Luke 2
BolesLuke 2:1-20
- THE BIRTH OF JESUS
- Now it came to pass in those days,—The first chapter closed with a brief reference to the growth, development, and private life of John; Luke now returns to a period of time a little after John’s birth, and relates the birth of Jesus at Bethlehem with its attendant circumstances. Matthew’s account (Matthew 1:18-24) of the angelic appearance to Joseph in a dream seems to come in between this and the preceding chapter. It is the purpose of Luke here to show how Jesus came to be born at Bethlehem, though Mary lived at Nazareth. “In those days” refers to the events recorded in chaper 1; this is his way of approaching the account of the birth of Jesus. “There went out a decree from Caesar Augustus”; this Caesar was the first Roman emperor; he was born 63 B.C. and died A.D. 14, at the age of seventy-six, after a long and prosperous reign of forty-four years; he was a nephew of the famous Ju-lius Caesar. His title “Augustus,” which means “the venerable,” “the majestic,” was conferred upon him by the Roman senate, and was applied to his successors. (Acts 25:21; Acts 25:25.) The title “Caesar” was assumed by him, and also applied to Roman emperors after him; in the New Testament we find it applied to Tiberius (Luke 3:1), to Claudius (Acts 17:7), and to Nero (Acts 25:8; Acts 26:32).
that all the world should be enrolled.—“All the world” here means all the provinces of the Roman Empire which at that time embraced nearly all the civilized and known world, and which was very commonly spoken of as “all the world.” The phrase seems to have been used sometimes in a restricted sense; it was originally used by the Greeks to denote the land inhabited by themselves in contrast with barbarian countries; afterward, when the Greeks became subject to the Romans, it was applied to the entire Roman world, and still later it was made to include “the whole inhabited world.” In the New Testament this is the more common usage, though, in some cases, this is conceived in the mold of the Roman Empire. (Acts 11:28; Acts 19:27.) Jesus used it in giving the commission when he said that the gospel should be preached “in all the world” (Matthew 24:14);and Paul in the prediction of a general judgment (Acts 17:31); and one time it is used to denote “the world to come” (Hebrews 2:5). “Enrolled” means properly to register or enter in a list; commentators are not agreed as to whether it refers to an enrollment for taxation, or for ascertaining the population, as the word may be used in either sense.
2 This was the first enrolment made—From this it may be inferred that there was another census under Quirinius, which was indeed the case, about ten years later. The full name of this Roman official was Publius Sulpitius Quirinius; he died at Rome A.D. 21. “Syria” was then a Roman province, whose boundaries are somewhat uncertain; its general boundaries were the Euphrates on the east, the Mediterranean on the west, Palestine on the south, and Cilicia and Mount Amanun on the north. After the banishment of Archaelaus, A.D. 6, Judea was added to the province of Syria by request of the governor of Judea. According to Josephus (Antiq., 17:13, 15; 18:1, 1) Quirinius became governor of Syria A.D. 6, when he took a census in Judea, which excited the opposition related by Luke in Acts 5:37. It appears that Luke here refers to a census about ten years later, which was commenced during the last days of Herod the Great, before Palestine became a Roman province. Some think that Quirinius was twice gover-nor, and that this enrollment came during his first term in office.
There seems to be some confusion as to when this census was made; profane historians are not agreed. When such is the case, believers in the Bible take the record as found in the inspired book, and leave all conflicts and difficul-ties in profane records to be worked out by those who be-lieve those records.
3-5 And all went to enrol—All the people of Palestine, and especially those of the Jews, had to go the city of their ances-tors; the census was taken, in part at least, after the Jewish method; each Jew went to the headquarters of his family to be enrolled, where the ancestral records were kept; hence “Jo-seph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem.” Joseph was of the family of David, and Bethlehem was Da-vid’s ancestral home. Luke’s reason for mentioning this census appears to have been to show how it was that Jesus was born in Bethlehem; Caesar, prompted by God’s purpose, directed the census. Each had to go “to his own city”;this was a prac-tice that the Jews had followed for some time. Joseph “went up”; this is the usual expression in speaking of going from Galilee to the more elevated region of Jerusalem and Judea; with this physical elevation may be associated the idea of greater political, social, and spiritual privileges and standing.
“Bethlehem” signifies “house of bread”; it was fitting that the name where “the Bread of Life” was born should be called Bethlehem, or “house of bread.” It was a small town about six miles south of Jerusalem, and about seventy-six miles south of Nazareth. The earliest mention that we have of it is in Genesis 35:16-20, when Jacob was bereaved of his beloved Rachel. It is called “the city of David” because it was his birthplace and the seat of his ancestral home. (1 Samuel 16:1.) Bethlehem was the scene of the touching story of Naomi, Ruth, and Boaz; it lay to the east of the main road from Jerusalem to Hebron, and was situated on a high hill. It was anciently located in the tribe of Judah (Judges 17:9; Judges 19:1; 1 Samuel 17:12), and its earliest name was Ephrath or Ephratah.
to enrol himself with Mary,—This may mean either that Jo-seph went up to be registered, accompanied by Mary, or that Mary went up to be registered as well as Joseph. The Greek can he rendered “went up with Mary,” denoting merely the fact of her accompanying him; or “to enrol himself with Mary,” implying that both their names must be registered. It seems that Mary would not have made the trip in her condi-tion, had she not been required to go, unless she knew the prophecy that the Messiah should be born in Bethlehem, and knew that her time for delivery was near at hand and that she should be in Bethlehem at the birth of her son. We have no way of knowing whether Mary went up to Bethlehem just in order to fulfill the prophecy; the natural and easy way of looking at it is that she was required by the “decree” to go to Bethlehem and register.
