Matthew 2:13-21

“Notice what you notice.” Just two items… First, in Mt. 2:14, Joseph took Jesus and Mary “by night” and fled to Egypt. Clearly they were in danger and didn’t want anyone to know that they had left or where they were headed. Bethlehem was in the “hill country” of Judea, so it would have been rough going, especially at night. They probably would have headed south to Hebron, then west toward Egypt. Even today there is no direct road west out of Bethlehem, so they would have been 2-3 days in the hill country before they ever got to flatter ground. Again, rough travel for a young family.

Second, in Mt. 2:16, Herod made his plan of death “according to the time that he had ascertained from the wise men”. That explains why, in yesterday’s reading Herod had called the Wise Men back to the palace. He had learned from them “what time the star had appeared” (Mt. 2:7). So somehow from the Wise Men’s information Herod made his calculation to do away with any infant boys two years and under. A number of questions arise: When did the Wise Men first see the star? How long was their journey? How long did the Holy Family stay in Bethlehem? And how long would they have stayed longer in Bethlehem if they had not been warned to leave? And how old was Jesus when they fled? The Holy Family’s trip to Jerusalem for the presentation in the Temple would have been after Mary’s 40 days of purification. So when did the angel appear to Joseph? We simply don’t know. But I expect it was with a mix of fear and confidence that Joseph led his family out of Bethlehem.

I’m looking forward to getting together later this morning!!

Blessings!

Matthew 2:1-12

“Notice what you notice.” I think it’s what I had hoped for, that in reading only a few verses at each sitting we would see words and phrases and “concepts” that we had not noticed before – or had glossed over without really considering them further. Again today I report on three such items, in order of appearance, not importance.

First, in verse 3, “…and all Jerusalem with him…”. I can imagine Herod being troubled. He already had a long history of murdering family and friends who might be a threat to him. But to whom is this “all Jerusalem” referring? The Temple leaders – the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Scribes…? Or the wealthy…? Or the average citizen…? Why would anyone but Herod be “troubled” at this news of a new King of the Jews? Weren’t they looking for a Messiah? I would think that “all Jerusalem” would be thrilled, not troubled.

Second, in verse 7, “…secretly.” Why would Herod summon the Wise Men “secretly”? It was previously noted that “all Jerusalem” was troubled “with him”. He had already publicly inquired of the Wise Men “…where the Christ was to be born”. Now he’s questioning them about the star and the time of its appearance. Is Herod into astrology? Surely not astronomy!! This item is truly intriguing to me.

Finally, verse 11, “the house”. I had suggested two days ago that Mary and her baby had probably not spent much time in that stable setting. So that item is confirmed in Matthew, that the Wise Men went “into the house”. So we have to re-think any artwork or manger sets that have the Wise Men worshiping at the stable. And I’m glad there was some gracious, generous family in Bethlehem willing to move the Newborn and His mother into their home!

Blessings!

Luke 2:21-38

“Notice what you notice.” What’s blessing me today is how much our agreement to “deep think” these passages is linking them all together. Two items came up again that I had mentioned in earlier posts. The first was the work of the Holy Spirit. I had reflected on the work of the Holy Spirit back on January 3 in relation to Mary, Elizabeth, and Zacharias. Now we see His work on Simeon in three consecutive verses (Luke 2:25-27), lest there should be any doubt of the work of the Holy Spirit throughout Jesus’ early life!!

The second item was Mary’s “firstborn” (v. 23). I talked about that at length on January 9, then mentioned it again on January 10. But on both of those occasions I was thinking about my Catholic background, Mary’s “ever” virginity, and whether or not Jesus had brothers and sisters. But I had forgotten about setting aside the firstborn of all males for the Lord’s service (Exodus 13:12-13). These firstborn of all Israelites were later replaced by the tribe of Levi (Numbers 3:11-13). So any mention of Jesus’ being Mary’s firstborn does not automatically suggest a second born or third…, etc. However, that little word “until” still applies (Matthew 1:24-25) to disrupt Catholic teaching.

Finally, one other mention – Anna (Luke 2:36-38). That name always jumps out at me. My mother had died when I was four years old. She always went by her nickname, Nancy, but her given name was Anna. “Anna” is also the name on her tombstone, so that name is imbedded in my soul. I don’t see too many girls named Anna these days, but a few older “Anna” women that I have known have been gems!! I am blessed every time I read Luke’s mention of this three-verse Anna.

Blessings on you all!

