Sunday, February 06, 2011

The Magi and the Refuge in Egypt — Matthew 2


Chapters 1 and 2 of Matthew constitute his “prologue” to Jesus’s public ministry. They intend to put it in a context that guides the reader’s interpretation.  The material in Matthew 1 (the genealogy and the announcement to Joseph of the divine nature of the child and his role as Savior of his people from their sins) help us to focus on those aspects in the rest of the gospel. The two main stories in chapter 2 then explain just who “his people” are. Both of these two stories set up a pattern of God coming to the chosen people of Israel and refusing to be deterred by the opposition He finds there (Herod, Archelaus), yet opening the doors at the same time to non-Jews who are seeking him (the Magi).  He offers invitations to both groups in language they can understand, if they are willing: to the Magi in an astrological form, to Jerusalem in prophetic scripture.

The visit of the Magi, 2:1-12        

1 After Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the time of King Herod, Magi from the east came to Jerusalem 2 and asked, “Where is the born-king of the Jews? We saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him.” 3 When King Herod heard this he was disturbed, and all Jerusalem with him. 4 When he had called together all the people’s chief priests and teachers of the law, he asked them where the Messiah was to be born. 5 “In Bethlehem in Judea,” they replied, “for this is what the prophet has written: 6 “‘But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for out of you will come a ruler who will shepherd my people Israel.’ 7 Then Herod called the Magi secretly and found out from them the exact time the star had appeared. 8 He sent them to Bethlehem and said, “Go and search carefully for the child. As soon as you find him, report to me, so that I too may go and worship him.” 9 After they had heard the king, they went on their way, and the star they had seen when it rose went ahead of them until it stopped over the place where the child was. 10 When they saw the star, they were overjoyed. 11 On coming to the house, they saw the child with his mother Mary, and they bowed down and worshiped him. Then they opened their treasures and presented him with gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh. 12 And having been warned in a dream not to go back to Herod, they returned to their country by another route. 

2:1 For those of us familiar with the whole story of events leading up to and including the birth of Jesus—in other words, Luke’s opening chapters—it is easy to supply them in our minds and to overlook what Matthew—perhaps even deliberately(?)—doesn’t include and Matthew’s first readers might not know: the Roman census, which God used to bring Joseph and his new wife to Bethlehem, the story of the caravansary being full and requiring the couple to bed down in the guest quarters of a nearby home, and the nighttime visit by the shepherds who had been notified by the chorus of angels in the sky. Scholars can’t seem to agree as to whether Matthew may have known these stories and chose not to use them or that he knew nothing more than he actually includes here: that Jesus was born in Bethlehem during the reign of King Herod I. But one thing is clear: that what Matthew adds here to Mark is essential to his picture of Jesus and God’s plan through Jesus.
The story focuses on pagan Gentiles: astrologers from the east, either Babylonia or Persia. An unlikely bunch of potential worshipers, we might think. In their homeland they most likely worshiped many gods and goddesses. They had no knowledge of the Hebrew scriptures, unless they had contact in their homeland with someone like Esther or Mordecai, that is, Jews living in the Diaspora. But somehow—either Matthew didn’t know because the Magi did not tell Mary the details, he or thought they were not essential for his readers—the Magi understood that a heavenly phenomenon[1] that they observed in their homeland announced the birth of a Jewish king, who was significant enough to them, to require that they travel a great distance and bring him expensive gifts and their “worship” (or “homage”).
Matthew introduces a story here that is not found anywhere else in the NT. Since we believe it is true, not just made up, the logical ultimate source of it would have been Mary, Jesus’ mother.[2] Either she told Jesus about it as a child, and he told it to his intimate circle of disciples at some point during his public ministry, or she may have been a direct source to Matthew after Jesus’ resurrection.
It is an amazing story in several respects. The “heroes” are pagan astrologers—called Magi[3] (Greek μάγοι magoi, transliterated in Latin as magi)—from lands to the east of Palestine, either Arabia, Babylonia or Persia. They are “heroes” because they believed in an astrological “sign” and took great pains to follow its direction, traveling for hundreds of miles, all in the hope of finding one born “king of the Jews.” This doesn’t mean that we today should look to astrological signs for divine guidance: our guidance is Jesus’ own words and those of the Old and New Testament writers.
In antiquity, stars, comets, and constellations were believed to signal the birth of a ruler. Cicero (Div. 1.47) says that on the night of Alexander the Great's birth, Magi prophesied on the basis of a brilliant constellation that the destroyer of Asia had been born. Tacitus (Annals, 14.22) asserts that it is the general belief that the appearance of a comet means a change of emperors. So when a comet appeared during Nero's reign, people speculated about Nero's successor as though Nero were already deceased. In the Testament of Levi 18.3,[4] it is said about the priestly Messiah: "His star will rise in the heaven as of a king.”

