Let’s Try This Out (more on Matthew 2:13-23)

After publishing my previous post and asking for input from people over Twitter & Facebook, I think I may have gotten somewhere.  One friend suggested I listen to a sermon.  In itself, I didn’t find the sermon to be all that helpful, but what it did do for me is get me thinking about sermons.  I seldom listen to sermons online, simply because I want to avoid the risk of being tempted to re-preach something.  What I study the Bible and write sermons, I do my best to come to the text trying to understand what it’s saying and what value does it have for the congregation I’m preaching to, apart from any theological bias (although it’s impossible for anyone to do that perfectly).

But I started searching the internet for sermons on Matthew 2:13-23.  I’ve been searching for commentary, but never sermons.  I came across a sermon that actually did a pretty good job speaking to the questions that have been holding me up with this text (but he misses the application, giving in to the simplistic providence theme I’m trying to avoid…see yesterday’s post for my reasons why).  But what this sermon did do is help me see a rather important connection that I had been overlooking…

The tendency that we often have when looking at this text is to focus on one of two things; we either focus on Jesus’ flight and return, or we focus on Herod’s “slaughter of the innocents.”  Much has been made of the lack of historical evidence supporting the “slaughter,” so we tend to be more incline to spend our time and energy focusing there.  But the text doesn’t give an extraordinary amount of attention to either point.  Matthew is focusing primarily on Jesus, trying to say something about him.  Based on the book as a whole, I’m coming to the text assuming that Matthew is still working to show his readers that Jesus is the messiah.  That is exactly what Matthew is doing, but not in the way we may expect him to – which is one of the reasons I’ve missed a very important “background text/figure.”  But the typical Jewish reader would have picked up on it immediately.

In verse 15, Matthew quotes Hosea 11:1 saying “Out of Egypt I called my son.”  This would have served two particular purposes in regard to Matthew’s readers, but one really stands out: Matthew is forcing his readers to think about the Exodus.  Some of the commentaries I’ve been reading on this passage have suggested that this is Matthew’s way of getting his readers to fully accept Jesus as one of their own, an Israelite who has also participated in deliverance from bondage.  That’s the second possible purpose, but the first is far stronger and would have a far greater impact on Jews.

When a Jewish reader is reminded of the Exodus, a number of people come to mind.  But none more prominent than Moses…

By the time a Jewish reader gets to verse 16, the Moses imagery runs thicker than thick.  Moses was born in Egypt while the Israelites were being enslaved by Pharaoh (Ex 2:1).  Prior to his birth, Pharaoh had become rather paranoid over the fact that the Israelites were were multiplying like rabbits (Ex 1:7).  The Egyptians became afraid that the Israelites would one day overthrow Pharaoh and take control of their territory (Ex 1:8-10).  So Pharaoh did something strangely similar to Herod, he issued an order that all Hebrew male children be killed (Ex 1:16, 22).  Moses escaped certain death because his mother gave him up, placing him in a basket, and setting him afloat in the Nile (Ex 2:3).  Moses was found by Pharaoh’s daughter and saved (Ex 2:5-6), only to grow up and ultimately lead the Israelites to freedom.

The similarities between Jesus’ early life and that of Moses are unmistakable.  Both were born under dangerous circumstances, both were in danger of being killed for little more than their gender, both were victims of political paranoia.  So while Matthew’s quotation of Hosea 11 directs his reader’s thoughts to Egypt and the Exodus, verse 16 solidifies their mental image of Moses.

But why is Moses so important to understanding who Jesus was?

That’s where Judaism 101 comes in handy .  Moses was the greatest prophet, leader, and teacher that Judaism has ever known.  The 12th century Jewish philosopher and theologian, Maimonides considered a belief in “the preeminence of Moses among the prophets” as a fundamental tenant of the Jewish faith.  In other words, Moses was it.  No other prophet ever came close to reaching the status or respect given to Moses.  He recorded the Law (torah) and enjoyed direct communication and fellowship with God – the only human to have ever done so and live to tell about it.

By showing such an overt comparison between Jesus and Moses, Matthew is sending a clear message that in his mind Jesus is equal to Moses.  As Christians, we want to throw our hands up and defend Jesus’ deity against a statement like that – how dare Matthew suggest that Jesus was equal to another human being; Jesus was more than a human.  But we have to take into account what this meant to his readers: Matthew was committing just a big a sin by elevating Jesus to such an extreme level.  For Jews, no one matches the spiritual greatness of Moses…EXCEPT THE MESSIAH!

Matthew then quotes Jeremiah 31:5 in connection to “the slaughter.”  This quotation seems to be more of an anecdote to the situation than something Matthew sees as adding anything to the story.  Jeremiah’s words were written in reference to the Babylonian captivity and the pain and sorrow associated with that experience.  Lamentations 1:16 makes reference to mothers weeping because of what is happening to their children.  Mothers in Bethlehem are experiencing great pain as a result of the deaths of their children, just as mothers did when the first temple and Jerusalem were destroyed by the Babylonian Empire.

But Matthew does reinforce his message of Jesus as messiah in verse 23: “and going, he lived in a town called Nazareth.  Therefore, the word of the prophets was fulfilled that he will be called a Nazarene.”  No where in the OT is this prophecy actually made.  Which means we’re left with two options: 1) this prophecy was given by a prophet that wasn’t recorded and handed down; or 2) it’s a rather general summary of the gist of several prophecies mixed with some cultural awareness stuff.  Either way it works out; there’s no reason to think that every Jewish prophet to ever live had every word recorded and preserved within the OT.  The second possibility take a little more explanation…

Isaiah especially – with the support of others – makes frequent reference to the messiah’s lowly status and position in society.  Jesus is frequently degraded and insulted because of where he comes from.  At one point, in response to discovering that Jesus is from Nazareth, someone actually exclaims, “Nazareth!  Can anything good come from there?” (John 1:24).  The biblical example is that Nazareth is problematic for Jews in and of itself.

The reason form such animosity stems from the fact that the Roman garrison charged with occupying northern Galilee (where Nazareth is located) was housed in Nazareth.  Rome was the highly despised occupiers of the time, and so, any Jew living in Nazareth was unfairly looked upon with suspicion and assumed to be a traitor.  The connection between Jesus lowly status and possible traitor-hood may be a bit of a stretch, but a connection can be made.  Again, Matthew is emphasizing Jesus’ messiahship.

The remaining difficulty is that there does not seem to be anything here pertaining to discipleship or missions – leaving Matthew’s three-fold purpose in limbo.  However, if we were to broaden our view of the context, what we might see is that we have three distinct scenes in which Jesus’ messiahship is emphasize over anything else (1:18-24; 2:1-13; 2:13-23) followed by three scenes that seem to have a discipleship focus to them (3:1-12; 3:13-17; 4:1-11).  But that’s just a working hypothesis…

Filed under: Bible Study, Culture, Ministry, Theology