribe. V. 37 either describes her as having been a widow for 84 years, or states that she is a widow of 84 years of age. If the former, she would have to be around 103 years old. While that sounds ridiculous, it would be reminiscent of the heroine Judith, a widow who lived to be 105 (Judith 16:22-23). Widows seemed to have a special role in the early church (1 Tim 5:3-10).

Vv. 39-40 bring the infancy narrative to a close as Joseph and Mary return to Nazareth, the child growing up, filled with wisdom and favored by God. These last lines recall the ending of the story of Samuel (1 Sam 2:20-21) in which Elkanah and Hannah returned to their home after presenting Samuel to Eli and the boy Samuel grew in the presence of YHWH. Luke is preparing the reader for the appearance of the adult Jesus of Nazareth, preaching a message of wisdom and exemplifying God’s favor.

Away in a Manger

The Lucan narrative of the birth of Jesus (Lk 2:1-20) begins with the story of the census that caused Joseph, along with the pregnant Mary, to travel from their hometown of Nazareth to Bethlehem. It continues with Jesus’ birth in a stable and a visit from shepherds. Except for the mention of the angel who had announced Jesus’ birth to Mary, one could start reading Luke’s gospel beginning with chapter 2 and not be aware that anything had been missed.

Census

There are many problems with Luke’s mention of the census. In 1:5, Luke states that Gabriel visited Zechariah in “the days of Herod, king of Judea.” This agrees with Matthew in setting the birth of Jesus during the days of Herod the Great who died in 4 BCE. But in 2:2, Luke dates the census to the time of Quirinius, governor of Syria. Quirinius did conduct a census of Judea, but not until 6-7 CE, so Luke’s dating is off by 10 years. And a census of Judea would not have affected Joseph living in Nazareth, nor was there any requirement that people travel to their ancestral home. Such a requirement would defeat the point of a census, which is to identify the number of people residing in a certain location.

Both Luke and Matthew appear to be trying to deal with contradictory traditions. On the one hand, it was well-known that Jesus came from Nazareth. On the other hand, there was a belief the messiah would be born in Bethlehem. Matthew sees Joseph and Mary as residents of Bethlehem who, after the birth of Jesus, were forced to move to Nazareth for safety reasons. In Luke’s account, the census required Joseph and Mary to travel from Nazareth to Bethlehem so that Jesus could be born there. The Emperor Augustus who issued the edict for the census was an unwitting actor in God’s plan to have a Nazarene born in Bethlehem, thus reconciling the two traditions.

Luke may also have had in mind a passage from the Greek version of Psalm 87:6: “In the census of the peoples, this one will be born there.”

Manger

According to Luke, some time after arriving in Bethlehem (2:6), Mary gave birth to Jesus, swaddled him with strips of cloth and laid him to rest in a manger. The angel appearing to the shepherds repeats this, telling the shepherds this will be the sign of the messiah’s birth (v. 12). And, upon arriving in Bethlehem, they encounter the baby in the manger just as the angel had described (v. 16). Obviously, the manger is a key symbol for Luke.

Adoration of the Shepherds by Bartolome Esteban Murillo (c. 1650)

In the Greek version of Isaiah 1:3, God complains: “The ox knows its owner and the donkey knows the manger of its lord, but Israel has not known me.” When the shepherds arrive and see the baby lying in the manger, their reaction is to begin praising and glorifying God. This is Luke’s way of saying that God’s people have begun to know the manger of their Lord.

According to the traditional King James translation, Mary laid Jesus in a manager “because there was no room for them in the inn.” A modern reader might get the idea of a hotel with no available rooms. But a more accurate translation would be “because there was no place for them in the lodgings.” The word translated as “inn” or “lodgings” would be something like a caravansary or khan. Think of an open-air courtyard where people would stake out an area and set up tents for the night. Given the presence of a manger, a stable is a reasonable surmise for the location of Jesus’ birthplace, but Luke is not interested in that detail.

Gloria

Luke spends the majority of this passage on the annunciation of the angel to the shepherds and their reaction to finding the baby in the manger. In the stereotype of an angelic appearance, we first have the reaction of fear and the assurance, “Be not afraid” (2:10). The angel then announces the birth of the savior in “the city of David” (v. 11). Earlier in v. 4, Bethlehem was called “the city of David.” After the angel departed, the shepherds immediately identified “the city of David” with Bethlehem. The interesting thing about all of this is that, in the OT, Jerusalem is always identified as “the city of David.” If you visit Jerusalem today, you can tour the City of David excavations. Luke intends to shift attention from Jerusalem to Bethlehem because Bethlehem is now where the presence of the Lord resides.

The angel is joined by a heavenly host reciting a very brief canticle (2:14). The traditional King James translation consists of a tricolon:

Glory to God in the highest,
and on earth peace,
good will toward men.

The NRSV, based on more reliable texts, translates as a bicolon:

Glory to God in the highest heaven,
and on earth peace among those whom he favors.

This matches the proclamations of the disciples on Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem (Lk 19:38):

Peace in heaven,
and glory in the highest heaven.

The angels are proclaiming peace on earth and the disciples are proclaiming peace in heaven. Some biblical scholars think the two verses, now separated in the gospel, may have been originally part of the same hymn.

Reactions

After the angelic visitors departed, the shepherds headed for Bethlehem and found the baby lying in the manger. After they described their experience, we see three sets of reactions. All who heard were astonished, but Mary “kept all these things, pondering them in her heart” (2:19 RSV), and the shepherds returned to their fields glorifying and praising God.

Many biblical commentators assume that the shepherds represent the common folk, but with all the references to “the city of David,” it is more likely that Luke is recalling King David who was once a shepherd in the region of Bethlehem. They also, as mentioned above, represent the Israel who now knows the manger of its Lord. The shepherds' response to all they have heard and seen is to praise and glorify God. Just as the heavenly host praised and glorified God in the heavens, now the shepherds do so on earth as well.

The previously unmentioned bystanders who heard the shepherds' story are merely astonished. In the NT, astonishment is a common reaction, but noncommittal in nature.

Mary, on the other hand, recalled these events and sought to interpret them. She is the sole bridge between the events of the infancy narrative and the public ministry of Jesus and the Church. Later in the gospel (8:21) she will appear with the brothers of Jesus as one who hears the word of God and does it. And in Acts (1:14), she will again appear alongside the brothers, disciples and other believers awaiting the day of Pentecost. Luke knew that Mary must have successfully interpreted the events she experienced because she became a model believer. He would have his audience do likewise.