What these astrologers saw, as once suggested by the famous astronomer Johannes Kepler, may have been a conjunction of the planets Jupiter and Saturn, which occurred three times in 7 B.C. And since Jupiter in ancient astrological lore represented kingship and Saturn the people of Israel, the conclusion of the magi recorded here would have followed naturally. 

2:2-6 The Magi came to Jerusalem, because they were seeking "the born-king of the Jews,” which forms a natural opposition to the king merely appointed by the Roman overlords. Jerusalem was the capital city of “the Jews,” the place where a king of the Jews would be found. In Matthew’s account they tell everyone they meet about having seen a “star” that portends the birth of a Jewish king. They claim to have seen it “at its rising.” They further announce that they have come to find this born-king and to worship him. How remarkable that they should think that the king of the small Jewish state should command their homage and worship! If it had been a newly born king of Egypt or some other great nation, we could understand their taking such pains. All of this suggests that God had been preparing their minds and hearts to appreciate the crucial role of the Jewish people in the world’s redemption.

How humbling this story was to Matthew's Jewish believers! Instead of believing Jews taking the good news to the Gentiles, these unbelieving Gentiles brought the news of the King's birth to Jerusalem—to learned Jewish Bible scholars who didn't have a clue what was happening! 

The magi told a fantastic story and feared no ridicule. How is it with us? We have also an incredible story to tell, a miraculous one that both humbles hearers because it requires admitting sinfulness and offers hope through the promise of forgiveness and eternal life. Are we reluctant to share it with others? Or are we busy just telling simply what we have seen in the Bible and experienced in our lives?
2:3 When news of their inquiry reaches the present “king,” Herod I, Matthew doesn’t tell us immediately that he was insulted, furious or filled with a desire to find and kill any such impostor. But when Matthew tells us that the king “was worried/disturbed” (ἐταράχθη) and all Jerusalem with him,” this implies that all the citizens of Jerusalem sensed that violence would soon follow and might accidentally affect them, as indeed it later did to the mothers of infants in Bethlehem (2:16-18). Herod, you see, had a history of killing off anyone who threatened his control of the kingdom, even members of his own immediate family. He had killed some of his own wives for crossing him. In fact, when eventually his attempt to use the magi failed, Herod was more than “disturbed”: he became absolutely furious (verse16) and murdered all the innocent male children of Bethlehem. Herod was not of Jewish ancestry, but Edomite. He owed his kingship to political connections in Rome, not to any Jewish or Old Testament law. And he was only observant of God’s law when it suited him politically. 

It is easy to see why  Herod would be unhappy at the possibility of a born king of the Jews. But wouldn't you think that the people of Jerusalem would be overjoyed at the possibility? Yet because of Herod's influence, they too consider the possible birth of the Messiah to be an unwelcome intrusion in their lives. Matthew gives us just a foretaste here of what Jerusalem's attitude toward Jesus will be at the end of his gospel, when he entered Jerusalem for the last time (Matt 21:10-11). There too the city was "shaken" instead of overjoyed. 