6, 7 And it came to pass, while they were there,—Joseph and Mary came the long distance from Nazareth to Bethlehem and were waiting either for the proper officer to register them or till their own turn came to be registered. We do not know how long they had to wait, but evidently not very long, as they were occupying a temporary lodging place. While they were waiting “the days were fulfilled that she should be delivered.” The child was born and Mary “brought forth her firstborn son.” The question whether Mary had other children is in itself a matter of little concern, except as the Catholics have argued and decreed her perpetual virginity. That she afterwards had other children seems to be highly probable. (Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3; Luke 8:20.) These references seem clear enough that Mary had other children, and hence Luke refers to Jesus as “her firstborn son”; the Greek literally reads “her son, the firstborn.”
she wrapped him in swaddling clothes,—In this verse and in verse 12 of this chapter only do we find the word “swaddling”; it is often found in medical writing. “Swaddling clothes” were bands of cloth which were wrapped around infants at their birth; the language indicates that Mary did this herself. After wrapping the babe with these bands she “laid him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn.” Luke is the only writer that mentions his being placed in a manger. The “manger” was a hollow place for food, a feeding trough in a stable. (Isaiah 1:3.) It was sometimes spoken of as a “crib.” The reason given for laying him in a manger is “because there was no room for him in the inn.” “The inn” as used here implies that there was but one in the small city of Bethlehem; it was very much unlike our modern hotel. It was probably but little more than a large enclosure where the traveler might sleep, stable his beasts, and deposit his goods, furnishing his own bed and food. Such inns were common in the East. Sometimes there were separate stables for cattle in the rear under a shed running all along behind the walls; some supposed that it was in one of these rear sta-bles that Joseph and Mary were compelled to lodge on that eventful night. It was perfectly natural after finding no lodging place within the inn, to have found it in one of the stables or outhouses.
8, 9 And there were shepherds in the same country—Shepherds were common among the Jews; one of their chief occupations was that of herding sheep, goats, and cattle; the busi-ness was an honorable and humble calling. Biblical literature is enriched by figures of speech taken from the occupation of shepherds. The patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and his twelve sons were shepherds; David was a shepherd, as were some of the prophets. The calling and office of shepherds have been highly honored; Christ styled himself “the good shepherd” (John 10:11), and he is called “the great shepherd of the sheep” (Hebrews 13:20), and the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29.) The region near Bethlehem was a fertile country and a fine pasture land. These shepherds were “abiding in the field, and keeping watch by night over their flock.” They were “abiding” in the field; that is, they were remaining or living in the open field, after the custom of shepherds. Some think that these shepherds were living in the tower “Migdal Eder” which means “tower of the flock,” or “a watchtower,” which was not far from Jerusalem; it is claimed that this tower was built for herdsmen in watching and guarding their flocks.
The prophet Micah mentions this tower and Bethlehem with Messianic expectation. (Micah 4:8; Micah 5:2.) The shepherds do not appear to have been in this tower at this time. They were probably on one of the neighboring hills, where shepherds and flocks frequently remained.
keeping watch by night—Literally this means that they were keeping watches of the night over their flocks; that is, they were taking their turns at the several nights’ watches. The night was at this time divided into four watches. (Matthew 14:25.) The Jews first divided the night into three “watches,” a “watch” being a period of the night spent by soldiers, in keep-ing awake, to guard against enemies, or to prevent the escape of prisoners; finally it came to mean any division of the night. The Roman custom was to divide the night into four “watches”; these watches began at six, nine, twelve, and three o’clock.
And an angel of the Lord stood by them,—“An angel” came to the shepherds and “stood by them”; the angel appeared in a visible form standing by them; the meaning is that the angel appeared suddenly and unexpectedly. (Luke 24:4; Acts 23:11.) The surpassing brightness of the angel was such that “the glory of the Lord shone round about them”; this usually accompanied the presence of angels. (Exodus 24:16; Numbers 14:10; Matthew 17:5). The shepherds were overshad-owed and surrounded with the divine effulgence. The effect upon them was that they “were sore afraid.” Literally this means that “they feared with a great fear.” There was a glory attending the angel beyond anything that Zacharias or Mary had seen; the supernatural and the holy produced an awe in them that is common to one who sees a representative of Jehovah. (Exodus 20:19; Exodus 33:20; Judges 13:22; Matthew 17:6.)
