Calling Disciples

Posted on October 19, 2015 by Don Merritt

As Jesus was walking beside the Sea of Galilee, he saw two brothers, Simon called Peter and his brother Andrew. They were casting a net into the lake, for they were fishermen. “Come, follow me,” Jesus said, “and I will send you out to fish for people.” At once they left their nets and followed him.

Going on from there, he saw two other brothers, James son of Zebedee and his brother John. They were in a boat with their father Zebedee, preparing their nets. Jesus called them,  and immediately they left the boat and their father and followed him.

Matthew 4:18-22

As we continue with Matthew’s account of Jesus, we come to the time when He began calling disciples, and no matter how many times I read these accounts whether it be here in Matthew or in one of the other Gospels, I am always struck by the fact that Jesus called and they came immediately. No excuses, no arguments, nobody had to “pray about it” (so they could avoid saying no): Jesus called, they responded.

This short account begins with the calling of Peter and Andrew, two fishermen who were out on the Sea of Galilee fishing. Jesus calls them and says that He will make them fishers of men. Notice they had nets in the water at that moment and they just left them there and went with Jesus. Let’s be clear, they were fishermen, not sportsmen; fishing wasn’t their hobby, it was their livelihood. When they just left everything and followed Jesus, they lost their business. They also left their boat behind… they sacrificed greatly to follow Jesus, and they did it without hesitation.

Next, Jesus called John and James who were fishing with their father, and once again, without hesitation, they left not only their profession but they left their father to follow Him. If walking away from your livelihood is big, turning your back on your family is bigger still. There is a cost to following Jesus; we may not like to talk about it, but it is true nevertheless.

So to recap, these four disciples responded to Jesus immediately, and in doing so, they gave up everything they had in this world to follow Him. In our day, what do we give up to follow Him? Cussing? An hour a week?

Yet often we say following Him is too hard!

Next time, we’ll see how His early ministry was doing; see you then!

Posted in Bible | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Jesus Heads to Galilee

Posted on October 17, 2015 by Don Merritt

Sunset-over-Sea-of-Galilee-tb102904518

When Jesus heard that John had been put in prison, he withdrew to Galilee. Leaving Nazareth, he went and lived in Capernaum, which was by the lake in the area of Zebulun and Naphtali— to fulfill what was said through the prophet Isaiah:

“Land of Zebulun and land of Naphtali,
the Way of the Sea, beyond the Jordan,
Galilee of the Gentiles—
the people living in darkness
have seen a great light;
on those living in the land of the shadow of death
a light has dawned.”

Matthew 4:12-16

As the first section of Matthew’s Gospel draws to its close, Matthew inserts some transition, and in so doing, he continues his pattern of linking the story of Jesus with Israelite history; in this case using geography as his means. It would seem that Jesus heard that John had been arrested, and then headed for Galilee. Let’s not b e too hasty to assume that He did so because He feared arrest or danger Himself; there is something much greater in play here, for John’s arrest put an end to his mission to “prepare the way of the Lord” and thus, with everything in readiness and the fullness of time having arrived, it was time for Jesus to step into center stage.

In fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy found in Isaiah 9:1-2, Jesus travels there, but He doesn’t resume His residence in Nazareth, He sets up shop in Capernaum which will be His base of operation during His Galilean ministry. Notice the inclusion of the tribes that once lived in this region, among the very first to be taken into captivity, along with the reference to “Galilee of the Gentiles” with its obvious reference to the universal nature of Jesus’ messianic mission and its fulfillment of God’s promises to Abraham.

There is also the observation that these are people, both Jew and Gentile, who are living in darkness, in the very “shadow of death” for whom a new light is beginning to dawn. This is not only the dawning of hope, but it is also the dawning of the truth of God’s redemptive plan coming into its final phase of execution. Matthew sums the whole first section of the book up in one wonderful sentence:

From that time on Jesus began to preach, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.”