Everyone in Jerusalem was disturbed and worried, but the magi! They simply gave their testimony of what they had seen. The magi told a threatening story to a potentially hostile and dangerous king. How is it with us? Does fear of a hostile response keep us from sharing the good news with others?
2:4-6  Up to this point Herod had not met the magi: only heard the excited news circulating in Jerusalem. Herod could take no steps to suppress this possible rebellion against his throne without further knowledge. The news the Magi had brought had taken him quite by surprise, which for a king who prided himself on his network of spies and informers must have shaken him to the core! He would need to disguise his hostile intentions and do some crafty inquiring, both from his own scholars and from these visiting ones.
2:4 He began with his own native scholars, two groups which Matthew describes as “chief priests and scribes.” The “chief priests” comprised the current high priest and any former ones still living in Jerusalem, all of whom would have been Sadducees, while the “scribes” (or “teachers of the law” NIV) would have been Pharisees.
The Magi had asked about a “born-king of the Jews.” This couldn't be just any ordinary person in line to obtain the kingship over the Roman province of Judea! And why would an ordinary person’s birth be announced by a star? For this reason, and because the Roman occupation of Judea had increased the longing of the Jews for the promised Messiah to come and free them, as Moses once did when they were slaves in Egypt, Herod immediately thought this might be the Messiah. And even if he didn’t personally believe such promises—he was, after all, an Edomite who owed his throne to the pagan Roman occupiers—he would fear that his Jewish subjects might back such a person to replace him by force. Why he would fear this, however, is inscrutable, since it would take such a newborn around 20 years to become old enough to lead a rebellion!
Since these two groups—the Sadducean high priests and the Pharisaic scholars of the Torah—hated each other, Herod may have summoned the two groups separately and compared their responses to his questions. If on the other hand Herod did actually convene them together, their remarkable willingness to cooperate should be compared with their cooperation later in bringing Jesus to trial and to execution. More than they hated each other, they hated the thought that the Messiah would come and make them unnecessary to the people! These Jewish scholars would not know much about astrology, but they would certainly know the prophetic scriptures in detail. Herod assumed that somewhere in those prophecies would be information about where—if not also when—the Messiah was to be born. Could it be in Jerusalem itself?
2:5-6 The Torah scholars quoted to him the words of the prophet Micah, who predicted in Micah 5:2 (Micah 5:1 in the Hebrew and Greek versions) that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem of Judah. Bethlehem was the town where David had been born. Micah’s oracle builds upon the earlier one of the prophet Nathan to David (2 Samuel 7), that the true “son of David” whose reign God had said would last forever (2 Samuel 7:12-13) would be born in David’s hometown.
Here we meet an ironic contrast which Matthew certainly wants us to notice. The behavior of the Magi is in stark contrast to that of the Jewish scholars who had a detailed prophetic knowledge about the Messiah to be born in Bethlehem and who wouldn’t take the trouble to travel 20 miles to the south of Jerusalem themselves, although they were the Messiah’s own people! ! Furthermore, with a view to his own times, Matthew used this episode to portray how the Jewish “establishment” valued their own comfortable symbiosis with the Roman authorities over throwing in their lot with God’s messiah, implications of whose advent might anger the powers that be.

The religious authorities had accurate knowledge of the scriptures, but doubted the claim of the magi. They made no effort to investigate. Was it pride? Pride that refused to believe that God would give information to these pagans and mediate it by them to the chosen people? Because these authorities didn't believe what the magi told them, they robbed themselves of the opportunity to see their true God-sent king. And out of spite for these pagan visitors, they told them only the minimum information: that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem. Nothing about his glories or his mission to not only restore Israel but be a light to the nations!  

These religious authorities also had no real desire to experience their fulfillment in their own lives. This can be true of us as well, my friends. We can know a great deal of factual information from the Bible, but have no particular interest in experiencing its truths by getting involved in service and in witness. 
2:7-8 The second part of Herod’s plan to locate and kill the newborn pretender to his throne involved getting information from the Magi themselves. But since he didn't want his people—not even his Torah scholars—to know that he put any credence in the magi's story about a star, he summoned them to a meeting secretly. 

Already by telling him how long ago the star first appeared they could provide him with the newborn’s approximate age. If they said, “About two years ago,” he would know that the child would have to be two years old or less. Later (in 2:16) we learn that this was about the length of time he had been given. So after summoning the astrologers to his court, asked them when the star first appeared, and then informed them that the king they were seeking was foretold in Jewish scripture to be born in Bethlehem. He would give them directions to that town, he said, but he wanted a favor in return. He asked them to locate the child and bring back word to him, so that he could also go and worship him. Of course, he had no such intention, but since these strangers might not know how ruthless he was, he was hoping they would innocently give him the information he needed to kill the newborn Messiah.
2:9 Confident of his success, Herod sent no escort with the Magi. This was not “absurdly trusting” (as Schweizer claims in his commentary, Matthew), since the deception depended on winning the Magi’s confidence. To send an escort would have made them suspicious and uncooperative. Their cooperation was vital to the success of Herod’s plan.
2:9-10 The text doesn’t say that they followed a moving star all the way from their home in the east to Bethlehem. On the contrary, they simply saw it at its rising in their homeland, and because it portended the birth of a Jewish king, they knew to travel to Jerusalem, the Jewish capital city to inquire further. Once informed about Bethlehem, they needed no star to guide them there, but when it appeared again on their way from Jerusalem toward Bethlehem, and they recognized it as the same one they had seen in their homeland, and it stood over Bethlehem to the south, they took this as confirmation of the Jewish scripture quoted to them by Herod’s scholars, and they continued to Bethlehem, where they believed they would need to “search diligently for the child,” as Herod had requested them to do (Matthew 2:8 ESV). As it turned out, God guided them without need of a "diligent" search (Mat 2:9). Either the “star” was something like an angel, who actually moved and then stopped over the house where Mary, Joseph and Jesus were living, or God simply guided their steps by other means so that they found the house, whereupon the star also “stopped” when they stopped moving. The text can bear either interpretation.