10-14 And the angel said unto them,—The angel knew that they were “sore afraid,” and assured them that they should not be disturbed “be not afraid” were the assuring words of the angel. They should not be frightened, for the angel was a messenger, not of bad, but of good tidings; hence there was no need of cringing fear. “I bring you good tidings of great joy which shall be to all the people.” The Greek when taken strictly literal means “I evangelize to you a great joy.” An angel is the first to announce to the world that the Messiah had actually come. The good tidings would not only bring great joy to the shepherds, but to the whole people, and espe-cially to all Israel who were expecting the Messiah. The shepherds later made known the good tidings to others; while the message is limited here, the blessings of it are general.
for there is born to you this day in the city of David a Saviour,—The city of David was Bethlehem, David’s native city and Christ’s promised birthplace. (Micah 5:2; Matthew 2:5-6.) “A Saviour” means one who is to save; he was called Jesus, which means Savior, “who is Christ the Lord.” Jesus saves men from the power and penalty of sin; “Christ” is the official name of Jesus and is the Greek for “anointed,” and corre-sponds with the Hebrew “Messiah.” It was common for the Jews to apply this name to the expected deliverer. (Psalms 2:2; Daniel 9:24-25; John 1:41; John 4:25.) He was the anointed Prophet, Priest, and King of spiritual Israel, or the kingdom of God. “Lord” means “ruler or governor”; the Jews thought the name Jehovah too sacred to pronounce and substituted for it in their oral reading a term which the Greek translators of the Old Testament rendered by this word “Lord.” Sarah called Abraham “lord” (Genesis 18:12); Joseph is called “lord” of the country (Genesis 42:33) and is addressed by his brethren as “my lord” (Genesis 42:10). This term is applied to God also. (Genesis 18:27; Exodus 4:10.) In the New Testament it is a name for God. (Matthew 1:20; Matthew 1:22; Matthew 1:24; Matthew 2:15;Acts 11:16; Acts 12:11; Acts 12:17.)
And this is the sign unto you:—As in the case of Mary (Luke 1:36), the sign is promised where none was asked; God anticipated their necessity; they were to be witnesses and proclaimers of the wonderful event; hence they are qualified by divine guidance in bearing this witness. The sign that was given them was that they should “find a babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, and lying in a manger.” There would be but one babe so poorly provided for in Bethlehem; the angel did not tell them everything, but left something for faith to supply. They were to believe the angel, and were to follow the instruction which they received; they believed, went, and found. This babe would be found “lying in a manger”; the fact that it would be wrapped in swaddling clothes was not the sign, for that was common—all newborn babes were wrapped in swaddling clothes; but the fact that this babe would be found in a manger was the sign to the shepherds. This lowly birth and all of its surroundings were in keeping with him who was to be the “man of sorrows,” “the friend of the poor,” and without even a place to lay his head; his lowly condition was adapted to dispel any fears which these humble shepherds might have in approaching a newborn king and excite their sympathy for one so great in nature and yet so hum-ble in earthly estate.
And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude—Only one angel appeared to the shepherds and announced to them the birth of Jesus; but “suddenly,” just as the angel had fin-ished speaking, “a multitude of the heavenly host” appeared. There was a celestial army which came swiftly to impress the message which the angel had delivered. Some have thought that the “heavenly host” was present while the angel was talk-ing to the shepherd, but the context seems to imply otherwise. A host of angels is represented in the Old Testament as form-ing the bodyguard of Deity. (Psalms 103:21; Daniel 7:10.) The glory of the Lord (verse 9) was the first token to the shepherds of the divine presence;next the angelic hosts which appeared praising God emphasized God’s presence. These an-gels or “army of angels” were “praising God” by saying “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men in whom he is well pleased.” This praise was a proclamation of the newborn king and the confirmation of the glorious tid-ings to the shepherds, and through them to all men. Angels shouted for joy at creation (Job 38:7), ministered at the giv-ing of the law (Deuteronomy 33:2; Acts 7:53; Galatians 3:19) and now, with more reason than ever, exult at the advent of the Savior. Their message is confirmed by the proclamation of peace; the “Prince of Peace” is born, and he brings peace to all who ac-cept him.
Chronology of the birth of Christ.—The exact day and year of the birth of Jesus cannot be ascertained with certainty. The “Christian era” should properly begin with the year Jesus was born;that was the intention of the one who arranged our pres-ent calendar. By the “Christian era” is meant the system upon which calendars are constructed, and by which historical events are now dated in practically all the civilized world. Dionysius Exiguus, an abbot of Rome, in the year A.D. 532, arranged the scheme of counting dates from the birth of Jesus. He calculated that the year of Jesus’ birth was 753 from the founding of Rome. It has long been admitted that Dionysius made an error of at least four years.
Jesus was born before the death of Herod the Great (Matthew 2:1; Matthew 2:19), which took place about the year of Rome 753; this is defi-nitely fixed by an eclipse of the moon which is mentioned as occurring a little before the death of Herod; this eclipse, by astronomical calculation, took place in the year of Rome 753, or four years before our common era; but Jesus was born somewhat earlier. The error Dionysius Exiguus made was not discovered until many years afterwards, and no at-tempt has been made to correct the error.
15 And it came to pass, when the angels went away—It seems that immediately upon the departure of the angels the shepherds resolved to go to Bethlehem; the angels “went away from them into heaven” which was their abiding place, and the shepherds, while under the holy influence of the sa-cred scene, said: “Let us now go even unto Bethlehem.” The expression indicates that they were a little distance from the city, and it may imply that Bethlehem was not their home. At any rate, they determined to go and “see this thing that is come to pass.” The words of the shepherds are not those of doubt, but of belief and obedience; they were assured that what the angel had told them was true, and they wanted to see this wonderful babe of Bethlehem. We have no evidence that the angel commanded them to go, but the angel told them where they would find the babe, and this carried with it the force of commanding them. They were anxious to see the one who had been expected for so long a time.
16, 17 And they came with haste,—We may judge that they did not delay after the angel left them, for they “came with haste” to Bethlehem. They came before the night was over, leaving their flocks to the care of providence, showing how strong their faith was. When they arrived they found every-thing as the angel had described; they found “both Mary and Joseph, and the babe lying in the manger.” How they found the Messianic babe is not told us; we need not suppose, with some, that the stable belonged to these shepherds, nor, with others, that the angel gave them minute directions regarding it. We only know that their faith was strong enough and their desire great enough to cause them to search and find the babe. “Mary and Joseph” were found with and protecting the babe; Mary is mentioned first as chief in honor; both Mary and Joseph may have been humiliated by the humble sur-roundings, but they were comforted and cheered by the unex-pected visit of these shepherds, and the news that the heav-enly hosts were rejoicing over the birth of the Savior.
And when they saw it,—When the shepherds saw the child and Mary and Joseph, they knew that the angel had described accurately the babe, and that the Messiah had ‘come. The shepherds were satisfied with the sign which the angel gave them and their faith strengthened in the divine arrangement which had been revealed to them. The shepherds not only told Mary and Joseph what the angel had announced and what “the heavenly host” had sung with respect to the child, but they “made known concerning the saying which was spo-ken to them about this child” to all who would believe them. They gave a full account of the scene as it had occurred. It seems that it was not intended that the report of the birth of Jesus should then be spread abroad, like that of John, in “all the hill country of Judaea.”
18-20 And all that heard it wondered—The effect of this glorious intelligence upon all those that heard caused them to wonder; they were amazed, astonished at hearing so strange an account, for they had not looked for the Messiah to come in such a humble way; they could not reconcile these humble circumstances with their conception of the coming of the Mes-siah. While others were wondering in amazement about these things, “Mary kept all these sayings, pondering them in her heart.” Mary laid them up in her mind and compared the things which the shepherds had told her with what the angel had announced to her when he first visited her. The silent pondering of Mary contrasts strongly with the wonder of those mentioned in the preceding verse. They may have soon forgotten many of the incidents, but Mary kept all of them in her heart. It is noticeable that Joseph is not now mentioned, but he doubtless participated in Mary’s feelings and hopes.
And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God— The shepherds returned to their flocks; the wonderful revela-tion did not withdraw them from their common duties, but rather caused a joyful attention to them. They glorified and praised God; like the angelic host, they give glory to God, as-sured that they had seen the fulfillment of the angel’s predic-tion and that the child was indeed the Messiah. It is probable that Mary and Joseph related to the shepherds some things regarding the babe, and that this also confirmed the faith of the shepherds. Luke says that they glorified and praised God for “all the things that they had heard and seen, even as it was spoken unto them.” This could include what they had learned from Mary and Joseph. Luke’s account of the birth of Jesus bears upon every line the evidence of simple, honest truth in striking contrast to the imaginary legends of the spu-rious accounts given by others. Uninspired men would have written differently about the birth of the Son of God, but God’s word comes in the majesty of simple truth.
Luke 2:21-40
- THE AND OF JESUS
21 And when eight days were fulfilled—The law required that the first-born male be dedicated to Jehovah. (Leviticus 12:1-8.) This was to be done on the eighth day, or when the child was eight days old; these days were required for the preparation of the ceremony of circumcision at this time the child officially received its name. The angel at the annunciation had told Mary that she should call “his name Jesus.”
22-24 And when the days of their purification—The mother of a child was unclean for forty days after the birth of a son, and for eighty days after the birth of a daughter; the time for a son was forty days from his birth, or thirty-three days after the circumcision. When the days were fulfilled for the purification, “they brought him up to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord.” Women on errands commonly rode to the temple on oxen; they did this because the body of an ox was so large that it increased the space between the woman and the ground to prevent any chance of further defilement from passing over any unclean thing on the road.
as it is written in the law of the Lord,—The word “law” occurs in this chapter five times;this is more times than in all the rest of the Gospel of Luke. Luke emphasizes the fact that Jesus was “born of a woman, born under the law” (Galatians 4:4), and accordingly he elaborates the details of the fulfillment of the law by the parents of both John and Jesus. There are different expressions for the law of Moses; it is called “law of Moses,” “the law of the Lord,” and “the law.” (Nehemiah 8:1; Nehemiah 8:3; Nehemiah 8:7-8; Nehemiah 8:14; Nehemiah 8:18; Mark 7:10.) From the day when the first born of Egypt had been smitten by the destroying angel, the first born of Israel among the male were consecrated to the Lord. (Numbers 3:13.) However, God ordained and accepted, as a substitute for the first born, the tribe of Levi, which was set apart for his special service. (Numbers 3:12.) But as the number of the first born exceeded that of the tribe, a redemption price of five shekels was to be paid to the priests (Numbers 3:46-47), which was ordained to be paid for all the first born (Numbers 18:15-16). This is why the first born was called “holy.”
to offer a sacrifice according to that which—This verse is joined to verse 22, but separated by a parenthetical statement in verse 23. The law prescribed the sacrifice to be a lamb one year old for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon or turtledove for a sin offering; but in case the poverty of the mother forbade the offering of a lamb, two turtledoves or young pigeons were permitted as a substitute; one of these was for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering. (Leviticus 12:6-8.) The fact that Mary offered “a pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons” shows that she was poor, for she would not have made the offering of the poor, if she had not been poor. This fact also denies the legend that she was a rich heiress. God had made provision for the poor; his service has always been reasonable. While the lamb for this offering would probably cost about two dollars, the doves would cost about sixteen cents.
25, 26 And behold, there was a man in Jerusalem,—This man’s name was Simeon;some have thought that Simeon was the celebrated rabbi of that name, and the father of Gamaliel; there is no evidence that this supposition is true. It was not the design of Luke to refer to the worldly standing of Simeon, but only his religious attainments. Luke describes Simeon as being “righteous and devout.” The Greek for “devout” is used only by Luke; it means circumspect or cautious; hence Simeon was a person who took hold of things carefully; he was cautious and careful to observe all the ordinances of the law; he was righteous in that he kept the commandments of the law. Simeon was one who was “looking for the consolation of Israel.” “Consolation of Israel” is the same as “hope of Israel.” (Acts 28:20.) He was looking for the Messiah. There was a common form of adjuration among the Jews which said, “so may I see the consolation.” Simeon was filled with the Holy Spirit whether he was filled just at this time or at some previous time, we are not told.
And it had been revealed unto him—The original bears the interpretation that it was having been revealed; that is, it “stood” revealed while he waited for the fulfillment of the revelation. We are not informed as to what manner it was revealed to him. Some have inferred that it was revealed to him in a dream as it was to Joseph and to the wise men (Matthew 1:20; Matthew 2:12-13; Matthew 2:19); but the distinct reference made twice to the Holy Spirit would lead one to suppose that it was made to him in a vision while he was in a state of prophetic ecstasy. It was revealed to him “that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord’s Christ.” In Matthew 16:28 we have the statement, “shall in no wise taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.” Taste and sight are often put figuratively for the actual experience of a thing. Simeon was promised that he should not die before he saw “the Lord’s Christ”; this means the Christ, the anointed of the Lord. (Psalms 2:2.) There is a beautiful and striking antithesis between the words “see death” and “see the Lord’s Christ.”
27-32 And he came in the Spirit into the temple:—The Holy Spirit prompted Simeon to go to the temple at this time; the Holy Spirit moved Simeon to come to the temple at the opportune moment when Joseph and Mary brought the child Jesus, just as the Holy Spirit brought Philip and the eunuch together on the road to Gaza. (Acts 8:26-31.) Simeon was brought into the court of the women of the temple; women were not permitted to enter the temple proper; hence we are to understand that they went into the court where women were permitted. Here Joseph and Mary are spoken of as “the parents” of “the child Jesus.” Luke has made his record clear that Joseph was not one of “the parents” of Jesus; he is spoken of as a “parent” of him, because he was the husband of Mary, who was the mother of Jesus. They brought Jesus to the temple “that they might do concerning him after the custom of the law.” “After the custom” means “according to that which was usually done”; “custom” or “to be accustomed” are used more frequently by Luke than any other writer; they are words which are common in medical writings; hence Luke, who was a physician (Colossians 4:14), uses frequently medical terms. Reference is here made to the payment of the redemption price.
then he received him into his arms,—Simeon required no information in regard to the incidents attending the conception and birth of the child; it had been revealed to him that before his death he should see the long-expected Messiah; he had gone to the temple by the direction of the Holy Spirit, and when Mary entered with the babe, he recognized her child as the promised Messiah. He then took the child and “blessed God.” His act first was one of thanksgiving; then his aged eyes were permitted to rest on the long-expected and hope-for Messiah; he prayed for a speedy and peaceful departure from the toils and sorrows of life. He said: “Now lettest thou thy servant depart, Lord, according to thy word, in peace.” Simeon regarded the sight of the promised Messiah as the consummation of his earthly life, and hence it was to him an assurance that his earthly labors were now about to end.
For mine eyes have seen thy salvation,—This was the ground of his assurance; he had been permitted to see the Messiah, which was equivalent to seeing the salvation of Jehovah, for “salvation” is to be interpreted as “Saviour”; this salvation in the vision of Simeon had been prepared “before the face of all peoples.” “All people” primarily include the Jews which had been scattered all over the world, and in a comprehensive sense it embraces all people of the earth. For this Savior was to be “a light for revelation to the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.” “A light” is put here with the meaning of “a lamp.” The Messiah was to be the Savior of the world; he was to be the moral light of the Gentiles, revealing to them the ways of God, and the true and only method of salvation through his atoning blood. The blessings of the Messiah’s reign are promised here conjointly to the Jews and the Gentiles, and although Simeon spoke this under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, there can be no doubt of the belief of such pious Israelites as Simeon and others who had studied carefully the Messianic prophecies that the Gentiles were to participate in some degree in the same blessings. There was much doubt and mystery with respect to the nature and extent of his kingdom, and it cost much effort on the part of our Lord to teach his disciples the true conception of his mission to earth. Light is promised here to the Gentiles and glory is promised to Israel; the Gentiles were regarded as in darkness and ignorance, and the Messiah would attain the true and highest glory of Israel.
33-35 And his father and his mother—Again we have Joseph spoken of as “his father”; this is done only in the sense that he was regarded legally as his father, since Joseph was the legal husband of Mary. God was the father of the Christ. Joseph and Mary marveled “at the things which were spoken concerning” Jesus by Simon. Although they had been prepared by the previous wonderful manifestations for the remarkable destiny of the child, yet they were doubtless very far from having attained to a full and just conception of the glorious reality; they can hardly realize that the child so helpless and dependent is the manifested Messiah; hence when reminded of this by the words of the shepherds and of Simeon, they wonder at the marvelous event almost as though they had then heard of it for the first time.
Simeon blessed them,—While the plural is used here, the blessing seems to be directed to Mary; some think that the “them” includes Joseph, Mary, and the babe Jesus. In speaking to Mary, Simeon said; “Behold, this child is set for the falling and the rising of many in Israel.” He was the “falling” of some because he would be a stumbling block to many. (Isaiah 8:14; Matthew 21:42; Matthew 21:44; Acts 4:11; Romans 9:33; 1 Cor. 1 23.) He was the “rising” of many because many would be raised up through him to life and glory. (Romans 6:4; Romans 6:9; Ephesians 2:6.) He was also to be “a sign which is spoken against.” This expression does not voice a prophecy, but describes an inherent characteristic of the sign, a sign of which is the character to experience contradiction from the world. In the beginning as a babe Jesus was endangered at the hands of Herod, and all through his earthly ministry and even on the cross, he suffered many things and was spoken against by all who refused to believe him.
yea and a sword shall pierce through thine own soul;— Strictly speaking, this means a large broad sword; the original is used in the Septuagint of the sword of Goliath. (1 Samuel 17:51.) This is a strong figure of Mary’s pang when Jesus her son was nailed to the cross, and while she stood at a distance and witnessed the dying agonies of her son. All the manifestations of Jesus before men would have the result of revealing many hearts; hence Simeon said “that thoughts out of many hearts may be revealed.” When Jesus stood in the presence of men he could look into their hearts and see what was in them; his presence became a searching test of real character. When Jesus came among men some hailed him with joy as one who brought the light of God from heaven to their needy, longing souls; but others hated this light, repelled it because it rebuked their evil deeds; those who refused to accept Jesus hardened their hearts and deepened their own damnation.
36-38 and there was one Anna,—Anna is another one of those who were prayerfully waiting with hopeful, longing expectation for the coming of the Messiah she was guided on the present occasion by the same spirit and came at the same time that Simeon came to the temple to behold the Messiah. She was well advanced in years; she was a prophetess, “the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Asher.” The particularity with which her parentage and lineage is given shows that she was a person whose family as well as personal history was well known to the public. She had married in her young maidenhood, and had lived with her husband seven years; after her husband’s death she lived eighty-four years, making in all ninety-one years since her marriage; on the supposition that she was twenty years old when she married, she was at this time one hundred eleven years old. She was regular in her worship, for she “departed not from the temple, worshipping with fastings and supplications night and day.”
And coming up at that very hour she gave thanks—Like Simeon she gave thanks to God that her aged eyes had been spared to see the infant Messiah; she knew by the Holy Spirit that the child Jesus was the long-expected Messiah; she “spake of him to all them that were looking for the redemption of Jerusalem.” Anna not only gave thanks to God, but she spoke to all others who in their hearts were waiting for the Messiah; it is not to be understood that she gave public utterance, but that she spoke to the pious ones who were with her in the temple waiting for the Messiah. “Looking for the redemption of Jerusalem” is equivalent to “looking for the consolation of Israel.” (Verse 25.) “Jerusalem” here stands for the race or nation of the Jews. Anna is to be classed with Simeon, Zacharias, and the shepherds. All of these were in a state of prayerful expectation of the Messiah.
39 And when they had accomplished all things—After the presentation of the child in the temple, Joseph and Mary returned “into Galilee, to their own city Nazareth.” According to the record given by Matthew (Matthew 2:1-12), it seems that they returned to Bethlehem, where they were visited by the Magi, and afterwards took their flight into Egypt (Matthew 2:13-23). The portion of Luke’s record is parallel to Matthew 2:22-23, and serves to explain what is there left out of sight, that Joseph and Mary with the babe returned to Nazareth, because it was “their own city.” Matthew refers to this only to show that Jesus was brought up in that despised city; Luke, whose plan led him to speak of the previous dwelling place and condition of Joseph and Mary, refers to Nazareth as their place of abode before and after the birth of Jesus.
40 And the child grew, and waxed strong,—This shows that Jesus had a human body and that he was capable of increasing in wisdom and knowledge. The childhood life of Jesus followed the normal law of the race, growth of both body and mind; the facts were peculair to him and he had the great grace of God upon him and his wisdom was noticeable. The Jews marked the stages of a child’s development by seven different terms; the newborn babe (Isaiah 9:6);the suckling (Isaiah 11:8) the suckling beginning to ask for food (Lamentations 4:4); the weaned child (Isaiah 28:9);the child clinging to its mother (Jeremiah 40:7);the child becoming firm and strong (Isaiah 7:14); the youth becoming free and independent (Isaiah 31:8). Jesus passed through all of these stages in his human development.
Luke 2:41-52
- THE BOYHOOD OF JESUS HIS VISIT
TO AT AGE OF TWELVE
41 And his parents went every year—The law required all males above the age of twelve to attend three annual feasts; these feasts were held first where the tabernacle was pitched, and next in Jerusalem when the temple was built. The attendance of females was not forbidden; they were left free to attend if they wished. (1 Samuel 1:7; 1 Samuel 1:22; 1 Samuel 1:24.) The school of Hillel made it obligatory upon women to attend the Passover. It is not to be inferred here that Joseph and Mary went up to no other yearly feasts than the Passover, but that upon this feast they were in constant attendance. It seems that the fear of the child being harmed had passed; that the Roman authorities had either forgotten about the incident of the newborn king, or had not given much attention to it, possibly thinking that it was a superstition of the Jews.
the feast of the Passover.—The Passover was held on the fourteenth day of month Nisan, which came some time in our month of March. It commemorated the death angel passing over the Israelites in Egypt and sparing the first born of the Israelites, but destroying the firstborn males of the Egyptians. It was held annually, and was eaten with the lamb, called the paschal lamb. (Exodus 12:1-18.) It had to be eaten with unleavened bread and bitter herbs; those who ate it had to be ceremonially clean.
42-45 And when he was twelve years old,—At the age of twelve a boy was regarded as “a son of the law,” and came under obligation to observe the ordinances of the law personally. It seems clear that this was the first time that Jesus accompanied Joseph and Mary to the Feast of the Passover. How little did the multitudes which filled Jerusalem on that occasion think that the real Lamb, who was to be offered for the redemption of the world, the antitype of the lamb slain at the paschal feast, was present there! Joseph and Mary “went up after the custom of the feast” which required its celebration at Jerusalem. Before the erection of the temple the feast was kept at he place where the tabernacle was raised.
and when they had fulfilled the days,—The Passover required but one day, but the feast of unleavened bread, which immediately followed the Passover, continued for seven days. Since the Passover was the beginning of the feast of unleavened bread, the names have been used interchangeably, the Passover being applied to the feast of unleavened bread and the feast of unleavened bread to the Passover. (Exodus 12:15; Exodus 12:17; Exodus 23:15; Leviticus 23:4-8.) At the expiration of these days Joseph and Mary with their kinspeople began their journey homeward, not aware that Jesus was tarrying behind, but supposing that he was with the company made up of their neighbors and friends. These incidental circumstances show the method of travel from remote localities to the great city to attend the great feasts.
supposing him to be in the company,—This explains why they thought that Jesus was along with them; there was a great crowd of neighbors and kinspeople, and as they were traveling along engaged in religious exercises, they supposed that Jesus was along with them. Either they had committed him to some friend or relative, or they thought that he was old enough to take care of himself as they journeyed along, hence no attention was given to him until they arrived where they would spend the night. We are not to infer that Joseph and Mary were negligent with respect to Jesus. “They went a day’s journey” before they discovered that the boy Jesus was not in the company. The length of “a day’s journey” depended somewhat upon the distance they had to go in order to encamp where there was a supply of good water. From twenty to thirty miles is probably a fair estimate of an average day’s journey with baggage, animals, and women and children. “A day’s journey” (Numbers 11:31; 1 Kings 19:4; John 3:4) was far different to a “sabbath day’s journey,” which was about three-fourths of a mile. The company started early on their journey and usually made it a point to stop for the night before it was dark in order to prepare their evening meal and be ready for an early start on the morrow.
and when they found him not, they returned—They turned back on the following morning; as they had made a day’s journey from Jerusalem, it would require another day to return to Jerusalem. It seems that they sought for him all their way back to the city; they supposed that he had started with the company, hence they diligently searched for him along the way. Not finding Jesus during the entire day, nor at the place of rest for the night, they returned to the city anxiously seeking him.
46, 47 And it came to pass, after three days—Some have counted the three days from the time that they arrived in Jerusalem; others think that it was three days from their separation, two days being spent in travel from and back to Jerusalem, and one day spent in searching for him in the city. It is a little difficult to determine the exact length of time, as the Jews were not accurate in counting time as we are today. It seems that one day was spent in their journey, another in returning to the city, and the third day he was found in the temple. He was “in the temple,” in one of the apartments of the main building, where the Jewish doctors of the law held their schools. He was “sitting in the midst of the teachers, both hearing them, and asking them questions.” It was the custom for students to sit on the floor at the feet of their teachers, who sat on raised benches of a semicircular form; Jesus was sitting in the company of the others. The “teachers” were the “doctors” of the law; these were the Jewish rabbis, a class of men who, after the captivity, expounded the law in the temple and synagogues; they were consulted on doubtful points of the law and held public lectures and discussions wherever they could find auditors.
and all that heard him were amazed—Jesus was “both hearing them, and asking them questions.” He was not “disputing” with them, but sat in their presence and asked questions of them, and answered their questions. We must think of Jesus even at the age of twelve as being humble and respectful; his questions were not those of a pert and spoiled child, but of a youthful mind, a modestly searching after truth, and seeking from the lips of age and wisdom a solution of difficulties, which he had already met in meditating upon the law of God. It was the custom in the Jewish schools for the scholars to ask questions of their teachers, and much of the books of the rabbis consisted of the answers of the rabbis to such questions. All the doctors and others who were present were “amazed at his understanding and his answers.” He manifested more intelligence in asking questions and in answering their questions than the ordinary scholar; his degree of intelligence was such that all were astonished at his understanding of the law. It will be noticed here that Jesus at the age of twelve is not occupying the place of a teacher, but is sitting in the circle among the doctors and their hearers.
48-50 And when they saw him, they were astonished;— When Joseph and Mary saw Jesus engaged in this study or conversation with the rabbis, “they were astonished”; the original Greek uses a very strong verb here, which means “to strike out or drive away from”; hence the meaning is “to drive out of one’s senses” “amazed” is to throw into a “maze” or labyrinth, and is closely akin to the Greek word used here. It seems that Mary should have paused before she spake to him in the manner of reproof that she used; she should not have been so “astonished” when she remembered all the supernatural events connected with his conception, birth, and divine protection. She said: “Son, why bast thou thus dealt with us?” “Son” here means “child,” as the original means a word which implies passive or dependent relation. There is a rebuke in Mary’s language. She adds that “thy father and I sought thee sorrowing.” Joseph was not his father, but this shows that he had been taught to regard Joseph as his real father. Up to this time Joseph had been called by Jesus “father,” but from this time on never does he speak of Joseph as his father, neither does Mary, henceforth, speak of Joseph as the father of Jesus. The original means that they had “sought” or “were seeking with sorrow.” Mary seems to be going over in mind the process of the long search that they had made for him.
And he said unto them,—With mental anguish which amounted to distress of body, hour after hour Joseph and Mary had searched without success for the missing child; hence the rebuke that Mary gave to Jesus. However, Jesus replied: “How is that ye sought me?” This is the first recorded saying that we have of Jesus; they are spoken to his mother. He means why have you been searching for me; the words of Jesus do not imply a rebuke, as some have affirmed, but are words of anxious solicitude for his mother’s anxiety. His reply has reference to the state of mental distress with which they sought him as is shown from his next words. He said: “Knew ye not that I must be in my Father’s house?” The word “must” here means “it is necessary” or “it behooves.” Jesus often used this word concerning his own appointed work, and expressed both the inevitable fulfillment of the divine counsels and the absolute constraint of the principal duty upon himself. (Matthew 16:21; Matthew 26:54; Mark 8:31; Luke 4:43; Luke 9:22; Luke 13:33; Luke 24:7; Luke 24:26; Luke 24:46; John 3:14; John 4:4; John 12:34.) “In my Father’s house” means that he must be doing those things of God. Mary’s question was not as to what her son had been doing, hut as to where he had been; Jesus answers her by asking: Where is the child to be found but in his Father’s house?
And they understood not the saying—It seems to us strange that after the revelations that had been made to Mary and Joseph (Matthew 1:20; Luke 1:32; Luke 1:35) that they should have been at a loss to understand Jesus’ reply; but the years of his infancy and childhood passing away without any striking incident, it may be that they lost sight in part of the wondrous circumstances attending his birth. They may never have understood fully the depth of meaning, which, in the light of the New Testament, we find no difficulty in attaching to these declarations. It is certain that this consciousness of Jesus as to his divine nature threw Joseph and Mary into the profoundest reflection as to the full meaning of the words that he uttered.
51 And he went down with them,—The geographical direction from Jerusalem to Nazareth is “down,” hence Jesus went with Joseph and Mary down to Nazareth. We do not hear any more of Jesus until the time for his baptism; eighteen years of silence is spent at Nazareth, as he was about thirty years old at his baptism. We are told that “he was subject unto them.” The original in the Greek denotes “habitual, continuous” subjection. He had been subject to them even before this, and this is mentioned here when it might seem that he could by this time have exempted himself from obedience to any human authority. It was a great honor to the home of Mary to have Jesus sojourn as her son in it; no such honor has been bestowed upon angels. We learn that Joseph was a carpenter. (Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3.) It is a very clear inference that Jesus also learned and followed that trade.
As no further mention is made of Joseph, it is thought by many that he died soon after the visit to Jerusalem. However it is not strange, when we consider his relation to Jesus as only his reputed father, that no further mention should be made of him by any inspired historian. “And his mother kept all these sayings in her heart.”
52 And Jesus advanced in wisdom and stature,—This verse covers the eighteen years of silence in the life of Jesus; these years intervened between his first visit to Jerusalem and the beginning of his public ministry. During this time his mental powers were constantly enlarging and strengthening; his physical growth was uninterrupted by sickness or disease. Some understand the word “stature” as to mean advanced in wisdom as he advanced in age; however, this is not justified by the original. “In favor with God and men” means that he grew in divine favor, that every step of his development was pleasing to God. Some have raised the question that if Jesus was always pure and sinless, how could he increase in holiness, which is implied in his advancement in the divine favor.