Matthew 4:17

Posted in Bible | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Jesus in the Wilderness

Posted on October 16, 2015 by Don Merritt

Matthew 4:1-11

After His baptism by John, Jesus heads out to the Wilderness (desert) to be tempted by Satan. In this narrative, we see once again Matthew’s fondness for connecting his story about Jesus with the history of Israel, in this case, with the 40 years of wandering. I truly doubt that God was, as some might suggest, testing Jesus to make sure that He could be fully trusted; it was a little late for that. Instead, it seems to me that God was drawing a contrast between the faithfulness of Jesus His Son, and the people who for forty years wandered in the Wilderness because of their lack of faithfulness to God. In fact, we will see this tendency in Jesus all through the story of His life.

Satan plays an interesting role in all of this, but then he played a behind the scenes role in the original story as well, as seen by the constant grumbling and complaining of the Israelites. In our story, Satan interacts with Jesus in the role of tempter; yes, he seems focused on pulling Jesus away from his Father and into Satan’s orbit and service. I can’t say whether or not Satan really though he could succeed in this; he must have known it was a long shot, but he tried.

The drama begins after Jesus has fasted for forty days and forty nights. Now that Jesus is really hungry and physically weak, Satan drops in to taunt Him saying “If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.”  Jesus relies by quoting Deut. 8:3: “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.”

If Jesus can quote the Scriptures, it might interest us to know that Satan can as well, and in His second taunt, that is exactly what he did, after transporting the scene to the highest point of the Temple:  “If you are the Son of God,” he said, “throw yourself down. For it is written:

“‘He will command his angels concerning you,
and they will lift you up in their hands,
so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.” (cf. Psalm 91:11-12)

Jesus isn’t buying Satan’s twisting of the Word of God, this time quoting Deut. 6:16:” Jesus answered him, “It is also written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’”

At this stage in the story, Satan is about to get to his actual point; it was never his mission to test Jesus to see if He was really the Son of God; he knew exactly who Jesus was, after all, why else would old Herod have been so anxious to kill Jesus as an infant? No sir, Satan knew exactly who he was talking to, and his whole reason for being there was to try and “turn” Jesus, to gain His worship, just the way he had “turned” Adam and Eve, and so he comes to his point:

Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. “All this I will give you,” he said, “if you will bow down and worship me.” (4:8-9)

When we think about this, it seems a little strange for Satan to make such an offer as though he actually held the power to deliver on his promise, but then he is a liar and the father of lies. Jesus, as God’s Son is heir to the entire universe and beyond, but His path to His destiny is not by stealing or betrayal, it is the path of service, a path that, as we will see, leads to the cross. This is the path that Matthew is leading us on through the rest of His account of Jesus’ story, but even more than that, it is our path as disciples of Jesus today, for we too have become co-heirs with Christ to everything, but our path to inheriting everything is not through stealing, scheming or conquest, but by the path of service.

At this point in the story, Jesus is done with Satan:

Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’”

Then the devil left him, and angels came and attended him. (4:10-11)

Quoting Deut. 6:13, Jesus equates Satan’s “offer” with idolatry and dismisses him. An obvious, but often overlooked aspect of this is that even in His weakened condition, Jesus told Satan to leave, and Satan obeyed.

Interesting isn’t it?

So here we are, followers of Christ, indwelt by the Holy Spirit, and we think we have so many problems and that the devil is so strong, unstoppable and alluring, but all of that is the devil’s lie! What did we study in James so recently?

Submit yourselves, then, to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.

James 4:7

Posted in Bible | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 17 Comments

Jesus Appears on the Scene

Posted on October 15, 2015 by Don Merritt

Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to be baptized by John. But John tried to deter him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?”

Jesus replied, “Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness.” Then John consented.

Matthew 3:13-15

So far, we have seen John’s ministry and teaching, and we have seen the response of so many people to his work. Then Jesus bursts onto the stage. It is abundantly clear in verse 13 that Jesus departed from Galilee for the express purpose of receiving John’s baptism during the time that he was preaching in the wilderness, and it is also clear that the work of John is linked strategically with the arrival of Jesus.

John’s reaction to this does him considerable credit; he seemed to be surprised that one so much greater than he would want to submit to his baptism. Rather, John knew that he needed what Jesus could offer; not the other way around. That is when Jesus speaks for the very first time in Matthew’s Gospel; for the time being anyway, it was right and proper that Jesus submit Himself to John’s preparatory baptism so that all righteousness could be fulfilled.

It seems clear, at least to me, that Jesus wasn’t making any sort of legal argument, for there was no Jewish Law that said He had to be baptized, there wasn’t any specific prophecy that had to be fulfilled or anything like that, rather it was righteous for Jesus to submit to the baptism of John to prepare Him to step forth from the shadows into the bright lights of His own ministry as the Messiah, the Son of God, for you see, Jesus was not there to do His own will, but to submit to the Father’s will and purpose. Isn’t it interesting that when Jesus in obedience submitted to John, John immediately submits to His request to be baptized?

So then, why did God want this little scene to happen?

As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him. And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”

Matthew 3:16-17

Jesus submits to John’s baptism, John submits to Jesus’ request to be baptized, Jesus is immersed… and as soon as He comes up out of the water, heaven was opened. It seems to me that this is one of those “wow” moments…

“Heaven was opened” is used several times in Scripture to signal a divine revelation (cf. Ezek. 1:1; Is. 63:19; Acts 7:56; Rev. 4:1) and this time is no different; God has a little announcement to make. First, the Spirit descends upon Jesus “like a dove” and alights on him. Some have suggested that this is when Jesus actually became God’s son, but to me that seems unlikely, particularly considering the great pains Matthew has gone to already to show the Sonship of Jesus from the time of His conception. What seems more likely to me is that this anointing of the Holy Spirit is done in conjunction with His commissioning, which follows immediately when the voice of God speaks forth from Heaven pronouncing His pleasure with His Son.

It isn’t every day that you see all three Persons of the Godhead manifested together in one place at the same time; thus began the earthly ministry of Jesus, the Messiah.

Posted in Bible | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 11 Comments

Photo of the Week: October 14, 2015

Posted on October 14, 2015 by Don Merritt

Posted in Photo of the Week | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Preparing the Way of the Lord

Posted on October 14, 2015 by Don Merritt

Matthew 3:1-12

Matthew skips over nearly 30 years between 2:23 and 3:1 and in so doing he has emphasized for us his priority on the identity and role of Jesus over that of providing mere biographical information. This is further emphasized for us in that Matthew picks up all these years later not with Jesus, but with John, for John’s story serves to underscore the messianic role and function that Jesus will fulfill.

A common form of Jewish messianic hope is represented by the notion that Elijah would return as a precursor to the arrival of the Messiah (cf. Matt. 11:14; 17:10-13; Mal. 3:23-24; 4:5-6). Matthew takes care to present John in this light to underscore ultimately, the identity of Jesus, for in presenting John as he did, Matthew shows that John’s emergence upon the scene marks the beginning of a whole new paradigm in Israel. Consider the fact that John has come to the territory of David (3:1) in the spirit of Elijah (cf. 3:4; 2Kings 1:8) preaching a message of repentance (3:2, 7-10; cf. Mal. 3:1-5; 4:5-6), in the context of the nearness of the Kingdom (3:2) and the ultimate judgment of the “mightier one” to come (3:11-12).  As Matthew’s story continues to unfold in the chapters that follow, John’s work will continue to give us focus on the character and mission of Jesus (cf. 3:14; 11:1-19; 14:1-12; 16:14-20; 17:9-13; 21:23-27). Matthew breaks his description of John the Baptist into two parts: 3:1-6 highlight John’s ministry, and 3:7-12 his message.

3:1-6: There is no coincidence in the fact that John appears in the “wilderness of Judea” (or “desert”) for it had long been expected that the precursor to messiah’s arrival would come from the Wilderness (Is. 40:3-4; 42:14-55:13; Ezek. 20:33-44; Hos. 2:14-15). This also provides us with a connection between Moses in the Wilderness and the story of Jesus. The Kingdom of Heaven (mentioned by Matthew 33 times in his Gospel) was near; there was urgency in John, an urgency that came from the very nature of his calling, as seen in the quotation from Isaiah 40:3.

John is further connected to the prophets of old in Matthew’s description of his wardrobe and menu. His dress is associated with that of Elijah (2Kings 1:8; cf. Zech. 13:4). His menu is that of a prophet fully consecrated to God. The impact of John’s ministry out in the desert was profound indeed; people came from all around to hear his message. They not only heard it, but they responded to it as well, confession their sins and repenting, being baptized in the Jordan River.

3:7-12: Yes indeed, john’s ministry was having quite an impact, and when a radical message has a significant impact upon the people, the authorities will be looking into the situation, and that is what happens in these verses. Matthew tends to present the Pharisees and Sadducees as a united front throughout his Gospel, but to be sure, they would have only been united if they felt threatened, for they were rival factions that didn’t usually see eye-to-eye on very much. John, as Jesus would later, saw right through their façade.

In verses 7-10, John essentially launches a broadside at them; his message, crafted in apocalyptic terms they would understand was simply that they must repent of their unrighteousness like everyone else, or face judgment. This is made even clearer in vv. 11-12 where John clearly tells them that his baptism is all about repentance, but there will shortly appear one who is far greater than he, who will baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire. There are various interpretations of the issue of “Holy Spirit” and “fire” that John speaks of here and whichever you prefer is fine by me. As for me, as simple-minded as I am, I simply see a very tight context here that is illustrated in verse 12:

His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor, gathering his wheat into the barn and burning up the chaff with unquenchable fire.”

Using a simple agricultural metaphor that would be understood by most anyone in that day, John is telling the religious leaders that they will soon be able to repent and receive Jesus’ baptism and the Holy Spirit, or they can refuse and face the consequences; it would be their choice, just like it is our choice. This same tension will come up time and again in Matthew’s story.

In the next scene, John will have an entirely different kind of visit; see you there!

Posted in Bible | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

A Sudden Trip to Egypt and a Home in Nazareth

Posted on October 14, 2015 by Don Merritt

Matthew 2:13-23

When we left off, the Magi, because of a message from God in a dream, left the house where the infant Messiah was staying in Bethlehem and returned home without going back to tell Herod where the child could be found. It would seem that almost immediately after they departed, Joseph had another word from an angel in a dream telling him to flee from Bethlehem with his family and go directly to Egypt, because of the plot of Herod to kill the baby.

Joseph obeyed without hesitation.

Matthew doesn’t give us any more detail than that. I too have traveled from Bethlehem to Egypt; I took a bus. What method of travel did Joseph employ  a bus, a train… or maybe a donkey or a camel or on foot? Where did they end up in Egypt? I went straight to Cairo; Egypt is a pretty big place, but we have no information from Matthew…

What we should remember is that Matthew is not writing a travel story, he’s showing us who the baby was, for He was a rather special little Person. Egypt had long been a place for political refugees in Israel to go to when in danger (cf. 1 Kings 11:40; 2 Kings 25:26; Jer. 41:16-18; 26:21; 43:1-7). We begin to see what Matthew is up to in verse 15, for rather than tell us any details of their flight; he tells us that this fulfills the words of Hosea:  “Out of Egypt I called my son.” (Hos. 11:1).

Next, in verse 16, we find out how terrible a plot Herod had in mind; he would have all boys 2 and under murdered… in fulfillment of yet another prophecy, this time it’s Jer. 31:15:

“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.” (v. 18)

Do you see what Matthew is doing here? He really isn’t giving us a historical narrative of the life of a very young Christ at this point; he is pointing out who He is.

In the remaining verses, verses 19-23, we discover that upon the death of Herod, Joseph has another angelic visit in a dream in which he is given the “all clear” to return home, and once again, Joseph complies promptly, ending up in the dusty town of Nazareth of Galilee. Joseph seems to have gone there to avoid the new king who happens to have been Herod’s son, a little tidbit he seems to have acquired in yet another dream. Nazareth must have seemed perfect to Joseph, being very remote and off the beaten path as it was (and still is), but it just happens to fulfill more prophecy, although Matthew cites none in particular, preferring to use the plural; “prophets”.

In fact, the word “Nazarene” is not found in the Old Testament, and this gives scholars a bit of a research problem. As you might guess, there are many theories resulting from this issue, ranging from the suggestion that Matthew’s work is unreliable to some others that are rather fantastic. Personally, after studying and reflecting on many of the ideas out there, I think the solution is something along these lines:

Matthew is playing on words, for there is an interesting similarity between the Hebrew word for “branch” and the Greek for “Nazarene”. There is a phonetic word play there… and if this is what Matthew was thinking, then the Hebrew word in question tsemach ( צֶמַח  ) is found in some interesting places (cf. Is. 4:2; 11:1; Jer. 23:5; 33:15; Zech. 3:8; 6:15) in which strong emphasis is placed upon Jesus’ Davidic roots in a clear messianic context. However you might interpret this, Matthew in both the first and second chapters has been very keen to demonstrate the identity of Jesus as the son of David and His inherent characteristic as Son of God.

Next time, we’ll begin chapter 3, and as you will see, Matthew skips over about 30 years and resumes with the story of John the Baptist: Does anyone expect to see a prophecy f or two being fulfilled in that story?

Posted in Bible | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Herod and the Magi

Posted on October 13, 2015 by Don Merritt

Matthew 2:1-12

As we have already seen, Matthew ties his story of Jesus together with Israel’s past in a variety of ways in his account of Jesus. Clearly in today’s passage, we can see that, but he does so throughout the first two chapters in which no fewer than five human decisions are the result of a dream, reminiscent of many stories of Israel’s past events (1:20; 2:12, 13, 19, 22). Four times in chapter 2 alone, Matthew concludes a scene by telling his readers that it is a fulfillment of prophecy (2:6, 15, 18, 23) giving his readers the clear impression that after a long period of silence, God is once again busy at work in the midst of His people. The two parts of this chapter give us therefore, a deeper look at the whole character of Jesus’ messianic role as well as His relationship with the Father.

As the first scene opens, Matthew sets time and place as “after” Jesus’ birth and in Bethlehem once again reinforcing Jesus as son of David. By mentioning that this scene takes place during the reign of Herod, Matthew is giving his Jewish readers a clue that there is about to be trouble. Herod, half Jew, had gained power in 40 BC through shrewd political moves that enabled him to gain favor with the Romans. However, he was never accepted as a legitimate king by the Jews, and as time went on, he had become more and more paranoid about threats not only to his person but to his throne. He was known for wild fits of rage and anger and making rash or violent decisions, so receiving news that a true Davidic king had recently been born in Bethlehem was bound to set him off.

Most scholars agree that the “Magi” were likely astrologers from Persia or Arabia; they are Gentile, not Jewish, and we must not miss the irony that they are the ones who bring the news of the birth of the “king of the Jews” to Jerusalem. Their pilgrimage to Jerusalem and their worship at the scene also tells us that they obviously were aware of the universal implications of this birth, quite a contrast to the unbelief and complacence of Israel. When they told Herod about the birth, we might understand why he was “disturbed” but notice in verse 3 that “all Jerusalem” was disturbed along with him; shouldn’t there have been dancing in the streets?

They were “disturbed” instead.

Herod assembles the religious experts and asks where the messiah is to be born, and they tell him that it is to be in Bethlehem, quoting from Micah 5, sort of… Micah actually said:

“But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah,
though you are small among the clans of Judah,
out of you will come for me
one who will be ruler over Israel,
whose origins are from of old,
from ancient times.”

He will stand and shepherd his flock
in the strength of the Lord,
in the majesty of the name of the Lord his God.
And they will live securely, for then his greatness
will reach to the ends of the earth. (Micah 5:2, 4)

Matthew completely leaves out verse 3:

Therefore Israel will be abandoned
until the time when she who is in labor bears a son,
and the rest of his brothers return
to join the Israelites.

I know that there are teachers and scholars who have explanations of exactly why verse 3 is omitted from Matthew’s text either by Matthew himself, or by the Jewish authorities when they quoted it to Herod. However, since as of the date of this writing, I have not had the opportunity to ask them myself, all I will say here is that this strikes me as a very interesting omission. In any event, you no doubt noticed that Matthew’s account includes a little change or two from Micah. First, Ephrathah becomes in the land of Judah which underscores once again that Jesus is from the tribe of Judah, which is the tribe David came from. Second, instead of describing Bethlehem as though you are small among the clans of Judah, it receives special attention as by no means least among the rulers of Judah. Finally, Matthew adds a line that comes from 2 Sam. 5:2 where the Lord tells David that he will “shepherd my people Israel”: All of these serve to highlight the messianic implications of this mysterious birth in Bethlehem.

After this, Herod’s plot begins to unfold. In a secret meeting, he seeks to trick the Magi by sending them on their way to Bethlehem, and asking them to provide him with the location of the child. They follow this very odd star, and from Matthew’s description, it would seem to be something that is not described by any natural phenomenon, and considering the intrigues and reactions we’ve already read about, I wonder if anyone else could see it all. Whatever the explanation, they arrived at the “house” where they found Jesus and Mary; note that it isn’t a manger at this point, for it would have taken these men a considerable amount of time to arrive at the palace of Herod from Persia or Arabia. The story of what happened next is familiar to all, and the scene closes with one more twist; the men receive a dream in which they are told not to return to Jerusalem, and they return home by another route. Their obedient spirit along with their true worship leaves us with grave doubts about the religious leaders of Jerusalem.

Posted in Bible | Tagged , , , , , , , | 9 Comments

Matthew’s Interesting Use of Isaiah 7:14

Posted on October 9, 2015 by Don Merritt

Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

Isaiah 7:14

As a Christian reading this verse as translated in the NIV, and then seeing Matthew’s reference to it in Matthew 1:22-23, it is very easy to say that this is really cool, and then just keep on going. If we do that, we miss something that is both problematic and fascinating. Here is Matthew’s statement:

All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel” (which means “God with us”).

This is the first time Matthew cites the fulfillment by Jesus of an Old Testament prophecy, but scholars have struggled with it for centuries because the original Hebrew of Isaiah doesn’t exactly say what we have just read. In fact, there really isn’t any record of a messianic interpretation of this verse prior to Matthew. There are two reasons for this: First, as I mentioned, the Hebrew doesn’t quite say anything about a virgin, for the Hebrew word Isaiah used was “’almah” which means a young woman of marriageable age; she may or may not still be a virgin. This ambiguity is important to us because Mary’s virginity is the point of the exercise in our Matthew passage.

The second problem for scholars is the fact that this verse falls within the larger context set in Isaiah 7:1-2:

When Ahaz son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, was king of Judah, King Rezin of Aram and Pekah son of Remaliah king of Israel marched up to fight against Jerusalem, but they could not overpower it.

Now the house of David was told, “Aram has allied itself with Ephraim”; so the hearts of Ahaz and his people were shaken, as the trees of the forest are shaken by the wind.

Here’s what happens in Isaiah 7: The kings of Syria and Israel (Northern Kingdom) join in league together to oppose the Assyrians. They ask King Ahaz of Judah (Southern Kingdom) to join with them, but he refuses, so they march on Jerusalem to dethrone him and put a favorable king on the throne (Is. 7:6). God dispatches Isaiah to Jerusalem to tell Ahaz that the two kings will fail if Ahaz will believe God (Is. 7:3-9). Ahaz doesn’t take Isaiah’s advice, and even considers an alliance with the Assyrians (cf. 2 Kings 16:5, 7; Is. 7:17). The Lord sends Isaiah to Ahaz a second time, this time offering to give Ahaz a sign so that he will believe God, and once again Ahaz refuses (Is. 7:10-12). In 7:14, God, through Isaiah, gives him a sign anyway.

The sign God gave Ahaz in 7:14 that Matthew quotes is explained further in Isaiah 7:16:

for before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste.