God still works in these ways today. Sometimes he guides our decisions by circumstances (like the star), but more often he does it by truths that we have learned from the scriptures. It is usually the best course to follow the truths of scripture in general and then let God refine that guidance as we proceed, using circumstances and our good sense. 
Verse 11 tells us that considerable time has elapsed since Jesus’ birth. For the family is no longer living in a stable or a cave, but in a “house,” and Jesus is not described as an “infant” (as in Luke), but as a “child” (Greek παιδίον). Joseph may have been away at the time, for when the Magi entered the house, they did not see him, but only Mary and her child Jesus. The first reaction of the pagan astrologers to seeing this new “king of the Jews” was to “fall down” and offer him homage (“worship”). The did this, although they were not themselves Jews, nor did they know that he was to be the Savior of the world. Part of the holy mystery of this text is this curious behavior: that they had no ostensible reason to worship a “king of the Jews.” But here too lies Matthew’s contrast with Herod and the chief priests and teachers of the law, who had every reason to worship him, and yet did not!

Please keep in mind also that, unlike the pictures we see in Bible story books or on stained glass windows in churches, the magi didn’t see golden halos around the heads of Jesus and his parents. This baby looked just like any other baby. They were prompted to worship him on the basis of what they had learned from the star and from the scriptures quoted to them in Jerusalem. These men present quite a contrast to the skeptical religious leaders who later in Matthew’s gospel would reserve judgment on Jesus or even declare him an impostor, even after seeing him heal the sick and raise the dead. How does anyone today come to know that Jesus is someone we should worship? Isn’t it also on the basis of (1) what we know from the scriptures and (2) what we have “seen” of him in the lives of those whom he has already transformed? 
2:11 Although Jesus’ mother Mary is mentioned prominently in this verse, it is significant that Jesus himself—although he is only toddler here—holds center stage. It is he whom they worship, not his mother. After bowing in homage, the Magi produced gifts for the new king of the Jews, gifts they had brought from their homeland: gold, incense and myrrh. These gifts could have been purchased almost anywhere in the areas to the east of Palestine and cannot therefore identify the homeland. The three products—but not necessarily the Magi who had bought them—most likely originated in southern Arabia. What became of these gifts? How were they used? Matthew leaves us to speculate, if we will. Perhaps they helped to finance the trip to Egypt and the long return to Nazareth. The gifts are described in order to show us the faith and love of the givers. These valuable gifts served show what value these pagan sages placed on the child of Bethlehem, the future king of the Jews. 
In terms of what Matthew wishes to indicate about God's plan for Jesus' ministry, since he is at this point a mere child, the people from distant lands do not come to hear him speak or to perform miracles, but simply to worship him. They have heard the "voice" of God in nature—i.e., in the "General Revelation" of astrology, and on the basis of that limited and faulty knowledge they respond in faith and worship. Matthew will say this again and again in delineating Jesus' contacts with pagans: with the Roman centurion who comes for him to heal his servant (Mat 8:5-13), with the “Canaanite” woman,[5] etc. It is not abundance of correct knowledge that ensures a correct response to Jesus, but openness to it and willingness to go where it leads.