Luke 2:1-20

“Notice what you notice.” A couple of things today… First, my NKJV text had in verse 17 that the shepherds made it “widely known” what they had heard and seen. But that verse had a footnote that “widely” was omitted in (presumably) an earlier translation. To my mind the NKJV added “widely” because of the next verse, “And all those who heard it marveled at those things which were told them by the shepherds.” Both the ESV and the NASB say simply in verse 17 that “…they made known…”, while the NIV is more like the NKJV “…they spread the word…”. For any of those translations, verse 18 makes it clear that the stable birth was probably well known to the locals. I can imagine that Mary and her newborn baby spent very little time in that manger setting.

Second, in verse 8 the NKJV and the NIV have the shepherds “living out in the fields”. The NASB is a bit lighter, with the shepherds “staying” instead of “living” and the ESV has them simply “out in the fields”. Most sermons that I’ve heard on the topic have shepherds as society’s castoffs – among the lowest ranks of working people. But I guess I never imagined them LIVING out with the sheep. I probably assumed that they pastured them during the day, then brought them in at night. Further reflection has my earlier thoughts to be wholly unrealistic; they had to roam far and wide to find fresh grass for the sheep every day. But, “living” jumped out at me…

Finally, “firstborn” in verse 7… Why “first” if not a second born or third or more? Hearkening back to my thoughts from yesterday’s reading…

Feel free to share your own thoughts on these readings. It would be good to hear from more of you.

Slava Bohu!

Matthew 1:18-25

“Notice what you notice.” Verse 25, “…until…”, as in “Joseph … kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a son.” I well remember from my Catholic childhood the phrase, “Blessed Mary ever virgin”. The obvious follow-up to that phrase is that Joseph never consummated his marriage to Mary, Jesus had no “true” brothers or sisters, and any mention of His brothers or sisters simply reflected His cousins. I presume that that Catholic teaching still holds; I went online to four Catholic websites (including one Vatican website) that hold to that doctrine.

But the word “until” is a challenge for them. One argument went something like this: If I say “The Lord bless you until we meet again”, does that mean the blessing stops when we do meet again? That is, the inclusion of “until” does not imply any certainty of any suggested or implied action. I am not a theologian or a rhetorician, so I don’t want to pursue this issue any further. But it’s what I noticed. All I know is that I am on the other side from my Catholic brothers, sisters, and friends!

Slava Bohu!

Matthew 1:1-17

“Notice what you notice.”

Genealogies have always been a challenge to most Bible readers. That’s certainly the case for me, especially when I had prior knowledge that Matthew’s genealogy and Luke’s genealogy were quite different from each other. And after extolling Luke’s virtue a few days ago as a research historian, I found myself casting a wary eye on Matthew’s listing. But I read through his genealogy three times before moving over to Luke’s (Luke 3:23, ff.). And yes, they are very different.

But what I noticed in comparing the two was a major split after David. Matthew traces Jesus’ ancestry through David’s son, Solomon while Luke goes from David to Nathan. The listings are very different after that. The only common name that I saw was Zerubbabel (Mt. 1:12-13; Luke 3:27), the leader of the Jewish return from captivity. I have no idea what to make of it all. Maybe we’ll learn more when we come to Luke’s genealogy two weeks (14 days!) from now. (Sorry, that’s a play on Matthew’s fixation on FOURTEEN!)

One other item that I noticed in Matthew’s listing was my familiarity with all of the names up to Zerubbabel, but a complete blank on every name after that until we get to Joseph, Mary’s husband. That may be my oversight, but it may also be reality. Any Bible scholars out there?

Sorry, not much for today…

Blessings!!

Luke 1:67-80

“Notice what you notice.”

I have probably noticed before, but never really took it to heart how much Zacharias’ prayer/prophecy is more about Jesus than John. Check it out – the only reference specifically to John is contained in one sentence in verses 76 and 77: “And you, child, will be called the prophet of the Most High; for you will go before the Lord to prepare his ways, to give knowledge of salvation to his people in the forgiveness of their sins…”. Earlier, Gabriel’s appearance to Zacharias was almost totally about John. The only reference to Jesus is in verse 17: “…and he will go before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready for the Lord a people prepared.”

I can now see something of an RTB meeting with Elizabeth, Zacharias, and Mary chatting together.

Mary: “Well, I have told you what the angel Gabriel told me about my Son who is to be born, whom we are to name Jesus. Zacharias, what exactly did Gabriel say to you about this Son of the Most High?”

Zacharias: “Really, only that he would go before Him and prepare the people for the coming of the Lord, not much more.”

Elizabeth: “Even though I only knew what Zacharias had told me, I felt there was something special going on when you first visited, Mary, because the baby leapt in my womb immediately when I saw you. And in my prayer I referred to the ‘mother of my Lord.’ That must have come from the Holy Spirit.”