The prophet goes on to explain that their lands will be laid waste by the king of Assyria, which is what happened, and Ahaz and his kingdom were saved from the threat. Thus, it probably never occurred to Isaiah, or anyone else for that matter, that the son of 7:14 was the future Messiah at all; that is until Matthew got it.

What Matthew saw was a broader meaning that applied to the ultimate fulfillment of God’s promises; consider the larger context of Isaiah 7-11: It is full of the theme of exile (7:18-25; 8:1-10, 19-22) right beside the theme of God’s presence (Immanuel, 8:8, 10) and the clear promise of a great son of David (9:6-7; 11:1). What Matthew understood was that there may well have been a fulfillment in Isaiah’s time of certain prophetic promises, and that those early fulfillments might very well foreshadow an ultimate fulfillment by the Person of Jesus Christ, which is an important concept for us to keep in mind as we go forward in his Gospel.

Posted in Bible | Tagged , , , , , , , | 11 Comments

Joseph Gets the News

Posted on October 9, 2015 by Don Merritt

Matthew 1:18-25

This scene explains the ambiguity that we found in 1:16 regarding the father of Jesus, and I’m sure you will recall our discussion of that from last time. Joseph was betrothed to Mary, which in that place and time was a process of about a year in length. During that time, the couple was legally married, but their union could not be consummated. During this time, the woman would normally continue living with her parents, and after the appropriate time had expired, she would move to her husband’s house to begin their lives as husband and wife and consummate their marriage.

Since they were legally married, even though they were not living together, the only way this betrothal could be broken was by the death of one of the parties, or by a legal divorce. When our story picks up, Joseph has just found out that Mary is pregnant. Joseph does not know who the father of her child is, but he does know who the father is not. OK, so you are Joseph: What would you do?

Being a righteous man, Joseph recognizes that his betrothed has committed adultery, and that the Law prescribes what must come next. Being a compassionate man, he doesn’t want to initiate formal proceedings and bring Mary to disgrace, so he resolves to present her with a bill of divorce quietly, in front of two witnesses, rather than have formal proceedings, which technically would have her facing a capital crime.

With this all bouncing around in his mind, God steps in.

A messenger of God comes to Joseph and explains the situation (vv. 20-21) telling him that the child has come from the Holy Spirit of God. All of this takes place in a dream and then Joseph awakens. Verses 24 and 25 tell us that Joseph believed this and did as he was instructed, taking Mary into his house, and when the son was born, naming him Jesus; we are also told that Joseph and Mary did not consummate their marriage until after Jesus was born. It’s all well and good for us to read this and accept it without much more thought, but we also know how the story of Jesus ends, so the news that He was the Son of God is already a given in our minds, but what about Joseph? Every December we hear sermons and stories about the great faith of Mary, while Joseph is only mentioned in passing. Clearly, Mary’s faith was amazing, but it always strikes me that Joseph’s was even greater. Maybe it is because I’m a man, but Joseph was still faced with a rather significant choice here; what if that was just a regular old dream and not an angel coming to deliver a message?

Whatever thoughts and lingering doubts may have been in his mind, Joseph did as he was instructed, and Jesus was of the royal line of David by adoption.

Some might be thinking here that Mary was also of David’s line as seen in Luke’s genealogy, and that would appear to be true. However, Mary was a descendant of David through David’s son Nathan, while Joseph was of David’s line through King Solomon, and the throne was passed down to and through Solomon, not Nathan, thus any claim Jesus would have had to the throne of David, would have been by his adoption by Joseph which, by the way, would be perfectly legal.

Much more important than any claim to the throne at that time, was the fact that Jesus’ actual father was God, and His unique status as royal heir and Son of God will continue to play a major part in his early years that are discussed in the Matthew’s next chapter.

In our next post however, I will discuss the two verses I had skipped, verses 22 and 23 which tell us that Jesus’ unconventional conception took place to fulfill the prophecy found in Isaiah 7:14; see you then!

Posted in Bible | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 11 Comments