Furthermore, the appropriate response to Jesus is the same as what it is to God: worship. Matthew will show that response throughout his gospel: by a leper (8:2), by a ruler (9:18), by his disciples (14:33), by a Canaanite woman (15:25), and others (20:20; 26:6-13; 28:9). And at the very end of this gospel the disciples worship the resurrected Jesus on the mountain (28:17). The theme runs throughout the gospel. Now cynical or skeptical Jews of Jerusalem, seeing what the magi did, might sneer and say: "Pagans will worship anything! They worship idols!" But this is not Matthew's view. this is no superstitious and gullible worship: it is perceptive and full of faith.  
2:12 These pagan astrologers continue to receive direct revelation from God in the form of dreams, just as Joseph, Jesus’ own (foster) father did! God’s spoken words were by no means limited to believers or to his chosen people Israel: God speaks to whomever will listen to him and show themselves responsive. These astrologers had already done that by coming all the way from their homeland in the east. Now God would not only protect them, but in doing so also protect Joseph, Mary and the young messiah from Herod’s violence. Joseph, whose main role throughout Matthew 1-2 is that of the Messiah’s protector, reminds us of Jacob’s son Joseph, who also served as the protector of his father and brothers, providing a safe home and food for them in Egypt when famine in Palestine might have killed them all (Genesis 45:4-8).
The dream vision said, in effect: “Do not return to King Herod and tell him where you have found the young king of the Jews!” The dream vision was essential, for up to this point the magi did not suspect that Herod planned to harm the child. Nor did Joseph or Mary.
The astrologers departed for their homeland, bypassing Jerusalem, so that Herod would not immediately learn that his plot was discovered. In the whole complex of the magi story Matthew may have seen close connections to the account of Balaam’s attempt to curse Israel in Numbers 22-24. The Moabite king Balak tries to use the pagan prophet Balaam to destroy Israel by cursing, but God prevents Balaam from doing so and instead forces him to utter blessing on Israel, which infuriates Balak (Num 24:10-11). In the course of Balaam’s blessing he foresees a “star” rising out of Jacob which will some day bring destruction to Moab (Num 24:17). This prophecy found a literal (and partial) fulfillment in David’s conquest of Moab in 2 Samuel 8:2. Matthew probably correctly saw a parallel here, with the Edomite king Herod trying to use the pagan star-gazer magi to lead him to the infant Messiah, the son of David and personification of Israel, to destroy him. But God overrules and uses the magi to thwart Herod’s plan, leaving him infuriated. In the process God also uses a star to guide the magi to the one whose kingdom will some day supplant every kingdom on earth. Repeatedly in the coming chapters Matthew will show us many examples of how Jesus thwarts the plans of Satan, turning his own human instruments against him. The ultimate example will be Judas, the “son of perdition” (John 17:12), whose treachery that led to the arrest and sentence of death to the Messiah backfired on Satan, since the Messiah’s death expiated the sins of humankind and led to the resurrection! He will show us how God always knows how to bring good out of attempted evil.  

To Egypt and back, and the massacre of the infants, 2:13-23

Joseph’s dream and the escape to Egypt, 2:13-15

13 When they had gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream. “Get up,” he said, “take the child and his mother and escape to Egypt. Stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to search for the child to kill him.” 14 So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, 15 where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: “Out of Egypt I called my son.” 

2:13 The angelic dream message did not come to Joseph until the night following the astrologers’ departure. Note that the dream did not come to Mary, because it was the role of the husband to decide on matters like moving to another place, and because—as I just mentioned—Joseph’s assigned role in all of this is to be the protector of the Messiah. The angel mentions the “child” (Greek τὸ παιδίον) Jesus before his mother Mary, because it was Jesus who was the real target of Herod’s wrath.

Egypt was a natural place to which to flee. It was nearby, a well-ordered Roman province outside Herod’s jurisdiction; and, according to Philo (writing around A.D. 40), its population included about a million Jews. Earlier generations of Israelites fleeing their homeland (1 Kings 11:40 [Jeroboam fleeing Solomon]; Jer 26:21-23; 43:7 [Uriah fleeing Jehoiakim]) had sought refuge in Egypt.
In Egypt, Joseph would have had no relatives that we know of. He would have sought work in a large Jewish community, perhaps in Alexandria, as a woodworker/carpenter.

God could have miraculously protected Jesus, if he had stayed in Bethlehem. But sometimes it is his preference to use ordinary and prudent means. It is not wrong to avoid danger, if God has not asked us to confront it. In Matthew 4 Satan urged Jesus to test his Father’s care by jumping off the pinnacle of the temple, and Jesus refused, quoting scripture, “You should not put the Lord your God to the test.”  For Joseph to ignore the dream and stay in Bethlehem would have been putting God to an unnecessary test.  

