Luke 2- thoughts by andy

Hey gang,
It’s nice to see all of the posts. I also want to thank Brandon for being a huge inspiration to me to want to read and write more consistently. Yay Brandon!

One small part of this chapter that I had previously not given much attention to is verse 23. The dedication of the firstborn son to God is packed with historical and theological significance. To a Jewish reader at the time, I think that they would reflect on the story of Abraham and Isaac or the dedication of the Levites. Perhaps an Egyptian would recall the tenth and most devastating plague. Perhaps some of the Gentiles who lived in region would think about the child sacrifice that was so common to Baal worship.

The concept of sacrificing a firstborn son is interwoven throughout the history of ancient peoples. The Canaanites and Phoenicians were known to burn their firstborn sons to Baal- especially during times of war or famine as a means of seeking the favor of their god. This not only happened during the 2000 to 1000 B.C. period associated with Abraham and Isaac and Moses and eventually David, it continued up to a little before the time of Jesus. In the second century B.C. one of the most famous military generals of Carthage was ceremonially offered to Baal in keeping with this custom. He became the most feared enemy of Rome and even his name, Hannibal (think Hanni baal) carries the name of the god Baal. (for those who are fans of podcasts- I would very highly recommend listening to a lecture by Patrick Hunt of Stanford University called “Background to Hannibal/ Carthage: Hannibal’s youth” on ITunes University.)

As the cultures developed, actual human sacrifice became more and more shunned. The Jews condemned it (I won’t go into a long discourse on the uniqueness of the story of Abraham and Isaac here) as did the Greeks and the Romans. Those who know the story of Tantalus may recall the horror of the Greek gods at Tantalus’ sacrifice of his own son, Pelops, in an effort to please the gods.

I mention all of this because I believe it gives a better historical framework to understand just who Jesus is and what his own sacrifice meant. I think it will also shed light on the uniqueness of his work and the uniqueness of the God revealed throughout the Bible. I think when people unfamiliar to the Bible and Christian language hear a phrase like “Jesus was sacrificed for our sins,” that it sounds at worst barbaric or at best mythological. Without understanding that there was a very real and very bloody history of the sacrifice of a firstborn son, we are prone to miss the full power of the story of Jesus.

I try to imagine what it was like, living in a time when so much of everyday life was so much more mysterious and grueling than I have experienced. I try to imagine a time when, if I wanted a cup of water, I would have to go out and make my own cup and dig my own well. Life was hard. I try to imagine a time when, if I was sick, I would expect just to die because I didn’t understand disease or germs or so much of what we take for granted today. I imagine it would be easy to be superstitious and fearful. If I was repeatedly told that gods existed and they were cruel and demanding, I suppose it would be natural for me to buy into that system. I imagine that if I was taught that the gods demanded sacrifice that I ought to give it. I still imagine that if I was told that the sacrifice demanded was my firstborn son, I would still be very reluctant. It would be so awful to live in a system or a community where the only way to find favor with god was to sacrifice my own firstborn son. Suffering and sin are such severe things that in order to find freedom, the gods demanded an equally severe sacrifice. Living in this situation make me feel so defeated.

But then I think about Jesus. God, our God, is not like these other gods. He does not demand that we sacrifice our own sons to find favor with Him. He sacrifices Himself for us, so that we may find favor with Him. Such a concept is revolutionary. I realize that there is still something disturbing in the idea of sacrifice, but that mystery belongs to God and is not a burden that he makes us carry. God takes the very worst of the cultures at the time and turns them in on themselves and shows the full extent of His love. It is right to break out into song for a salvation such as this.

Oh boy, that was a long discourse on a short verse. And I am posting this late, so I may need to go back and clarify a few of these thoughts.

A few other quick thoughts- I like how it says that the shepherds went and told everyone about Jesus but Mary treasured these things in her heart. I like how this shows that there is a range of how people respond to encountering Jesus and that there is not a “one size fits all” approach to faith. I think that it is good that some people encounter Jesus and immediately run out and tell everyone. And yet, it is also good that some people encounter Jesus and need time to take it all in and treasure that encounter and think about them often. “We meditate on your unfailing love as we worship in your Temple” (Psalm 46:9).

So Steve, in response to your question about what did it mean that Mary kept these things in her heart- I think that it is an allusion to Deuteronomy 6:6-9 and possibly to Psalm 1:2 or to the whole of Psalm 119. It was the custom of the faithful Jews to treasure the words of the Law in their hearts. What a great fulfillment of that image as Mary gets to treasure the fulfillment of the Law in her heart by knowing Jesus.

I like also that the shepherds are terrified upon encountering an angel. I think that it was probably helpful that there was a group of them who witnessed not just one angel, but a whole host of angels. To respond to the question of how I would respond to an encounter with an angel- I think I would also be terrified. From what I can tell, angels are not these cherubic little cuties. They are scary warriors, usually armed with some type of sword, often a sword that is on fire. Yeah, I would be pretty freaked out. And as far as if I would believe it really was an angel- I honestly don’t know. While I am very skeptical about a lot of things, I believe that the Holy Spirit would probably give me some type of inner assurance that this was indeed a messenger of God. Oh, by the way, the Greek word for” angel” is the same word as “messenger”.

Steve, you also asked about the tax or census mentioned in the beginning of the chapter. The Greek word is “apographesthai” “apographe” which very literally means something like “to be being written” or “from writing.” Basically it means a list or an inventory. In this section of Luke, most translations call it a census. The same word shows up in a few apocryphal books to refer to the Book of Life (the book of Enoch and the Apoc. Of Paul). Historically, the first emperor of Rome Caesar Augustus, instituted the first census of the Roman Empire. He did this in part because he was really gifted at knowing that running an empire requires a good understanding of who is in it, but also because he was trying to reform the taxation system. He could only do this by having a census taken of the whole Empire so he could know how to set a more appropriate tax on the people.

God bless us all as we endeavor to read His Word,
Andy Newberry