They must have continued for hours, days, and weeks trying to figure this thing out! And although they got it right, they didn’t know the half of it…!!

Notice also that John is referred to as the “prophet of the Most High” (v. 76) whereas Gabriel in his visit to Mary earlier referred to Jesus as the “Son of the Most High” (v. 32). Intriguing…!

Blessings!!

Luke 1:57-66

“Notice what you notice.” We’ve heard these birth narratives and read them so many times that they have become so very familiar to us. Sometimes it’s hard to find something new. But I am confident that in reading and re-reading these passages again and again that something will stand out for you. That was the case today for me and what stood out for me was one word, “they”.

The word “they” occurs six times in today’s first seven verses, with “they” referring back in the text to Elizabeth’s neighbors and relatives (v. 58). And what did “they” do? (1) They rejoiced with her. (2) They came to circumcise the child. (3) They would have named him Zacharias. (4) They argued with Elizabeth on her naming him John. (5) They appealed to Zacharias. And finally in verse 63, they all wondered (were astonished) at Zacharias agreeing with Elizabeth. “They” sound like good-hearted, well-intentioned … meddlers!! They come with joy ready to do “the right thing” and are befuddled when Elizabeth and Zacharias have something else in mind. And when their “advice” is rejected, fear (v. 65) and …??gossip??!!! “And all these things were talked about through all the hill country of Judea.”

Is this little caricature relevant to our 21^st century? Have we found ourselves under pressure to do this or that? “Friendly” advice can be difficult enough when we have a good understanding of where we might be headed, but full-bore, pressured, overwhelming advice can be especially difficult if we are uncertain and are still seeking the Lord as to His direction for us. Do this! Do that!

But also, let’s put the shoe on the other foot. Are we the meddlers? Are we the ones liberally sharing our “certain” advice? Maybe especially to our children…? (Personally, I am fully guilty there!) Or do we gossip with our fellow Christians about others’ circumstances or as to what others should do? Guilty, again!!

Let’s not meddle. Let’s pray.

Luke 1:39-56

“Notice what you notice.” Again today it was something really simple that I have read over and over and just never seen it. And again, it was a combination of two verses, 39 and 43. Verse 39 tells us that Mary went “…to the hill country, to a city of Judah” to visit Elizabeth. Simple enough – easily glossed over. However, in verse 43 Elizabeth is struck that Mary has come to visit: “And why is this granted to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” (ESV) Why would Elizabeth be so surprised/honored by a visit from Mary? In part I think her reaction was due to the fact that the hill country of Judah was quite far from Mary’s home, Nazareth. The “hill country of Judah” is a mountainous string just west of the Dead Sea, essentially Jerusalem and points south (Bethlehem, Hebron, etc.). This region was some 80 miles from Nazareth “as the crow flies” and more like 120 miles by the most-traveled roads! That’s a long journey for a young woman in her first trimester! No wonder Elizabeth was surprised!

And to take Elizabeth’s reaction one step further, how did Elizabeth know that her relative, Mary was to become “the mother of my Lord”? Especially when news does not travel fast over an 80-120 mile distance…! We had an angel appearing to Zacharias with news of John’s birth, but there is no mention of Jesus’ origin, only of John’s future ministry preparing the way for Jesus. So how has news of Mary’s role as “the mother of our Lord” come to Elizabeth? How does she know? My only answer comes from verse 37, “For with God nothing will be impossible.” Nuff said…

Blessings!!

Luke 1:26-38

“Notice what you notice.” Today it was something really simple, really mundane that I had never seen before. It was a combination of two phrases, “…the angel Gabriel was sent…”, but more importantly, “And having come in…”. Simple, but previously lost on me. I’ve always imagined Gabriel appearing to Mary, hovering above her like the picture in our Chronological Bible shows. But here we have Gabriel essentially coming through the front door, not unlike the Lord vising Abraham (Genesis 18:1-2) or the angel who visited Gideon (Judges 6:11). These were real “people” in real earth time. The same for Gabriel’s visit to Mary…!

Previously we saw that “…an angel of the Lord appeared…” to Zacharias (v. 11). Then later we will see an angel appearing to Joseph in a dream (Matthew 1:20). But Mary has a personal, front-door encounter. She MUST be special, fully worthy of the honor so many Christians bestow on her.

Have angels come through our front doors, unannounced, or suddenly appeared in our lives, unknown and unexpected? I can detail for you a number of spiritual encounters that have happened to me that are inexplicable in their occurrence and their timing. Angels…? Or the Holy Spirit, as I discussed yesterday…? Certainly not beyond the bounds of my faith!!

Slava Bohu, indeed!!