Herod massacres Bethlehem’s infants, 2:16-18

16 When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. 17 Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled: 18 “A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more.” 

2:16 Herod would have run out of patience quickly for the return of the magi. Furious because they had disobeyed him and tricked him, and now desperate to kill this child pretender to his throne, he sent his guards to kill all male children in Bethlehem two years old and younger. Herod guessed the age of the child from the time the magi had told him the star had first appeared. Of course, he couldn’t know if this figure was exact, but using it he set the upper limit at 2 years. We are in just a bad a position to know Jesus’ age at the time of the massacre, since the exact date of his birth is in dispute.[6] If we knew it, we could measure the time between that date and the known date of Herod’s death (4 BC). He died in early April of 4 BC in Jericho and was buried in a tomb 7.5 miles south of Jerusalem, near the Herodium. If Jesus was born in the year 6 BC, as many scholars believe, he could not have been over 2 years old at the time Herod ordered the massacre, and probably was much younger. There is no doubt that this massacre is historical. But it is also clear that for Matthew it provided a reminder to his readers of the futile and equally brutal act of the Egyptian pharaoh who ordered the murder of all the boy babies at the time of Moses' birth. There too, God was able to shield Moses from this fate, but at the cost of the lives of many other boy babies, whose mothers cried their hearts out like the mothers of Bethlehem. 
Because of the especially hideous nature of the act recorded here, Matthew departs from his usual way of quoting an Old Testament prediction. Usually he writes “Such-and-such occurred in order that it might be fulfilled what was spoken by the prophet.” Here he avoids “in order that,” saying only “then  the scripture was fulfilled …” This is because God never deliberately decrees cruelty and wickedness just to make a point.  
For the rest of his life Herod would wonder if the massacre of Bethlehem’s little children had included the promised child. In vain he would seek for the newborn King of the Jews, but never locate him.  That agony was a small part of his punishment for not repenting of his many sins and trusting in God’s appointed Savior. Even a man as wicked as Herod could have been saved by the child he sought to kill, if he had only repented and believed.
The death of Herod brought relief to many. Only then, for instance, did the community of Jewish “monks” at Qumran return to their center, which had been destroyed in 31 B.C., and rebuild it. In Egypt, Herod’s death made it possible for Joseph, Mary and the child, who awaited a word from the Lord, to return to their homeland. Because Herod knew how hated he was by so many Jews, in order to ensure that there would be mourning instead of rejoicing at the time of his death, he ordered in advance that a large number of prominent people should be executed at that time.

It has been well observed that “no one sings in Matthew’s infancy narrative as they do in Luke’s; instead they weep."

What a sorry picture of a human being was Herod the Great! God created humans in his own image, but Satan invites them to replace that image with his own. The picture is not a pretty one. I sometimes think that, if I could only see myself from the viewpoint of others around me, when I am sinning, would I not be nauseated at the sight? But the amazing thing is that God does see each of us from the outside—and in addition can even see us from the inside as we see ourselves—and instead of being nauseated, he longs to forgive us and lead us to repentance and renewed holiness. Only a god like our God can do that. Those rare Christians who gladly adopt His viewpoint can see the possibilities, even in a Herod, for repentance, faith and transformation.

Joseph and Mary return and settle in Nazareth, 2:19-23

19 After Herod died, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt 20 and said, “Get up, take the child and his mother and go to the land of Israel, for those who were trying to take the child’s life are dead.” 21 So he got up, took the child and his mother and went to the land of Israel. 22 But when he heard that Archelaus was reigning in Judea in place of his father Herod, he was afraid to go there. Having been warned in a dream, he withdrew to the district of Galilee, 23 and he went and lived in a town called Nazareth. So was fulfilled what was said through the prophets, that he would be called a Nazarene.

Refugees living in another country often choose to return home on the death of their former ruler. An ancient Egyptian named Sinuhe, who lived during the period of the Israelite patriarchs, ran afoul of the King of Egypt and fled to Palestine, where—like Moses in Midian years later—he impressed the locals, married the daughter of a local chieftain, and prospered in the land. But when news from Egypt told of the king’s death there, he couldn’t resist returning home, so that he might be buried in his home country. The patriarch Joseph also gave instructions that long after his death, when the Israelites succeeded in leaving Egypt to return to the Promised Land, they should take his bones up there with them and re-bury him in the land of his ancestors.
After word came to Mary’s husband Joseph in Egypt that Herod the Great had died, God sent a message in a dream to Joseph, instructing him to take Jesus and Mary and return to the land of Israel. On the way to Bethlehem, Joseph learned from Judeans that the Romans had installed one of Herod’s sons, Archelaus, over Judea, who was equally dangerous to Jesus. 

Matthew uses geography as symbols. For him—but not for the other gospel writers—Judea is a place filled with unbelief and danger for Jesus. Had his parents stopped and settled in Judea this time, he would have been killed. On his last visit to Judea he would be killed. It Matthew's symbolic vocabulary Galilee represents spiritual ignorance but a place where Jesus' ministry is welcome. Judea on the other hand represents knowledge, but stubborn and hardened unbelief and opposition to Jesus.  

The danger of Judea to the family of Jesus was confirmed by a second dream which warned Joseph not to stay in the southern province of Judea. So Joseph traveling north into Galilee, which was a safer region. Matthew doesn’t say that the dream specified their destination in Galilee, much less the specific town of Nazareth. But he does say that their choice of Nazareth fulfilled a prediction that he would be called a “Nazarene” (Matt 2:23), which implies that they chose the town that God had in mind for them all along. Luke tells us that Nazareth had been their original home, which they had left when traveling to Bethlehem for the Roman census (Luke 2:4). So now they were returning to an area that they knew well, with friends and relatives to protect and support them.
The role that the non-Jewish magi and the land of Egypt as a refuge played in protecting the Messiah is part of Matthew’s repeated theme of the Messiah’s broader mission and the receptivity of many among the gentiles. It is not a theme that was original with Matthew. In fact, one can find this theme even in many places in the Old Testament. It was an Egyptian pharaoh who, after Joseph’s brothers first sought to kill him and then sold him into slavery, raised him to the office of second-in-command over all Egypt. And there are many other examples one could cite. But it is important, nevertheless, to recognize what Matthew is trying to stress. He alone of the four gospels mentions the incidents of the magi and the seeking safety in Egypt; there has to be a reason for these inclusions. But equally important, Matthew reports that the family of Jesus knew that Jesus’ mission was to be first and foremost to his own Jewish people, and that such a mission could only be properly fulfilled by living in the land of Israel, not in Egypt. Creature comforts of Alexandria had to be sacrificed in the interest of the plan of God for Jerusalem, Judea and Galilee to behold the Messiah and believe in him.[7]



[1] Called a “star” in our translations. Astronomers have speculated whether it was a comet, an asteroid, or some temporary conjunction of visible planets. Again, although appealing to our curiosity, specifying the phenomenon is unimportant to the gospel message. Many think it was not a “natural” phenomenon at all, but an angelic manifestation.
[2] See Luke 2:19. Which indicates that she was certainly the source of Luke’s infancy accounts. Since Joseph never appears in the gospel narratives after the childhood of Jesus (he last appears in Luke 2:41-52), and up to that point he is portrayed as a believer, it is probable that he died before Jesus began his public ministry. Otherwise, of course, he too could have been Matthew’s source.
[3] For more information see the articles on the Magi, more briefly in the Holman Bible Dictionary and more fully in ISBE.
[4] The Testament of Levi is part of a composition called The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. This work is a part of the apocryphal scriptures connected with the Bible. It is a pseudepigraphical work comprising the dying commands of the twelve sons of Jacob.
[5] γυνὴ Χαναναία Mat 15:21-28 = Ἑλληνίς Συροφοινίκισσα Mk 7:26.
[6] ISBE gives the following: “Though challenged by some … the usual date for the death of Herod the Great, March, 4 BC (year of Rome 750), may be assumed as correct … . The birth of Jesus was before, and apparently not very long before, this event (Mt 2). It may therefore be placed with probability in the latter part of the previous year (5 BC), the ordinary dating of the commencement of the Christian era being thus, as is generally recognized, four years too late.”
[7] This theme is well stated by Gernot Garbe in his fascinating recent commentary on Matthew (in the German language) titled Der Hirte Israels (“The Shepherd of Israel”, Neukirchen, 2005).

No comments: