Johnathan MS Pearce an atheist in his dialogue with Dave Armstrong gives ways hew believes would reconcile Luke in his comments on the proposed discrepancy between Luke 2:1-2 and Matthew 2:1-4 and the census of Quirinius and Herod. He states, “The Christian is left with several options: either question the date that Herod died, or that the census took place, or claim that Quirinius knocked around twice in the area, or had two censuses.” (Reply to Atheist JMS Pearce: Herod’s Death & Alleged “Contradictions)

Introduction

In Luke 2:2, we read, “In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered. This was the first registration when Quirinius was governor of Syria”. These words have caused many to assume that the Christian claim to the inerrancy of scripture cannot be true. For here it fails the test. They claim that the census of Quirinius would have occurred in A.D. 6 after he became governor of Syria, which is years out of range for the most accepted dates for the birth of Jesus. When trying to pinpoint the date of Jesus’ birth, we have both more precise dates and dates that are vague. This leaves us with ranges and probabilities rather than a precise date that everyone can agree on. But what we must prove is not a precise date but given the information we have could Luke’s writing about Quirinius have been accurate. In this writing, we will look at some of the possible solutions to show that Luke most likely documented history accurately and fits within what we know from Josephus’ writing. In this writing, I will not argue for a specific date or solution to this question but will show possible ways that would allow Luke to be consistent with the data that we have at this point as he is throughout his writing.

Dating Jesus’s Birth

Scholars use textual evidence within the Gospels and historical references outside the Bible to estimate the date of the birth of Jesus. It is noted that in Matthew, Herod on finding out about the birth of the King of the Jews, ascertained when the star appeared and killed all the boys in Bethlehem two years or younger. Since Herod would have been conservative in trying to destroy his rival, Jesus would have been born no more than two years before this event. Luke, in his Gospel, claims that John the Baptist began his ministry in “the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar” (Luke 3:1-2). We don’t know how long John ministered before Jesus was baptized. And we do not know the exact age of Jesus when he started his ministry, but we know that he was “about thirty years of age”. So, subtracting the “about 30 years” from the 15^th year of Tiberius Caesar helps to narrow down the time frame of the birth of Jesus. Another textual evidence, though more controversial is Luke 2:1-2 which discusses a census that was taken and Quirinius being in Syria. So, it is indicators like these that help us to get a range of when events could have occurred, but getting the exact dating of Jesus’ birth is not as easy.

For example, with “the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar”, when is a reign judged to begin? If a reign starts part way through a year, what year do you count as the first year? Or what about if there is a period of co-regency? For Jesus’ age when starting his ministry, what does “about 30” mean? How long after John started his ministry did Jesus’s ministry begin? How long before Herod’s death did the Magi come to Jerusalem? Based on the data through the range of years, people estimate for Jesus’s birth is 8 B.C. – 1 A.D, with the most likely candidates being 6-4 B.C, 3-1 B.C.

Dates Historically Proposed

Historically the most popular date options for Jesus’ birth have been 6-4 B.C., 3/2 B.C, and 1 B.C. Below is a chart adapted from Jack Finegan’s Handbook of Biblical Chronology from the article What year was Jesus born? The answer may surprise you by Jimmy Akin. The dates of 3/2 B.C. fit with what many of the early church fathers believed was the date of Jesus’ birth. The date 1 B.C. was made popular through Dionysius Exiguus’ calculations and his popularizing of the B.C./A.D. calendar system.

In the 1800s a German scholar Emil Schürer looked at the fact that Herod died in between a lunar eclipse and the Passover. He found that there had been a lunar eclipse in 4 B.C. that was visible from Jerusalem and so proposed 4 B.C. as the date of Herod’s death. Since Mathew has Jesus being born before Herod’s death and the fact that Matthew says he killed the boys in Bethlehem two years and younger Jesus’ birth was estimated to be around 6-4 B.C. His work on this and his dating has been popular thought in modern times.

15^th year of Tiberius’ reign

We will first look at Luke’s dating of the beginning of John the Baptist’s ministry which he ties in with the 15^th year of Tiberius’ reign and how it ties into the timing for Jesus’ birth. In Luke 3:1-2 we read,

In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene, during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness. (Luke 3:1-2, ESV)

Augustus the Caesar prior to Tiberius died on August 19^th, A.D. 14, however, Tiberius co-ruled with Augustus as an equal starting in A.D. 12. So, depending on which of these points Luke saw as the starting point of Tiberius’s reign we are looking at a range of somewhere near A.D. 26 or A.D. 29 for the beginning of the ministry of John the Baptist. If we assume that Jesus’ ministry started immediately after the start of John’s ministry when he was about “about 30 years” and with that assumption subtract 30 years from those dates, we are left with an approximate date of 6-4 B.C. and 3/2 B.C. for Jesus’ birth, respectively. Because of the room for Jesus’ age and not knowing how long in between the dates John and Jesus started their ministries, there is room for a range of dates allowing 1 B.C as a valid date for Jesus’ birth based on this information. We will see that these dates also work with the proposed dates for Herod’s death as well. Interestingly, Pilot who is also mentioned came into Judea and Samaria in A.D. 25. He along with the other historical figures listed by Luke also fit within the range of the most likely dates for the birth of Jesus, as well as the start of his ministry.

We can rule out, A.D. 6 timing for Jesus’ birth as some have suggested in order to have it reconcile with Luke’s statement about Quirinius. This would make Jesus 23 years old is not near 30 years and is also younger than 25 years old, the age necessary for someone to start their service as priest (see here). We get the same issue if we attempt to get a later date for Jesus’ birth by assuming the Herod of Luke 1:5 is Archelaus instead of Herod the Great.

So, at this point, we still left with likely ranges of 6-4 B.C and 3/2 B.C with some wiggle room. Next, we will look at Herod’s Death.

Herod’s Death

Because both Mathew and Luke have Herod still alive at the time of the birth of Jesus (Matthew 2:1, Luke 1:5) knowing when he died would give us a date by which Jesus had to have been born. Matthew gives us the account of the Magi visiting Herod in order to find the King of the Jews. Since as we noted earlier Herod would have been conservative in trying to destroy his rival, we can assume that Jesus was born no more than 2 years before the visit from the Magi. Although Mathew does not say how long before the death of Herod the account of the Magi occurred, if we estimate around 30 years before Tiberius’ fifteenth year reign, we get within the range of around two years before Herod’s death. Josephus said that during the time of Herod’s death there was a lunar eclipse (Antiquities 17.6.4) and that Herod died sometime in between this eclipse and the next Passover. If we know which eclipse Josephus is talking about then this would help to provide an anchor date that we could use to help understand the timing of other events. There were only 4 lunar eclipses visible in Jerusalem during this time frame. They are listed in the table below with their attributes.

The eclipse that is most popularly assumed to be associated with Herod’s death in modern times is the 4 B.C. eclipse. The 4 B.C. eclipse on March 12-13^th was not complete, its maximum shadow only being 36%, and occurred late at night near the feast of Purim and was 29 days before the Passover. The March 4 B.C. eclipse has been questioned because Josephus gives us an account of several things that occurred after the eclipse and 29 days does not seem to be enough time to accomplish all that Josephus stated happened between the eclipse and Passover. Andrew Stienmann states that it “would have taken a minimum of 41 days” to accomplish these tasks (From Abraham to Paul, 231). These events are listed below.

1. Herod’s illness declined, with sores putrefied and breeding worms
2. Herod was taken to get treatments in warm baths about 10 miles away. After these treatments were unsuccessful, he returned home.
3. He ordered important men from the area to come to him, they arrived some coming from 70-80 miles away.
4. Five days before Herod’s death he executes his son Antipater.
5. After his death, his body was taken about 23 miles away to be buried.
6. A 7-day period of mourning occurred, followed by a feast
7. Another public morning also occurred to commemorate those who were killed by Herod on the night preceding the eclipse

The other three eclipses have more time for these events to have occurred. Given this and its maximum shadow being 36%, the March 4 B.C. date is not the most likely candidate. The eclipse on September 15^th, 5 B.C. was a total eclipse occurring near Yom Kippur, seven months before the Passover. This eclipse would render a death date for Herod of around 4 B.C. There were also two eclipses in 1 B.C. The January 10^th eclipse occurred near midnight and was a total eclipse. It occurred 89 days before the Passover.  Later that year, on December 29^th, there was an eclipse at moonrise with a maximum shadow of 53% and was most visible at around 6 p.m. This eclipse occurred around 101 days before the next Passover. Both of these eclipses would be viable candidates for the eclipse described before Herod’s Death.

Basically, with this information, the most likely points of both Herod’s Death and Jesus’s birth again fit within the 6-4 B.C., 3/2 B.C., and 1 B.C range.

Could the eclipse assumption be wrong?

                Here is a link to an interesting paper by Duncan Cameron that discusses the possibility that the eclipse may not be a proper event to use to help establish an anchor date: Target Fixation and the Eclipse of Josephus: towards a redating of Herod’s death | Duncan Cameron – Academia.edu

Conclusion

I am still reading on this subject, not sure where I stand on specifically which lunar eclipse occurred before Herod’s death. There are other criteria I want to look at more. However, all these eclipses fall within the range of the accepted possibilities of Jesus’s birth. We will continue to see that these dates fit within other expected criteria as well.

Articles to read:

• Herod’s Death, Jesus’ Birth and a Lunar Eclipse – Biblical Archaeology Society
• Reply to Atheist JMS Pearce: Herod’s Death & Alleged “Contradictions” | Dave Armstrong (patheos.com)
• The 100-year old *mistake* about the Birth of Jesus| National Catholic Register (ncregister.com)
• Jesus’ birth and when Herod the Great *really* died – Jimmy Akin
• Does Luke Contradict Himself on When Jesus Was Born? | Catholic Answers
• Ormond Edwards, “Herodian Chronology,” Palestine Exploration Quarterly  114 (1982): 29-42
• Andrew Steinmann, “When Did Herod the Great Reign?” Novum Testamentum 51 (2009) 1-29
• Microsoft Word download – ElapsedTimes with section 9 corrected (rcyoung.org)
• King Herod’s Death Year – 4 BC or 1 BC? | The Odds
• On the Time of Herod’s death (expreso.co.cr)
• The Beginning of the Christian Era Revisited: New Findings (semanticscholar.org)
• Yet Another Eclipse for Herod (johnpratt.com)
• Target Fixation and the Eclipse of Josephus: towards a redating of Herod’s death | Duncan Cameron – Academia.edu

Side note: Objection that there are no records of a massacre of infants by Herod. I deal with that in this post: Massacre of the innocents.

So, what about Quirinius?

Now, we come to the controversial passage of Luke 2:1-2.

In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered. This was the first registration when Quirinius was governor of Syria.

This passage regarding the timing of the birth of Jesus states, “In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered. This was the first registration when Quirinius was governor of Syria” (ESV). Objections have been raised by scholars that make them and others question the accuracy of these two verses. The objections are as follows,

• No known empire-wide census occurred under Augustus
• No census would have required Joseph to be in Bethlehem
• Mary would have not been required to be part of the census
• No census occurred under King Herod in Palestine
• Josephus only mentions Quirinius’ census in A.D. 6
• There are no known records of Quirinius as Legate over Syria during the time of Jesus’ birth

The most important of these objections is the timing of Quirinius and his involvement in a census occurring in Palestine during this time. There are no records of Quirinius as legate over Syria during the times given for Jesus’ birth. The only records we have that show Quirinius serving as legate over Syria is starting A.D. 6, after the banishment of the ethnarch Herod Archelaus. Josephus also records a census occurring in A.D. 6. Quirinius starting as Legate over Syria and this census is seen to be in direct contradiction to the fact that Herod the Great is said to be alive during the birth of Jesus. And as we have seen, Herod the Great died well before A.D. 6.

Matthew 2:1 states,

“Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the east came to Jerusalem”.

And not only does Matthew states that Herod was alive during Jesus’ birth, but Luke also supports Matthew’s claim in Luke 1:5 when he says, “In the days of Herod, king of Judea, there was a priest named Zechariah”. And so, it appears that not only does Luke 2:1-2 seem to be in direct contradiction with Matthew’s account of Jesus’ birth, but that this statement also contradicts Luke’s own statement only shortly before. But would Luke make such an error only one chapter apart?

Luke seems to be aware of the intricacies of the politics during the time between Herod’s death and Quirinius’s governorship over Syria in A.D. 6 (Luke 3:1-2). He is also aware of the census Josephus describes along with the rebellion that had occurred with Judas the Galilean (Acts 5:37). Luke would have known that Herod’s rule over Judea and Quirinius A.D. 6 rule over Judea could not have occurred simultaneously. So why would Luke who is so careful in his writings miss such an obvious error and even contradict himself? Or would he? It would be a bold statement to say that Luke who proves himself diligent would be so egregiously careless. That being the case, we ourselves should not be careless by rejecting it only after taking a cursory reading of this passage, but instead should carefully and diligently investigate how Luke meticulously words his description of the events. He carefully uses words such as “protos” and “hegemoneuo” along with grammar style to express these events. The wording Luke uses in this passage is unusual, but as we look closer, we will discover possible solutions to this dilemma and proposed contradiction.

protos

Luke uses the Greek word “protos”, which is translated above as “first”, to qualify his statement about the census. He also uses a curious grammatical structure that presents interesting possible implications into what Luke is referring to. Because the phrasing and grammar Luke uses in constructing his sentence in Luke 2:2 is unusual and odd. He uses the genitive structure and odd grammar. If Luke was merely speaking of the census that occurred under Quirinius in A.D. there are simpler ways to say this. Why use a more difficult structure when a simpler sentence would suffice? Because of this, Scholars have suggested that this passage could be translated differently. The main alternative proponents are understanding “protos” to mean either “before” or “became prominent”. Each of these possibilities including as we will see translating it as “first” demonstrates that Luke was distinguishing this census from the A.D. 6 census.

So, in summary, the Greek allows for three possible translations for the qualifying word “protos”,

• this is the “first” of more than one census taken while Quirinius was serving in a government role while in Syria
• this is a census conducted “before” the census of Quirinius in A.D. 6.
• The census began earlier but became prominent later and was completed when Quirinius was governor of Syria

Each of these readings has evidence that supports these possible interpretations. Those who believe Luke is wrong would have to show in what sense Luke is using the word, “protos” and how Luke’s use of the genitive structure and odd grammar fits within this interpretive structure, and why Luke has chosen a more cumbersome way of saying this, when there are simpler options in the Greek.

“before”

NT Wright in his book, Who is Jesus? (pp 98-99) argues that in the specific use here “protos” can rightly be translated as “before”

In the Greek of the time, as the standard major Greek lexicons point out, the word protos came sometimes to be used to mean ‘before’, when followed (as this is) by the genitive case. A good example is in John 1.15, where John the Baptist says of Jesus “he was before me”, with the Greek being again protos followed by the genitive of “me”.[18] I suggest, therefore, that actually the most natural reading of the verse is: “This census took place before the time when Quirinius was governor of Syria.”…

My guess is that Luke knew a tradition in which Jesus was born during some sort of census, and that Luke knew as well as we do that it couldn’t have been the one conducted under Quirinius, because by then Jesus was about ten years old. That is why he wrote that the census was the one before that conducted by Quirinius.

This is also discussed in an article by James Keifer in The Infancy Narratives in Matthew and Luke (rowan.edu),

Turning to the word PROTOS, translated “first,” we note that it means “earliest,” but is also sometimes used to mean “earlier, prior, previous.” John the Baptist says (John 1:15,30), “he was first of me”, meaning, “he was earlier than I.” Greek regularly uses “of” (the genitive case) rather than “than” to express comparison. So that Luke’s words can be translated: “This enrollment occurred earlier than Quirinius governing Syria,” meaning, “This was the census just before the big one (the one that everyone knows about, because it started a rebellion) under Quirinius.” There are in fact three plausible ways of parsing the phrase: (1) We can read it as “the first census, Quirinius being governor of Syria.” This treats “Quirinius governing Syria” as a genitive absolute, similar to the Latin ablative absolute or the English nominative absolute as in “Jones took notes, the regular secretary being absent,” or the more frequent, “The picnic will be on Tuesday, weather permitting”. This is the construction assumed by most English translators. (2) We can read it as “the census earlier than Quirinius governing Syria.” This treats “Quirinius governing Syria” as a genitive of comparison. (3) We can read it as “the census earlier (than the census) of Quirinius governing Syria.” This assumes that Luke omits the second occurrence of the word “census”, as if I were to say, “My dog is smarter than his,” expecting people to understand that I meant, “My dog is smarter than his dog.” Such omissions of repeated words are standard in many languages. In John 5:36, we have, “The testimony I have is greater than (the testimony) of John.” In 1 Corinthians 1:25, we have “The foolishness of God is wiser than (the wisdom) of men, and the weakness of God is stronger than (the power) of men.” If this is the construction Luke intended, then “Quirinius” is an ordinary genitive of possession, modifying “census” understood. On either the second or the third interpretation, all difficulties vanish. George Ogg, who thinks that Luke is wrong about Quirinius, objects that there are no undisputed passages in which PROTOS followed by a participial phrase in the genitive case clearly means “before.” I think this is unreasonable. He does not deny that PROTOS often means “before,” or that participial phrases can occur in the genitive of comparison. I think his objection is little like questioning the authenticity of the Gettysburg Address on the grounds that Lincoln nowhere else uses “fourscore” to mean “eighty.” Even granted that he is right, this would eliminate the second construction listed above, but leave the third (which he does not consider) as a perfectly good possibility.

If this is true, then Luke can be read as having said that this census occurred before Quirinius was governor in Syria and the conflict is solved. Wallace argues against this in his article, The Problem of Luke 2:2 “This was the first census taken when Quirinius was governor of Syria” | Bible.org, but he doesn’t say that it is an impossible interpretation. I am not an expert on Greek, so cannot comment.

Articles to read:

• CADRE Comments (christiancadre.blogspot.com)
• The Lucan Censuses, Revisited on JSTOR

“prominent”

The other possibility argued for is that the grammar implies that the census became prominent while Quirinius was governor in Syria. Below is a quote from two articles. The first is, Did Luke get his nativity history wrong? by Ian Paul:

Intriguingly, this ties in well with a quite separate argument about Luke’s language here. Marshall notes that ‘the form of the sentence is in any case odd’ (p 104); why say something was ‘first’ when there is nothing to compare it with? Stephen Carlson has looked even more closely, and also noted that the verb egeneto also seems strange; why suggest the census ‘became’ something, rather than that it simply ‘was’? Carlson suggests that prote, rather than ‘first’ numerically, should be read as ‘of most importance’—much as we might say ‘so-and-so is Arsenal’s Number One player.’ This would then give the translation as:

This registration became most prominent when Quirinius was governing Syria.

or

This [decree to get registered] became the/a most important registration when Quirinius was governing Syria.

In the end, the mystery of the conflict between Luke and Josephus remains unsolved and (as Marshall puts it) ‘can hardly be solved without the discovery of fresh evidence.’ But these arguments at least offer a plausible explanation—and when considering questions of history, proof is rarely possible, but plausibility is an important measure. It certainly offers no grounds to write off Luke’s account, think it unhistorical or a fabrication, or see it as in conflict with Matthew. (Paul, Ian; Did Luke get his nativity history wrong?)

Here is the other quote from The Infancy Narratives in Matthew and Luke (rowan.edu):

Instead of supposing that Luke, or at least our present version of Luke, is wrong, we may question whether Luke has been correctly understood. The Greek reads: “This enrollment first occurred of Quirinius governing Syria.” Two words here require careful examination: (1) EGENETO, meaning “occurred” or “came to pass,” and (2) PROTOS, meaning “first” or “earliest.”

Luke uses EGENETO again in Acts 11:28, where a prophet predicts a famine, which Luke explains “occurred” (later) under the emperor Claudius. Thus, it is suggested, Luke may have meant that the census was commanded by Augustus and begun in about 7 BC, but completed under Quirinius, and hence known to historians as the census of Quirinius, or the census of 6 AD, or the like. The objection to this is that if Luke had meant “completed,” he should have said so. A strong objection, but not, I think, a fatal one. Luke may have been thinking in terms of a command by Augustus: “I want a list given me of all the property in the empire and who owns it.” A dozen years later, Quirinius says: “Here is the list, all checked out.” If one is thinking of the result (the whole empire organized on a rational, businesslike, efficient, bureaucratic basis), and not of the process of organization, the expression “occurred” is perfectly natural. Suppose that a speaker says, “Sports fans have long been waiting to see whether Hank Aaron would hit as many home runs as Babe Ruth, and this finally occurred on September 12, 1977.” No one takes this to mean that Aaron hit more than seven hundred home runs on the day mentioned, or that in place of “this finally occurred” the speaker ought to have said, “this feat was finally completed,” or something of the sort. I maintain that a perfectly possible interpretation of Luke’s statement is: “In those days, Caesar Augustus expressed a wish that the domains of King Herod might be completely surveyed and added to the tax rolls. In the days when Quirinius was governor of Syria, his wish was fulfilled.” Alternatively, we may suppose that Luke is using the word APOGRAPHE to refer, not to the preliminary surveying, registration, and assessment of real estate, but to the collecting of the taxes. In this case, we translate he statement somewhat as follows: “In those days, Augustus commanded that real estate everywhere should be taxed, and that the preliminary surveying and registration should begin at once. The tax was actually collected (in Palestine) in AD 6 when Quirinius was governor of Syria.” This interpretation has Luke using the same term for the registration and for the taxation, but this is not surprising in anyone not a tax lawyer. Given this interpretation, Luke’s use of “occurred” rather than “completed” for the events of AD 6 is above even the most nit-picking criticism.

If “became prominent” is the proper understanding of this verse, once again there is no contradiction.

Articles to read:

• Luke 2:2 and the Census (hypotyposeis.org)
• Parsing Luke 2:2 (hypotyposeis.org)
• Putting Luke 2:2 in context (hypotyposeis.org)

Conclusion to alternate Greek interpretations

Again, since I am not an expert on koine Greek and this is well beyond what I have learned so far, I cannot comment, but only present the data. But what I understand from what I have read, Luke’s use of grammar in this passage is quite unique with few examples of similar syntax in known koine Greek literature, and so the debate on the exact meaning of this phrase may have to continue or be on hold till we find more koine Greek literature that uses the same structure which will allow us to better support a specific interpretation. So, until we know for sure let’s move forward and look at what if “first” is the correct translation.

“first”

If we take “protos” to mean “first, then the phrase “This was the first registration when Quirinius was governor of Syria” assumes that there was at least one other census while Quirinius officiated over Syria. Josephus writes about the census in A.D. 6 under Quirinius, and this is what is used to show that Luke is in error. It is assumed that this is the only census or at least the first under Quirinius and since it is well past the time of Jesus’ birth, it in no way can be reconciled with the claim that Herod was still alive at the time of Jesus’ birth. However, Luke is not claiming that he is referring to the census in A.D. 6, which we have seen he was aware of. He is claiming that he is referring to the “first” census when Quirinius officiated in Syria. He could have used this term to clarify and distinguish it from the well-known census of A.D. 6. So rather than being evidence for the A.D. 6 census it is actually possibly evidence against it.

hegemoneouo

You might say, well we know that Quirinius was Legate over Syria starting A.D. 6 so that verifies that this must be the census. Not so fast. Luke doesn’t say the Quirinius was Legate over Syria. Luke is very careful in his terminology. The term he uses is “hegemoneouo”. The term “hegemoneouo” can be used to refer to more than one type of officiating office. So not only are we asking, was there a previous census, but also did Quirinius serve in any officiating compacity in Syria before A.D. 6? And since Quirinius was a high-ranking official, basically all that we need to show is that he could have been in Syria at this time. Thought we don’t have a definitive record of all his dealings with this area, this is an area he frequented and so it is reasonable to assume that this could have been the case. Again, Luke could be using the term, “hegemoneouo” to distinguish this role from when Quirinius was Legate in A.D. 6. Providing evidence that the census occurred at an earlier date.

So, in other words, the burden of proof is not to show that the census of A.D. 6 while Quirinius was Legate coincides with Jesus’ birth, any such effort is only sidetracking the issue, but rather for this to be a contradiction it must be shown that no other census occurred before A.D. 6 while Quirinius was in the area. And this is only if “first” is the correct translation for “protos”.

What Luke does not say about the census

Many of us have heard the passage in Luke 2 read many times. It is a popular passage during the telling of the Christmas story. As we hear this passage many of us have pictures in our minds of what the journey was about and what it was like for Mary and Joseph. As these issues are discussed it is important to not bring our assumptions into this passage. There are things that Luke does not say, and we should not assume.

• We should not assume that this census was for taxation purposes. The word Luke uses for “registration” could refer simply to a counting or a call for an oath of loyalty to Ceasar. And we will see that such a thing did take place during this time in Judea while Herod the Great was king.
• We should not assume that Mary was going with Joseph because she too was a part of the census. Luke does not state that. He only states that she went with him. We also see that they remained in Bethlehem for some time. If they were using this opportunity to make a move, it would make sense to take Mary.
• We should not assume that “each to his own town”, refers to everyone in the empire returning to the home of their ancestry. The passage doesn’t say that this was the case for all the empire, only that Joseph in this case went to Bethlehem because he was of the house and lineage of David, which could be based on lineage or family property in Bethlehem.
• We cannot assume that the census happened everywhere in the empire at the same time. It may have been decreed by Augustine at a time for the whole empire, but history shows that censuses could take years to complete. Transportation and communication did not occur as fast as they do, today. Also, we know that Augustine had a general policy of census taking, which this alone would fit in with what Luke wrote.
• Assume that Mary was at the final stages of her pregnancy. We don’t know how long Joseph and Mary were in Bethlehem before she gave birth. They could have left any time after three months into her pregnancy.

Was there a census before A.D. 6?

Since Augustus had an overall policy of registration and understanding the accounting of the Roman Empire, creating a culture where this was conducted throughout the empire, it would not be unusual for Luke to be referring any registration that occurred with Augustus and his policies. Augustus in his work Res Gestae describes how he initiated the taking of empire-wide censuses in the years 28 B.C., 8 B.C., and A.D. 14. Also, another census was taken throughout the empire culminating in Augustus being declared the “Father of the Country” on February 5^th, 2 B.C. Because censuses took years to complete and were conducted differently in different areas, the 8 B.C. census and the census declaring allegiance to Augustus fit well within a birth date of Jesus being around 6/5 B.C or 3/2 B.C. Would these censuses have affected Judea? Possibly. For a short time around 9 B.C. Herod lost favor with Augustus and Augustus for a short time took away Herod’s title as “friend of Caesar”. Herod also during this time had struggles within his family and assigning the heirs to his throne, something that required the consent and approval of Rome. So, even though he was a client kingdom and not necessarily required to participate, it is possible he did so to win favor with Augustus. Also, we know that at times censuses were imposed on client-states by Rome.

Dr. Jack Finegan, professor of New Testament history and archaeology and director of the Palestine Institute of Archaeology at the Pacific School of Religion in Berkeley, CA, writes:

The question has been raised whether the Romans would have instituted census and taxation procedures in Palestine while Herod the Great was ruling as king of the Jews. That they would not have hesitated to do so is suggested by comparison with Apamea on the Orontes in Syria. The autonomy of this city-state is shown by the fact that it minted its own coins, yet Quirinius himself had a census taken there. A gravestone found in Venice carries the inscription of a Roman officer named Q. Aemilius Secundus. He states that by order of P. Sulpicius Quirinius, whom he calls legatus Caesaris Syriae, he himself conducted a census of Apamea, a city-state of 117,000 citizens. As for Herod, Josephus reports that in the time when Saturninus and Volumnius were the presidents of Syria, Caesar Augustus demoted him from ‘friend’ (φ?λος= amicus) to ‘subject.’ Saturninus was listed above as governor of Syria in 9-6 BC, and Volumnius was evidently associated with him. By comparison with Apamea and specially from the time of Herod’s demotion by Augustus, Palestine would scarcely be exempt from any census and taxation procedures the Romans wished to institute. (Finegan, J. 1964. Handbook of Biblical Chronology. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, p. 237). (A Brief Comment on the Census in Luke 2 – Associates for Biblical Research (biblearchaeology.org))

Not only do we know that there were empire-wide censuses in general, but we also know that a census initiated by Augustus and requiring an oath of allegiance to Caesar and Herod was conducted in Judea about this time in the last years of Herod’s life for Josephus discusses it in Antiquities XVII.41-45:

There was moreover a certain sect of Jews who valued themselves highly for their exact knowledge of the law; and talking much of their contact with God, were greatly in favor with the women of Herod’s court. They are called Pharisees. They are men who had it in their power to control kings; extremely subtle, and ready to attempt anything against those whom they did not like. When therefore the whole Jewish nation took and oath to be faithful to Caesar, and to the interests of the king Herod, these men, to the number above six thousand, refused to swear.

This event could have occurred during either of these two census times, depending on when Herod’s death is dated. So, in fact, we do know that there were censuses conducted during the most likely time frames for Jesus’ birth and we know for at least one of them the region ruled by Herod participated.

Empire-wide census

Luke states, “In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered.” It must be noted that if Luke is claiming that this was an empire-wide census, none of these empire-wide censuses that we mentioned above were anywhere near the timeframe of A.D. 6. In fact the A.D. 6 census was a regional census following a transition in power, after the banishment of Herod Archelaus. It was sort of a settlement of Herod’s estate after his banishment and as it was being transferred to the Romans under Quirinius. Again, it was not an empire-wide census, which is contradictory to what Luke states. Because Luke is describing a world-wide census, this rules out the census in A.D. 6. Added to this, the A.D. 6 census also did not concern the province of Galilee, which was not under Herod Archelaus’s domain. Galilee is where both Joseph and Mary originally lived at the time of the census described by Luke. You would have to show why they would be required to take part in a census that was occurring in a region they did not live in. We have to remember Luke is a very careful historian and here we have not just one mistake but many. With the information Luke provides there is very little correlation with the census in A.D. 6. The reliance on this passage with the A.D. 6 census requires a lot of assumptions that are just unlikely given what Luke has said. It is much more likely that in Luke 2:2, Luke being aware of the A.D. 6 census is giving us ways to distinguish the census at Jesus’ birth from the more famous one in A.D. 6.

Therefore, saying that Luke is referring to the census in A.D. 6 doesn’t fit the description Luke gives nor would we expect it to if Luke understood the history of this time. So, to those saying it is contradictory to the A.D. 6 census, the answer is “Yes, it is. Didn’t you already understand that from reading the description Luke gave, for this is exactly the point Luke is trying to make?”

Traveling to one’s city of ancestry

It is also argued that no census required traveling to one’s city of ancestry and no census that required a woman to participate. But is this true? Were there occasions where this occurred. In fact, there are accounts of both people being required to go to their home city and women giving an account in a census. Below is a quote from the article, A Brief Comment on the Census in Luke 2:

Early in the twentieth century, a papyrus was discovered which contained an edict by G. Vibius Maximus, the Roman governor of Egypt, stating:

Since the enrollment by households is approaching, it is necessary to command all who for any reason are out of their own district to return to their own home, in order to perform the usual business of the taxation… (Cobern, C.M. 1929. The New Archeological Discoveries and their Bearing upon the New Testament. New York and London: Funk & Wagnalls, p. 47; Unger, M.F. 1962. Archaeology and the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, p. 64).

The same papyrus also confirms Luke’s assertion that a man had to bring his family with him when he traveled to his place of ancestry in order to be properly counted by the Roman authorities (Lk. 2:5). The document reads:

I register Pakebkis, the son born to me and my wife, Taas-­ies and Taopis in the 10th year of Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus Imperator [Emperor], and request that the name of my aforesaid son Pakeb[k]is be entered on the list’ (Boyd, R.T. 1991. World’s Bible Handbook. Grand Rapids, MI: World Publishing, p. 415).

This sheds light on why Joseph had to bring his highly pregnant wife along with him when he went to Bethle­hem. Such discoveries caused the late George A. Barton, Ph.D., Professor of Biblical Literature and Semitic Languages at Bryn Mawr and former Director of the American School of Oriental Research in Jerusalem, to comment:

Luke’s statement, that Joseph went up from Nazareth to Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to enroll himself with Mary (Luke 2:4, 5), turns out to be in exact accord with the governmental regulations as we now know them from the papyri. (Barton, G.A. 1917. Archaeology and the Bible. Philadelphia: American Sunday-School Union, p. 435).”( A Brief Comment on the Census in Luke 2 – Associates for Biblical Research (biblearchaeology.org))

Even though this is an example of a wife coming alongside her husband for a census, these things are not necessary for Luke never says that Mary participated in the census. And based on the account it appears that Joseph and Mary already had the intention before leaving Nazareth of staying in Bethlehem after the census if anything at least for the sacrifices after the birth and to fulfill everything required by the Law of Moses. Perhaps Joseph’s family was in Bethlehem making it a good place for the wedding since Luke says they were still betrothed. There is good evidence is that the original plan was to stay in the area of Bethlehem, for after their flight to Egypt, on their return it appears that they originally were coming back to Bethlehem to live only to change their plans after being warned in a dream.

But when Herod died, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, saying, “Rise, take the child and his mother and go to the land of Israel, for those who sought the child’s life are dead.” And he rose and took the child and his mother and went to the land of Israel. But when he heard that Archelaus was reigning over Judea in place of his father Herod, he was afraid to go there, and being warned in a dream he withdrew to the district of Galilee. And he went and lived in a city called Nazareth, so that what was spoken by the prophets might be fulfilled, that he would be called a Nazarene. (Matthew 2:19-23)

So, it would not have been unusual for Mary to have accompanied Joseph, her betrothed on his journey to Bethlehem as they start their new life in a new place. Joseph may have also taken her with him because they were only betrothed, and her pregnancy would have been a scandal, he may have not felt safe leaving her behind with the possibility of her being punished as an adulterer. And this too may have been a motive to move to Bethlehem and leave Nazareth where the scandal was known. Since he was marrying a wife, we can assume that Joseph would have been able to have a home though probably not one of much means. Though we can’t know with 100% certainty why they stayed in Bethlehem, it is more likely than not that Mary would have come with Joseph on the trip.

Evidence shows that at times people did go back to the place of the ancestry for a census in local regions. Also, because the idea of a census would be odious to many Jews, Herod, having some autonomy as a city-state king, would have wanted to conduct the census in a way that made it more palatable for the Jew. Since historically and traditionally the Jews were numbered by their tribes and family, rather than the place of residence, Herod may have conducted the census with this format. This extra requirement could have only been a requirement in the Herod-ruled areas since the wording of Luke does not require it elsewhere. Another possibility is that Joseph’s family-owned property in Bethlehem and Luke is only giving us insight into why his family-owned property in Bethlehem and using this opportunity to add that Joseph was of the line of David adding this tidbit to our knowledge of the background of Jesus and the fulfillment of prophecy.

Conclusion on the census

In the end, based on the evidence it is unlikely that the A.D. 6 census is the census Luke is referring to. This leaves us with the censuses of 8 B.C. and 3/2 B.C. which both fit within the range we have been looking at for Jesus’ birth.

Articles:

• Non Issues in the Lukan Birth Narrative — Augustus’s Decree (Part 1) (christiancadre.blogspot.com)
• CADRE Comments (christiancadre.blogspot.com)
• Non Issues in the Lukan Birth Narrative — Registration in Bethlehem (christiancadre.blogspot.com)
• Is the Census in Luke’s Infancy Narrative Historical or Literary? (missiodeicatholic.org)
• An Unusual Roman Census Decree By Caesar Augustus | The Odds
• Did Augustus Tax the World? | Smoodock’s Blog (wordpress.com)
• Worldwide Census | Smoodock’s Blog (wordpress.com)
• The Enrollment of Jesus’ Birth – Jimmy Akin
• King Herod’s Enrollment (biblehub.com)
• Was Apamea subject to the Census as a free-city? (christian-thinktank.com)
• The Nativity Census: What Does Luke Actually Say? on JSTOR

Could Quirinius have officiated in Syria before A.D. 6?

The fact that there was a census around the time of the birth of Jesus fits with the information we have both from Josephus and Luke, but we are still left with understanding Luke’s statement that the census was conducted while Quirinius was governing in Syria. Could Quirinius have had an officiating role in Syria at the time of Jesus’ birth? Below is a list of the Legates of Syria and the time frame they served in.

Based on this, there is missing information between the years 4 B.C when Varus’ term ends, and 1 A.D when Gaius took over as Legate. However, we are also told that Varus was around after Herod’s death and if Herod’s death was in 1 B.C. or 1 A.D. does that change what this chart would look like? If Herod’s death is considered an anchor date, what other things would be changed? Even if this were not so, we are still left with the earlier dates for Jesus’ birth.

So, what do we know about Quirinius during this time frame? From 12 B.C. to 1 B.C. Quirinius directed a campaign against the Homanades in the mountains of Galatia and Cilicia. He was possibly Legate of Galatia between 5-3 B.C. And around A.D. 1 he was appointed to tutor Augustus’ grandson Gaius Caesar while Gaius was Legate of Syria. In the dates most probable for Jesus’ birth his exact whereabouts are uncertain. Is it possible that Publius Sulpicius Quirinius was Legate during part of or all of 4/3 B.C. to 1 A.D.? Perhaps and we must consider this a possibility, but having Quirinius serving as a legate of Syria is also not necessary to still make Luke’s statement about Quirinius accurate.

As noted earlier, the term for governor in Luke 2:2 is “hegemoneuo”. “Hegemoneuo” does not refer to a specific position within the Roman government but is a general term that can be used to refer to different positions within Roman leadership. Both Luke, Josephus, and even Caesar use this term this way (see: Quirinius, Governor of Syria When Jesus Was Born? | The Odds). Luke also does not directly say that Quirinius oversaw the census, just that it happened while he was in Syria. So, it is not necessary to prove that Quirinius was the Legate of Syria at this time, it only needs to be shown that he was in Syria in an official governing role. Also, we know that it is possible that more than one person could be “hegemoneuo” in Syria at one time. Josephus describes in one incident two governors of Syria, “Caesar had ordered the court to be assembled…The presidents set first, as Caesar’s letters had appointed, who were Saturninus, and Pedanius, and their lieutenants that were with them, with whom was the procurator Volumnius.” Tacitus states “Each province had its equestrian procurator who in the eyes of the provincials was almost as important as the governor himself.” (Tacitus, Aric., 15). So Quirinius could have had a role as a “hegemoneuo” even during the known periods where someone else was Legate of Syria. Luke who is careful with his terms may have used “hegemoneuo” instead of legate purposefully to distinguish between Quirinius’ two terms, the first term being one of an official position but not a legate and not referring to Quirinius time as Legate in A.D. 6.

The circumstances allow for Quirinius to have been serving in an official position in Syria at this time. Because the staging of the war with the Homandes could have been staged from more than one location, it is possible that one of those locations was Syria, where Quirinius could have been conducting other official business as well. The war was one of attrition, and so did not necessarily require local governance. We know it is probable from 5-3 B.C. that the Quirinius’ location was Galatia, for it is believed that in addition to his role in the war, Quirinius served as Legate of Galatia during this time. But since he was not legate before 5 B. C. and did not continue as Legate of Galatia after 3 B.C., we are still within the range for the possible dates for Jesus’ birth. Military facilities were only located in imperial provinces. It would not be unusual for a high-ranking officer to be stationed in these facilities. Syria hosted a sixth of the Roman Army and was an imperial province and the defense center for the eastern front of the Roman Empire. It also hosted a large army (the 3^rd largest). Syria would have been a good location for headquarters in a war in Asia Minor. We also know that Quirinius won the war with the Homandes through attrition, allowing him to have had time to help with other matters, such as overseeing a census. After all, he was both Legate of Galatia and conducted the war at the same time. We also know that Augustine would assign special assignments to people who were not legates, so that the legate would not gain to much power. So, it is possible that Quirinius played a part in the census conducted in Judea during Jesus’ birth at any point during this time. Having already had experience directing a census in a client-state and having had to deal with rebels unsatisfied with Rome, he may have been asked to help with a census in Judea during this time. His experience in this matter is also why he was probably entrusted to conduct the census in A.D. 6 as well. After the war, we know that he was assigned as tutor to Gaius during his Legate term in Syria. So, we are missing the exact whereabouts of Quirinius during the dates most likely associated with the birth of Jesus, and therefore cannot assume that Luke was wrong. Even, if we take out the possible time Quirinius served as Legate over Galatia, though he could have still helped with the census during this time, we can see that he could have served in an officiating role in Syria during the time of Jesus’ birth.

Articles to read:

• Quirinius, Governor of Syria When Jesus Was Born? | The Odds
• Augustus – More than Just the Nativity Story | The Odds
• Quirinius: An Archaeological Biography – Bible Archaeology Report
• A Brief Comment on the Census in Luke 2 – Associates for Biblical Research (biblearchaeology.org)
• Dating the two Censuses of Quirinius | Gerard GERTOUX – Academia.edu
• W.M. Ramsay: Was Christ Born in Bethlehem? – Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org)
• REFUTING Bible Contradiction #1: Jesus’ Birth Narratives, Herod and Quirinius – YouTube
• Quirinius – Encyclopedia of The Bible – Bible Gateway

Was Josephus wrong?

Due to Josephus occasionally conflating events he tells about in his histories, and there being three separate stories at three different times about a rebellion by Judas each with similar details that eerily match up, the question arises of whether or not these descriptions of a rebellion by Judas are based on one event. If this is the case, what does this mean for the timing of the census? Rhodes describes this,

During the last twenty-five years, Daniel Schwartz and others have developed some fruitful insights into the historiography of Josephus which have highlighted the susceptibility of Josephus to mistaken duplications and to reporting contemporaneous events from different sources as if they happened at different times.

In reviewing Andrew Steinmann’s book From Abraham to Paul: A Biblical Chronology, Rodger Young states,

The material on the Quirinius census should change forever the way this topic is dealt with by scholars. The problem is well known: Luke presumably made a mistake when he stated that Quirinius (Cyrenius) was governor of Judea when a census was taken that brought Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem. However, it is “known” from Josephus that Quirinius did not come to Judea until A.D. 6. The approach of FATP is once again to start by examining the text. Luke does not strictly say that Quirinius was governor; the verb used means that he had governmental authority, not necessarily that he was the official governor of the province. After establishing the proper understanding of the text, Roman records are cited that are consistent with an empire-wide census taking place in 3 B.C. More significantly, Josephus gives contradictory information regarding Quirinius. He dates the coming of Quirinius to Judea just after the exile of Archelaus (A.D. 6) in Antiquities 18.1,2 (18.1.1) and 18.26 (18.2.1), but these passages also say that one of the acts after his coming was to depose the high priest Joazar from office. Joazar was installed by Herod the Great a few weeks before his (Herod’s) death in response to the golden eagle crisis, because Joazar cooperated with authorities in the matter of a census, and with Herod regarding his handling of the golden eagle incident. This made Joazar extremely unpopular with the people, and after the death of Herod they demanded that Joazar be removed from the high priesthood. This was done within a few months of Herod’s death, which means that Joazar, Quirinius, and the census are all associated together in the time shortly before the death of Herod and the time immediately thereafter, contradicting the A.D. 6 date for the coming of Quirinius to Judea. The internal contradictions of Josephus in these matters were pointed out years ago by Zahn, Lodder and other scholars, but new insights that help in unraveling the contradictory accounts of Josephus have been given by Dr. Steinmann’s colleague John Rhoads. FATP devotes 11 pages to sorting out the correct order of events and explaining why Josephus made the mistakes that he did in dating Quirinius and the census. These pages may require several readings to understand all the issues, but once this is done it is clear that the preponderance of evidence favors the enrollment associated with Quirinius to have been in 3 B.C., and perhaps continuing into early 2 B.C.” (Book Review: From Abraham to Paul: A Biblical Chronology: Part 2 – Associates for Biblical Research (biblearchaeology.org))

Are Sabinus and Quirinius the same person?

Rhodes also argues that Sabinus and Quirinius are the same person and that “Sabinus is a cognomen. The name Quirinius comes from the Sabine god of war. And Quirinius is from an area with a population of Sabines. There are also striking similarities between the two. They both were procurators and most likely both had consular rank. Both were concerned about the evaluation of the tax value of Judea, and both were sent by Augustus to secure and assess the value of Herod’s/Archelaus’ estate. If this is true it would provide evidence that Quirinius was in Judea and Syria regions at this time.

Census timing

Analyzing these passages of Josephus shows the possibility that the census done by Quirinius happened before Herod’s death and not in A.D. 6. Rhodes did a study ignoring the Luke account and only analyzing the data from Josephus to see what the likelihood of these accounts being the same event and if they are what is the most likely time frame they would fall into and it would fall within the 4 B.C. – 1 B.C. dates for Jesus’ birth.

Articles to read:

• JETS_54-1_65-87_Rhoads.pdf (etsjets.org)
• Did Luke Misdate the Census of Quirinius? – YouTube
• The Census of Quirinius – Biblical Error #1 – YouTube

What if the anchor date of 4 B.C. is wrong?

Though not a part of Rhode’s article, it is interesting to note that there is a gap in what we know about the Legates of Syria between 4 B.C. and A.D. 1, if we use the 4 B.C. date for the death of Herod. Since Varus was Legate of Syria during and after Herod’s death, for he put down a rebellion in Judea when Herod Archelaus failed to control it. Varus then crucified 2,000 people and destroyed the cities of Sepphoris and Emmaus. Soon after this Varus returns to Rome. If Herod’s death was around 1 B.C., which would mean that Varus’ governance ended in 1 B.C, or perhaps was his governance split with Quirinius ruling for a short time. This might explain the gap. Since we know Quirinius was in Syria in 1 B.C., this would put Quirinius in Syria around the 3/2 B.C. dates of Jesus’ birth. Basically, what if the anchor date of 4 B.C. is wrong how does this affect the dates and timing of these events? This is something to be explored, though not crucial to show that Luke is correct. It is just an interesting perspective on whether Jesus’ birth was 6-4 B.C. or more likely 3/2 B.C.

If you combine what Rhodes believed about Quirinius being around to perform a census around the time of Herod’s death and a 1 B.C./1 A.D. timing of Herod’s death this is what it would look like

It must be noted that because the 8 B.C. could have taken years to accomplish, it is possible that the 8 B.C. census, the 3/2 B.C. census, and the possible earlier Quirinius census all occurred at one time in Judea.

Accuracy of Luke

If Luke and Josephus were to being compared with each other for their accuracy in putting things together, Luke would be the one I would side with as being more accurate. Luke shows a significant firsthand understanding or firsthand reporting of people, places, and events he writes about. He would have interviewed actual eyewitnesses to the events and not just one eyewitness but multiple. He was well traveled. And he appears to have had access to people both in Herod’s and Caesar’s household (Luke 8:3, Philippians 4:22). Luke’s writing also had a more critical eye on it, both within the Christian community, but also with Theophilus (although this could be a pseudonym for the church), both of which could check his account for accuracy. His writings were read by people who were familiar with the events, times, and stories and would have been able to expose any errors. Luke’s account has been accused of being false because due to lack archeological or written evidence supporting what he wrote multiple times only later for that evidence to show up proving the veracity of his account. Textually our account of Luke is based on early transcripts that are close to the source (A.D. 175-225), whereas the earliest quote comes from Eusebius is in the 4^th century and the earliest manuscript of Josephus is ~1000 years after the original. Josephus is known to have a pattern of errors and is known to show Roman partiality. If Luke is in error in this passage, it would be a blaring error that based on Luke’s writing and reputation is unlikely for him to have made.

Even if you trust Josephus’ account more, based on Luke’s record and his reliability as a historian it would not be fair to treat him without the respect he deserves as an exemplary historian. As we have seen there are reasons to believe his account of Quirinius is accurate and that being said those saying he is not accurate here are left with the burden of proof. What makes a scholar pit one writing over the other? Specifically, Josephus over Luke. If Luke were not a Christian writing, would it be used to question Josephus based on these facts? Are we being fair? Certainly, the easy way out is just to say Luke is wrong but is this a fair evaluation? Should we not evaluate the possibility that he was correct? Yes, it is reasonable and fair to do so.

It is not intellectually congruent to use this passage and state that it is strong proof that the Bible is not inerrant. It simply isn’t. And those who state this make no serious inquiry into the grammar and vocabulary Luke used and pass over it as if it doesn’t matter. Nor do they take a serious look at what we do know about the history during this time. At the most one can only say as a scholar that there is no direct and specific evidence of Quirinius being an official in Syria at this time and there is no evidence that he was not an official in Syria at this time, although there are clues that this might be possible. But to use this verse as evidence against the Bible is faulty at best.

Videos to watch:

• The Gospels Were Written Early, Not After AD 70 – YouTube
• Undesigned Coincidences in the Passion and Resurrection Narratives – YouTube

Summary

The objections raised are not sufficient enough to invalidate the accuracy of Luke in his description of the nativity and therefore are not the strong proof against inerrancy that some scholars claim.

• No known empire-wide census under Augustus

Josephus describes a census where an oath of loyalty was required for Caesar and Herod in Judea during this time frame. Augustine had a general policy of census taking throughout the empire and any census including this one would have been considered a part of that policy.

• No census that would have required Joseph to be in Bethlehem

It is possible that Joseph was from Bethlehem and that his family-owned property in the area. There are records of this kind of thing happening. There would have also been some autonomy for local leaders to conduct the census in a way fitting to that region. The census in this region could have adapted the requirements to be more fitting to the Jewish culture, requiring them to be counted by families and tribes as was historically the case in Israel.

• Mary would have not been required to be part of the census

Luke does not claim Mary was required to be part of the census, only that she went with Joseph to Bethlehem, which would have been reasonable considering the situation.

• No census under King Herod in Palestine

As stated above Josephus describes a census under Herod in this time frame.

• Josephus only mentions Quirinius’ census in A.D. 6

He does in fact mention another census under Herod, but the census under Quirinius was significant historically and would have stood apart from the others. Also the absence of evidence doesn’t prove that it did not happen.

• No known records of Quirinius as Legate over Syria during the time of Jesus’ birth

Luke does not say Quirinius was Legate over Syria at this time only that he had an official position while in Syria. Based on what we know it is not improbable that Quirinius was in Syria during this time. It is an argument from silence. Luke could have very well been accurate in his description of where Quirinius was at this time.

So again, based on what we know, the objections do not provide strong proof that Luke was in error and therefore do not provide strong proof against the inerrancy of Luke’s account of Jesus’ birth. Those who purport this to be strong evidence of such are not arguing from as strong of a place as they often claim.

Conclusion

We must be careful in making absolute statements about Luke 2:2 and the Quirinius dilemma. We shouldn’t be quick to stand on any one solution without strong evidence.  Daniel Wallace has observed, “Evangelicals often have a tendency to find implausible solutions to difficulties in the Bible and to be satisfied that they have once again vindicated the Word of God. On the other hand, critical scholars tend to find errors in the Bible where none exist.” It is the tendency of both sides to believe that they have best, definitive or well-thought-out proof for their position. In this case, there is no definitive proof only possibilities, some that are more probable than others, but still only possibilities. In Rodger Young’s review of Steinmann’s work, he states,

“The scientific method as used by genuine scientists, however, is not the presupposition-based method of De Wette, Wellhausen, Noth, Hughes, and others who pursue current modifications of the discredited Documentary Hypothesis. True science starts with observation. This means assessing the data, and not rejecting any particular datum in the field of interest unless there is some compelling reason, based on the other data, to do so. The next step is to attempt to systematize the data by formulating a hypothesis. This was the procedure of all the early chronologers: Rabbi Yose, Africanus, Eusebius, Ussher, and the various writers of conservative Bible histories who attempted to give timelines for the events of the Bible. There are several prerequisites in pursuing this approach if it is to be credible. The researcher should be familiar with the languages in which the Scripture was written and with the modes of expression of those languages. He or she must also study the customs of the nations with whom the Hebrews had contact. It is essential to understand how these cultures counted the time, whether days, months, years, or reign lengths; formulating presuppositions in these matters that contradict the essential data (the method of the Documentary Hypothesis) is not acceptable.” (Book Review: From Abraham to Paul: A Biblical Chronology, by Andrew E. Steinmann)

It is important to have an openness to the data here. Perhaps evidence will be found that will help to put some of these theories to rest and perhaps give support and proof to a specific theory. But for now, we have what we have. People will differ on which theories they think is more probable, but before we claim that Luke was absolutely wrong from an argument of silence, we might pause, think as a scientist, and be careful not to make claims we cannot definitively support.

BACKGROUND: The son of God, the son of man

Then God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

                So God created man in his own image,

                                in the image of God he created him;

                                male and female he created them. (Genesis 1:26-27, ESV)

The Man

Who are we? What is our fundamental nature, the essence of who we were meant to be? We were made to image God and reflect his rule and care. “Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion . . .’” “The LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it.” (Genesis 2:15, ESV) Humanity was made in the image of God, to rule, to work, and keep this world. We were to be a royal priesthood imaging God.

 When the serpent showed up in Eden, he challenged our father and mother, Adam and Eve, with a choice, would they image God fully trusting in Him and looking to Him alone as their way, truth, and life or would they be like God in choosing for themselves between good and evil and doing what was right in their own eyes. Doing what is right in our own eyes is contrary to being made in the image of God. Sadly, Adam and Eve chose to abandon God and His word in order to do what was right and pleasing in their own eyes. And we, their sons and daughters, have gone down the same path, every one of us choosing to do what is right in our own eyes.

 Since Adam’s fall, that image of God we were meant to be has been profoundly corrupted infected at the very core of who we are. We are hopeless on our own, with no means of restoring ourselves to who we are meant to be. But we were not left on our own. When Adam fell mankind was not abandoned. God in his love promised he would one day send a man, one born of woman, who would crush the serpent’s head. He would be the perfect man, perfect in obedience and trust in God, the perfect image of God. The perfect priest-king.

                     I will put enmity between you and the woman,

                                and between your offspring and her offspring;

                he shall bruise your head,

                                and you shall bruise his heel.” (Genesis 3:15, ESV)

As time moved on, God continued to proclaim and elaborate on his promise through the scripture and prophecy. The godly men of the Old Testament looked forward to the reality when this man would come into the world.

And so, when the long-awaited man arrived, he came like any other man, He was born into a humble family. He was cared for as a baby. He grew up. He learned. He lived in history and walked among and with people. Jesus was a man in every way. Mary raised Jesus amongst family and friends. As a son, he loved his mother and earthly father. He loved those around him. He had compassion on others, touching them, healing them. The apostles sat at his feet, walked with him, and they touched Jesus with their hands. They were loved by Jesus. They had a relationship with this man. In every way, he was a man.

He experienced the hardships of being a man and was tempted in every way as we are, yet without sin, for, unlike any other man, no sin or fault could be found in him (Hebrews 4:15). This man did not live like other men who had been corrupted by sin as their father Adam. He did not do what was right in his own eyes, but he looked to the Father and did nothing without the Father. “So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise” (John 5:19, ESV) He was the perfect imprint of His Father, He was the perfect image of God, the perfect human. He was born of a woman, but unlike any other human in history, his father was God. He is the son of God.

The son

Having lived 2,000 years of theological history, many of us when we hear the term “son of God”, we think of the person of the Trinity God, the Son, but when men like Peter intimately walked with this man, they experienced his humanity firsthand. They ate with him, sweat with him, celebrated with him, sang with him, lived with him.  Peter had met his mother, Mary. He would have known of Joseph. But when he said, “You are the Messiah, the son of the living God” (Matthew 16:16), Peter was declaring that this man’s father was not Joseph. Peter was declaring that this man was unlike any human in all history.

We need to lay hold of this. To understand the human nature of the term “son of God”, for it is in becoming a part of creation, one of us, that he gained the right to save mankind from their sins. As the scripture says, “though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. (Philippians 2:6,7)” Jesus became human, made in the image of God, just like the rest of us. And like every human, he had a father and mother. His mother was Mary. His father was God. He was the only unique human in all history whose father was God. Jesus was the only begotten son of God. Hebrews 1:5 proclaims,

   For to which of the angels did God ever say,

                “You are my Son,

                                today I have begotten you”?

                                Or again,

                “I will be to him a father,

                                and he shall be to me a son”? (ESV)

At Jesus’s birth, the angel’s proclaimed, “Fear not, for behold, I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord” (Luke 2:10–11, ESV). A babe came into the world, the son of God . . . the only human, the only created thing born of God.

Firstborn: born into the world

Before Jesus was born, great men came into the world. All these men failed to be the perfect image of God. Adam failed. Noah failed. Abraham failed, Isaac and Jacob failed. Moses failed. David failed. The prophets failed. None of these men were the perfect image of God. Israel was called God’s firstborn son. Israel failed. All humankind, like our father Adam, have failed. But the prophets proclaimed a man who would come who would not fail and who would have the right to the title of firstborn. Ethen the Ezrahite speaks about this man, the messiah, who would be appointed as the firstborn. He would replace the first man, Adam, becoming the firstborn, and in his name, not Adam’s, would those who trust in him find their identity and be a new creation.

                     He shall cry to me, ‘You are my Father,

                                my God, and the Rock of my salvation.’

                     And I will make him the firstborn,

                                the highest of the kings of the earth. (Psalm 89:26-27, ESV)

When Jesus was born, he became the firstborn and only human son of God. No other human could claim God as their father. So just in the fact that he was born, he had the right to be called the firstborn son of God. Though he was the natural firstborn of God by birth, he also earned the right to the title of firstborn, by being the perfect image of God. “I will make him the firstborn”. Unlike Adam and all other humans, he did not fail. And because he did not fail, he won the right to the inheritance of the firstborn.

Firstborn: the inheritor of the world

Let us look more into what it meant for him to be the firstborn. In Deuteronomy 32:8-9, we learn this

                When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance,

                                when he divided mankind,

                he fixed the borders of the peoples

                                according to the number of the sons of God.

                But the LORD’s portion is his people,

                                Jacob his allotted heritage. (ESV)

When the nations were divided, God took Jacob aside from all the nations of the world as his own possession. YHWH was to be their God and Israel was to be His people. God did not choose them because they were great. They were little and weak among the nations.

For you are a people holy to the LORD your God. The LORD your God has chosen you to be a people for his treasured possession, out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth. It was not because you were more in number than any other people that the LORD set his love on you and chose you, for you were the fewest of all peoples, but it is because the LORD loves you and is keeping the oath that he swore to your fathers, that the LORD has brought you out with a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt. (Deuteronomy 7:6–8, ESV)

Though God took this nation, and became the Shepherd of this little flock, God had not forgotten the other nations. In his covenant with Abraham, whom he loved, he promised that the nations would be blessed through Abraham’s seed (Genesis 12:3; 18:18; 22:18) The covenant was a promise to bring the nations to himself. This promise of making the little flock and the large flock one would be accomplished through Abraham’s descendent, a man the YHWH would call his son.

                I will tell of the decree:

                The LORD said to me, “You are my Son;

                                today I have begotten you.

                Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage,

                                and the ends of the earth your possession. (Psalm 2:7-8, ESV)

And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd. (John 10:16, ESV)

Jesus wins the nations by being the final Adam

Through Jesus, no longer is it just Israel, the little flock, that is God’s inheritance, but Jesus as the son of God has been given all the nations as his inheritance. YHWH has rescued his people from their slavery to sin. In the culture of the time and scripture the one who inherits is given the title of firstborn, regardless of birth order. Jesus was not the first man. He was not Adam, but he did earn the right to be called firstborn and became the final Adam. Adam had failed to be the perfect image of God and lost his right to the title. Jesus being the perfect image of God, the perfect human, earned the right to the title and YHWH made him the firstborn. And as firstborn, we who trust in him no longer look to Adam for our inheritance, but to Jesus. He became the final Adam through whom we have become alive. When we trust in the promises of God, we are no longer in the image of Adam, we are in the image of Jesus, who is the firstborn among many brethren.

Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. (1 Corinthians 15:45, ESV)

Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another. For this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit. (2 Corinthians 3:17–18, ESV)

The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven. As was the man of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the man of heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven. (1 Corinthians 15:47–49, ESV)

For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. (Romans 8:29, ESV)

And so, through the Gospel, Jesus has inherited the nations. All one flock, under one shepherd.

There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call—one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. (Ephesians 4:4–6, ESV)

Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called “the uncircumcision” by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands—remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. (Ephesians 2:11–16, ESV)

He was appointed firstborn in his humanity

Psalm 89 states that God would appoint a man as the firstborn. It is important to understand that Jesus earned the right to this inheritance and the title of firstborn as a human when he came to earth. Unlike Adam, who lost the right of being firstborn through sin, Jesus did not sin. Jesus, therefore, gained the nations as an inheritance because he lived a perfect life of obedience as a man. So though he was the only firstborn human son of God by birth when he came into the world, he was not given the title of inheritance till he earned the right to his title by being the perfect image of God.

It has been testified somewhere,

                “What is man, that you are mindful of him,

                                or the son of man, that you care for him?

                You made him for a little while lower than the angels;

                                you have crowned him with glory and honor,

                                putting everything in subjection under his feet.” (Hebrews 2:6-8, ESV)

For surely it is not angels that he helps, but he helps the offspring of Abraham. Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, (Hebrews 2:16-17a, ESV)

                Behold my servant, whom I uphold,

                                my chosen, in whom my soul delights;

                I have put my Spirit upon him;

                                he will bring forth justice to the nations.

                He will not cry aloud or lift up his voice,

                                or make it heard in the street;

                a bruised reed he will not break,

                                and a faintly burning wick he will not quench;

                                he will faithfully bring forth justice.

                He will not grow faint or be discouraged

                                till he has established justice in the earth;

                                and the coastlands wait for his law. (Isaiah 42:1-4, ESV)

The son laid down his glory, became less than angels, humbling himself, “who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,” (Philippians 2:6, ESV) He became a man. Jesus is the only man who fully submitted to his God, considering the Father greater than himself, unlike the rest of humanity who had gone their own way in their pride, considering themselves greater than God, and doing what was right in their own eyes. Jesus, the man, is the only human who worshiped the only true God with his whole heart, mind, and soul. He learned obedience and God declares this human his perfect son,

“This is My beloved son in whom I am well pleased!” (Matthew 3:17; 17:5, Luke 3:22; 2 Peter 1:17)

It is in his humanity and his perfect life that God grants the man, Jesus, the titles of the son of God, firstborn, and the perfect image. Those writing in the New Testament understood that this man, Jesus, was unlike any other human in history. He was the man promised back in Genesis 3:15, the one foretold in the scripture. It was fitting when Pilate said of the man next to him who was wearing a royal robe and a crown, “Behold the man!” (John 19:5). The Apostles intimately beheld this man who had walked with them and proclaimed this man that they had known to the nations.

                We must ask ourselves; will we behold this man? Who we say this man is matters. For it is only in his name that men can be saved. Jesus said, “Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am, you will die in your sins” (John 8:24, NASB)

——————————-

WHO IS THIS MAN?

Support verses for Jesus not being God

                The question of who this man is has loomed through the ages. Just like in Jesus’ day, some call him a good man or a prophet or see him as an enemy. There have been many theories. Two that stand out in church history are the Arian and Trinitarian beliefs. Both agree that Jesus is more than a mere man. Trinitarians believe Jesus is God. Arians believe that Jesus is not God but is the first creation of God and through Jesus, God created everything else. Texts such as Colossians 1:15, Revelation 3:14, and Proverbs 8 are used to support the claim that Jesus is the first being created by God, and through whom all other things in creation were made.

                He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. (Colossians 1:15, ESV)

“And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: ‘The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of God’s creation. (Revelation 3:14, ESV)

                “The LORD possessed me at the beginning of his work,

                                the first of his acts of old. (Proverbs 8:22, ESV)

We will take a look at these verses so that we might believe that Jesus is who he claimed to be.

Revelation  3:14

Let’s start by looking at Revelation 3:14. In the letters to the churches, Jesus’s description of himself in the letters to the churches is linked to the descriptions of him in Revelation 1. So, we can look at both of these parallels together to understand what they mean. Below shows the parallels in the first six letters to the churches and Revelation 1, in order to show this pattern, then we will look at the pattern in the 7^th church.

Comparison of descriptions of Jesus in the letters to the descriptions in Revelation 1

And for the 7^th church the church of Laodicea (Revelation 3:14; Revelation 1:5)

Revelation 3:14 connection to Colossians 

Interestingly, Paul instructs that his letter to the Colossians be read to the church in Laodicea. “And when this letter has been read among you, have it also read in the church of the Laodiceans; and see that you also read the letter from Laodicea” (Colossians 4:6, ESV). So when the church at Laodicea hears these words from Revelation they are already familiar with the terms Jesus is using. So when Jesus is dictating his letter to the church of Laodicea, he is aware that they are familiar with these terms and concepts and the meanings behind them. So, the descriptions in Colossians and the descriptions here in the letter to Laodicea are connected and when used together can help us discover what these terms mean. So, let’s elaborate on these terms. The letter of Hebrews also uses these terms and similar phrases while exploring who this man is and can be used as we explore these terms.

The words of the Amen, the Faithful and true witness| The faithful witness

As we see in the pattern above, “the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of God’s creation” is connected to “the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings on the earth.” And these descriptions are also similar to the descriptions we find in Colossians 1. The descriptions in Revelation “the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness” and “the faithful witness” are reflected in “He is the image of the invisible God” in Colossians. These images are expressing that Jesus is a faithful and true witness of who God is both in his words and deeds. These phrases are describing Jesus as the perfect and true man, who fully and completely portrays who God is. John states, “No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known.” (John 1:18, ESV) As said before, mankind was originally made to be in the image of God. We failed. Jesus in his humanity did not fail. Jesus, the man, is the perfect witness, imprint, and image of the invisible God. He is the perfect human. Jesus said, “I am the truth”, and by him, we know the truth about God. He told his disciples that if they have seen him, they have seen the Father.

Firstborn from the dead

The phrase “the firstborn from the dead” is found in both Revelation and Colossians. There are accounts of people being raised from the dead in the Bible, the widow Zarephath’s son, the Shunamite woman’s son, the man raised out of Elisha’s grave, widow of Nain’s son, Jairus’ daughter, Lazarus, Tabitha, and Eutychus. This verse is not talking about this type of resurrection. These resurrected but had the same weak bodies as before. When Jesus resurrected, he no longer had the same kind of body, but his body, not seeing decay nor dissolving or disappearing and being the same body, was transformed into a new kind of human body (John 2:18-22, ESV, will be quoted shortly). This is the same kind of body we will have at our resurrection. For if we will not have the same type of body, then Jesus did not resurrect as well. Paul states,

And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. (1 Corinthians 15:14-16, ESV)

He goes on to say,

But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. (1 Corinthians 15:20-23, ESV)

Paul connects our resurrection to Christ. And it is “by a man” that our resurrection has come. Jesus did not cease being a man at the resurrection. His human body did not cease to exist but was transformed into a spiritual body. If our bodies are to be resurrected, it is in vital connection with the body of Christ’s resurrection, for our resurrection is the same. And if this is not true, our faith is in vain. Paul says in Romans, “he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.” Jesus was the first human to be born into the New Creation, through his bodily resurrection from the dead. And because he is one of us, both in his earthy life and in his resurrection, “he is not ashamed to call them brothers,” (Hebrews 2:11b, ESV). We who are being made in the image of Jesus are the congregation of the firstborn, enrolled in heaven (Hebrews 12:23).

Ruler of the kings on the earth

Because Jesus is one of us, Hebrews goes on to state he is our perfect high priest in the order of Melchizedek and he has the authority to sit on David’s throne at the right hand of God, reflecting Psalm 110, and foretold by Zechariah,

And the word of the LORD came to me: “Take from the exiles Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah, who have arrived from Babylon, and go the same day to the house of Josiah, the son of Zephaniah. Take from them silver and gold, and make a crown, and set it on the head of Joshua, the son of Jehozadak, the high priest. And say to him, ‘Thus says the LORD of hosts, “Behold, the man whose name is the Branch: for he shall branch out from his place, and he shall build the temple of the LORD. It is he who shall build the temple of the LORD and shall bear royal honor, and shall sit and rule on his throne. And there shall be a priest on his throne, and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.”’ (ESV)

Zechariah says of this man, the priest-king, “he shall build the temple of the LORD”. When asked by the Jews by what authority Jesus had done the things he had done, he answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” John goes on to explain,

The Jews then said, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?” But he was speaking about the temple of his body. When therefore he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the Scripture and the word that Jesus had spoken. (John 2:18-22ESV)

And we know that his body resurrected for the disciples “thought they saw a spirit”, but Jesus, the one who is the Amen and Truth, the faithful witness assures them, “spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.”

But they were startled and frightened and thought they saw a spirit. And he said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.” And when he had said this, he showed them his hands and his feet. And while they still disbelieved for joy and were marveling, he said to them, “Have you anything here to eat?” They gave him a piece of broiled fish, and he took it and ate before them. (Luke 24:37-43, ESV)

It is the power of Jesus’s human bodily resurrection that gave him the authority to be both priest and king in the order of Melchizedek.

This becomes even more evident when another priest arises in the likeness of Melchizedek, who has become a priest, not on the basis of a legal requirement concerning bodily descent, but by the power of an indestructible life. (Hebrews 7:15-16, ESV)

Both these positions king and priest require a human to take on the role. Adam was commanded to rule and be a keeper over the earth, to be a priest-king. He sinned by disobeying God’s command, but he also failed in his role to rule and to keep when he did not stomp the serpent on the head. The final Adam came to accomplish this. Jesus not only fully obeyed the law of Moses as a human, but he also sits on the throne of David as king and priest, fully accomplishing in his humanity what we failed to do. And as the perfect man, once his enemies are placed at his feet, he will deliver the kingdom to God, the Father, fully accomplishing everything humanity was supposed to do and then God will be all in all (1 Corinthians 15:24-25). The passage in Revelation after speaking of Jesus, being the “firstborn from the dead”, continues with “and ruler of kings on the earth.” His resurrection as the firstborn of the dead gave him the authority to be king as is said in Psalm 89.

He shall cry to me, ‘You are my Father,

                                my God, and the Rock of my salvation.’

                     And I will make him the firstborn,

                                the highest of the kings of the earth. (Psalm 89:26-27, ESV)

Colossians states, “He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins” (Colossians 1:13-14, ESV). Also, “He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent” (Colossians 1:18)

The book of Hebrews considers these concepts. It opens with these words,

Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs. (Hebrews 1:1-4, ESV)

Jesus being the Son, being the heir of all things, being the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, the world being created through Jesus, Jesus as the beginning of creation, Jesus upholding the universe by the word of his power and being priest and king sitting at the right hand of God are themes that keep being repeated in all these passages.

The scripture has an interesting caveat in the word “until” The scriptures say that Jesus will sit at the right hand of God until he has placed all his enemies under his feet.

“And to which of the angels has he ever said, ‘Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet’?” (Hebrews 1:13, ESV)

But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. (Hebrews 10:12–13, ESV)

For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For “God has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “all things are put in subjection,” it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all. (1 Corinthians 15:25–28, ESV)

After David had come to defeat his enemies putting them under his feet, Solomon had become king. It was then, that the temple could be built.

And Solomon sent word to Hiram, “You know that David my father could not build a house for the name of the LORD his God because of the warfare with which his enemies surrounded him, until the LORD put them under the soles of his feet. But now the LORD my God has given me rest on every side. There is neither adversary nor misfortune. And so I intend to build a house for the name of the LORD my God, as the LORD said to David my father, ‘Your son, whom I will set on your throne in your place, shall build the house for my name.’ (1 Kings 5:2–5, ESV)

The word “until” implies that Jesus will not always be sitting at the right hand of God. After Jesus has placed all his enemies under his feet, we see New Jerusalem, the New Temple, the new dwelling place of God coming down to earth, and in the midst of her is one throne, the throne of God and the Lamb. And God will be all in all.

No longer will there be anything accursed, but the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and his servants will worship him. [4] They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. (Revelation 22:3–4, ESV)

And the LORD will be king over all the earth. On that day the LORD will be one and his name one. (Zechariah 14:9, ESV)

Proverbs 8:22: The beginning of creation | the wisdom of God

I will discuss “the beginning of creation” and “the firstborn of creation” further, but first let’s look at Proverbs 8 for insight on what these mean. We need to look at Proverbs 8 because something is going on here that is important to note. Arius believed this passage describes Jesus being created as the first of God’s creations, tying it in with Colossians 1:15-18, Revelation 3:14, and John 1:1. He believed that Proverbs 8:22 described the creation of Jesus. Proverbs 8:22 says, “The LORD created me at the beginning of His way, Before His works of old” (NASB). I would agree that something significant is happening in these verses and that these verses impacted the writers of the New Testament and their understanding of the Messiah, the man who lived among them, so let’s explore the meaning behind this verse.

What is the subject of these verses? Well, the passage tells us, “I, wisdom”. These verses are about wisdom personified. Wisdom in the Hebrew language is feminine, so it is no surprise that she is portrayed as a woman. All agree that wisdom is an eternal attribute of God, there was never a time when God lacked wisdom, so what does it mean to “create”. It is not talking about mere wisdom. Let’s look back and see how this woman is described.

Passages 1-9 give you this description of Wisdom and Foolishness are calling out to us. We have a choice of who to follow. Chose life or choose death. This choice is not only a theme in these passages but throughout the scripture.

                Does not wisdom call?

                                Does not understanding raise her voice?

                On the heights beside the way,

                                at the crossroads she takes her stand;

                beside the gates in front of the town,

                                at the entrance of the portals she cries aloud: (Proverbs 8:1-3, ESV)

For whoever finds me finds life

                                and obtains favor from the LORD,

                but he who fails to find me injures himself;

                                all who hate me love death.” (Proverbs 8:35-36, ESV)

                She has sent out her young women to call

                                from the highest places in the town,

                “Whoever is simple, let him turn in here!”

                                To him who lacks sense she says,

                “Come, eat of my bread

                                and drink of the wine I have mixed.

                Leave your simple ways, and live,

                                and walk in the way of insight.” (Proverbs 9:3-6, ESV)

                The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom,

                                and the knowledge of the Holy One is insight. (Proverbs 9:10, ESV)

The context of 8:22-31, is a woman who cries out to the sons of men, calling them back to the fear of the LORD. The whole Bible proclaims this message from beginning to end. It is the message of the Gospel. Wisdom has its ultimate fulfillment is in the Messiah, who did walk the streets and byways calling men back to God.

Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. (Hebrews 1:1-2, ESV)

Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. (Matthew 11:28)

And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.” (Matthew 28:18-20, ESV)

Here is another passage describing this woman describing her as the tree of life, a symbol of the Gospel.

                She is a tree of life to those who lay hold of her;

                                those who hold her fast are called blessed.

                The LORD by wisdom founded the earth;

                                by understanding he established the heavens;

                by his knowledge the deeps broke open,

                                and the clouds drop down the dew. (Proverbs 3:18-20, ESV)

The theme of choosing life or death and the call of the Gospel, to choose wisdom over foolishness is the call to humanity throughout history.

Take care, brothers, lest there be in any of you an evil, unbelieving heart, leading you to fall away from the living God. But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called “today,” that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. For we have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original confidence firm to the end. As it is said,

                “Today, if you hear his voice,

                do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion.” (Hebrews 3:12-15, ESV)

Those writing the New Testament understood that the Gospel did not begin after Adam sinned. The Gospel call, its message, and its plan were established before the foundation of the world. Before the world began. Before Adam chose foolishness and sinned. Before Adam came into existence. And it is with the Gospel at the forefront that God created the world. They could see this from reading Proverbs 8. They found in the words of this chapter that the Gospel was there in the beginning and is the purpose for which the world was created. The Gospel is the wisdom through which the world was made.

For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. (Romans 1:20, ESV)

                The heavens declare the glory of God,

                                and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.

                Day to day pours out speech,

                                and night to night reveals knowledge.

                There is no speech, nor are there words,

                                whose voice is not heard.

                Their voice goes out through all the earth,

                                and their words to the end of the world.

                In them he has set a tent for the sun, (Psalm 19:1-4, ESV)

The word “create” in Proverbs 8:22 is beautiful and can mean “create, acquire, purchase, or possess” all of these word nuances fit the theme here. Before the foundation of the world, God determined in his wisdom and love to create the Gospel plan and to acquire and purchase the fulfillment of the Gospel through the Messiah. You don’t have a Messiah without the Gospel, so The Messiah is the beginning of God’s creation. The Greek term “arche” in Revelation 3:14 is fitting meaning beginning, ruler, origin describing Jesus’ role in creation. The Gospel and the Messiah were established first, and through the Gospel and through the Messiah now creation would begin. The roles the Father and Jesus would play in accomplishing the Gospel began and are displayed in the roles they played in creation. Wisdom is this purpose and the call of the Gospel throughout the ages.

Yet among the mature we do impart wisdom, although it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to pass away. But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. (1 Corinthians 2:6-7, ESV)

                “I will open my mouth in parables;

          I will utter what has been hidden since the foundation of the world.” (Matthew 13:35, ESV)

He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for the sake of you who through him are believers in God, who raised him from the dead and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God. (1 Peter 1:20-21, ESV)

Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. (Matthew 25:34, ESV)

who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began, (2 Timothy 1:9. ESV)

Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages but has now been disclosed and through the prophetic writings has been made known to all nations, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith— to the only wise God be glory forevermore through Jesus Christ! Amen. (Romans 16:25-27, ESV)

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love, he predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth. (Ephesians 1:3-10, ESV)

Yet among the mature we do impart wisdom, although it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to pass away. But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. (1 Corinthians 2:6-7, ESV)

Of this gospel I was made a minister according to the gift of God’s grace, which was given me by the working of his power. To me, though I am the very least of all the saints, this grace was given, to preach to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, and to bring to light for everyone what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God, who created all things, so that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly places. This was according to the eternal purpose that he has realized in Christ Jesus our Lord, in whom we have boldness and access with confidence through our faith in him. (Ephesians 3:7-12, ESV)

For I want you to know how great a struggle I have for you and for those at Laodicea and for all who have not seen me face to face, that their hearts may be encouraged, being knit together in love, to reach all the riches of full assurance of understanding and the knowledge of God’s mystery, which is Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. I say this in order that no one may delude you with plausible arguments. For though I am absent in body, yet I am with you in spirit, rejoicing to see your good order and the firmness of your faith in Christ.

Therefore, as you received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him, rooted and built up in him and established in the faith, just as you were taught, abounding in thanksgiving.

See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. [9] For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, and you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority. In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. (Colossians 2:1-12, ESV)

Paul states that Jesus became to us wisdom from God. Jesus was the embodiment of God’s redemption plan. And so Paul focused on this wisdom, the beginning of the creation of God.

And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, so that, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.” (1 Corinthians 1:30-31, ESV)

And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. And I was with you in weakness and in fear and much trembling, and my speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power of God. (1 Corinthians 2:1-5, ESV)

Both the Arians and Trinitarians could agree, or at least ought to, that the Gospel plan was created and began to be implemented before the foundation of the world as the first of God’s creations and that that plan would be accomplished through the Messiah who existed before the world began. Both agree that Jesus was set apart as the means and wisdom through which the Gospel would be accomplished before the foundations of the world, that he would come as a man and redeem his fellow people and brothers. Both agree that the roles that the Father and the Son would play in this redemption were set in place before the foundation of the world and we see these redemptive roles play out from the beginning of creation.

For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”—yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist. (1 Corinthians 8:5-6, ESV)

We see these roles from the beginning because God’s covenantal plan and love was the purpose through which the world was created, it was integrated into creation itself. The Messiah’s work of redemption did not begin at the birth of Jesus, it began before the foundation of the world when God created his plan to rescue mankind. It is through Jesus the world was created and it is through Jesus we and all things in heaven and earth are reconciled to God.

                Before continuing I want to pause on this concept that both the Arians and Trinitarians can agree on. . . . The purpose of Creation is the Gospel. The Gospel, and setting apart the Messiah, is the purpose and source and beginning of all the works of God, the beginning of God’s creation, and indeed the first of the works of God. The last book of the Bible is the Revelation of Jesus Christ. Jesus is both the beginning and the end of creation. He is the alpha and the omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end (Revelation 1:8, Revelation 21:6, Revelation 22:13). Jesus is the center of creation.

The final Adam

A pattern we see developed in these scriptures is that Jesus as a man came into this world and is the perfect image of God and by his obedience as the final Adam, he has earned the right to be the heir and ruler of all things and has been appointed the firstborn of creation, his name being elevated above all other names.

In Colossians 1:15 the Greek syntax suggests that the terms “image of the invisible God” and “the firstborn of all creation” express similar concepts and give us a picture of Christ’s humanity. These descriptions are unique to Jesus. The Father and the Holy Spirit are not the images of God or the firstborn of creation. This title belongs to Jesus alone. It is the role set apart for him since before the beginning of the world. Christ, the Messiah, the man, the final Adam became a part of creation and through his obedience was made the preeminent creation and the inheritor or firstborn of creation. Being preeminent not only as a part of the creation but also as the one who is before all things and is the creator of all things. So that in every way, his name is above all other names, both as the creator and as a man created in the image of God.

It has been testified somewhere,

                “What is man, that you are mindful of him,

                                or the son of man, that you care for him?

                You made him for a little while lower than the angels;

                                you have crowned him with glory and honor,

                                putting everything in subjection under his feet.”

 (Hebrews 2:6-8a, ESV)

And so the man Jesus was elevated above all.

Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Philippians 2:5-11, ESV)

Jesus preexisted creation

We see that Jesus, the man, the son of God, was the only firstborn of God in creation. When God created the Gospel as the first of his works, the Messiah was also the beginning of God’s creation. And as we have said he is more than just a man having existed before creation.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. (John 1:1-3ESV)

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John bore witness about him, and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me, because he was before me.’”) (John 1:14-15, ESV)

The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! This is he of whom I said, ‘After me comes a man who ranks before me, because he was before me.’ (John 1:29-30, ESV)

I glorified you on earth, having accomplished the work that you gave me to do. And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed. (John 17:4-5, ESV)

Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Philippians 2:5-11, ESV)

Jesus has preeminence over creation as the firstborn because he is the creator of the world. Being both the creator and having been born as a part of creation, Jesus is the only one with the right to this title. No other creation nor God the Father or the Holy Ghost can be called the firstborn of creation.

THE NAME

So much more . . .

Remember people walked with Jesus, ate with him, touched him. They were intimately familiar with his humanity, but as they write we can see they also knew that he was so much more. . . . Since they knew him in his humanity, you would expect them to describe his humanity, his being born of God, being firstborn of creation and such. Yet as you read what they are writing, you can imagine them bursting at the seams, for we also see them in the next breath say, but he is so much more . . . . describing him as before all things and creator of all things. Jesus was no mere man. How grand it would have been to have walked intimately with this man!

This man is the center of all creation, Jesus being separated for this purpose before creation began in the Gospel, the first of the works of God, the beginning of the creation of God. He is the one through whom God created the world. It is in Jesus alone that all things both in heaven and earth are held together. John a man who walked, ate, and touched Jesus wrote, “All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made” (John 1:3, ESV). Paul confirms this in his letter to the Colossians after calling him the firstborn of creation.

For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. (Colossians 1:16-18, ESV)

These passages are saying, yes, Jesus is a man and he has gained honor and inheritance and rule as a man, but he is also so much more than a mere man. His right to these titles has been earned as a man but were already his because he is more than a man. The writer of Hebrews warns us to take heed, that we do not neglect Jesus, for he is greater than Moses, the prophets, Melchizedek, and much more than the angels. Jesus in John states he is greater than the sons of God.

At this point, the Trinitarians and the Arianism again should agree. Arianism believes that Jesus is more than just a man, more than the angels, believing he is a created god, the first of the creation of God, and greater than all other creation. When the scripture refers to all things being created through Jesus, Arians believe these verses refer to all other things created after Jesus was created. One key aspect for Arius is that Jesus had a beginning. Arius said, “There was a time when the son was not.” Arians contend that being created; Jesus is not eternal. So, both agree that the concept of the Messiah was created with the Gospel plan of God, before creation, but disagree on whether Jesus was in existence eternally before this plan. Trinitarians believe that Jesus eternally existed with God, as one of the three persons of the Godhead. The Gospel was the first of the works of God, and the roles each person of the Trinity would play in the Gospel is the first of God’s work, seen in their roles at creation and in history. Arians would say that Jesus was created as the first of God’s works and was set apart before the foundation of the world for the Gospel plan. Arians and Trinitarians also disagree on who Jesus is. Both agree that Jesus left his glory in the incarnation but disagree on what was the extent of that glory that Jesus had before the world began. Arians believe Jesus was a created god. Trinitarians believe Jesus is YHWH.

Neither beginning of days nor end of life

                The writer of Hebrews along with other passages dealing with the concept of the firstborn, state that all things were created through Jesus.

And,

                “You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning,

                                and the heavens are the work of your hands;

                they will perish, but you remain;

                                they will all wear out like a garment,

                like a robe you will roll them up,

                                like a garment they will be changed.

                But you are the same,

                                and your years will have no end.” (Hebrews 1: 10-12, ESV)

But does the writer of Hebrews believe that there was a time Jesus did not exist? Later in his epistle, he writes of the order of Melchizedek, the king, and priest of the Most High God,

For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, and to him Abraham apportioned a tenth part of everything. He is first, by translation of his name, king of righteousness, and then he is also king of Salem, that is, king of peace. He is without father or mother or genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but resembling the Son of God he continues a priest forever. (Hebrews 7:1-3, ESV)

The writer of Hebrews argues it is on the basis of “having neither beginning of days nor end of life” that the order of Melchizedek has preeminence over the Levitical priesthood. It is not only in the fact that Jesus goes on to live forever that gives him authority, for both men and angels will go on to live forever, but the fact that unique to all of creation, he is the only creation that has had no beginning of days. And if he has no beginning of days, then there is not a time when the son was not. The writer of Hebrews goes on to say, “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.” (Hebrews 13:8, ESV). In the first chapter, he states, “But you are the same, and your years will have no end (Hebrews 1:12b, ESV). He also says that Jesus is unchanging, an attribute that can only be said of God. The eternal existence of Jesus is a theme throughout this epistle.

YHWH: Jesus is LORD

                When the writer of Hebrews speaks of the Son as the creator of the earth in chapter 1 verses 10-12, he quotes Psalm 102. The text seems to come out of nowhere. Why would the writer pull this text out and say that this speaks of the son? This Psalm is about YHWH, and the writer of Hebrews seems to want you to make this connection because he adds the term Lord in his quote. Well, he doesn’t actually add it, he grabs it from verse 12 of the psalm, which says, “But you O LORD, are enthroned forever;” which is a continuation of the theme he previously discussed, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever,”, expressing the eternal nature of Jesus. This psalm also correlates the theme the writer has for worship, “And again, when he brings the firstborn into the world, he says, ‘Let all God’s angels worship him.’” (Hebrews 1:6, ESV) with “when the peoples gather together, and kingdoms, to worship the LORD.” (vs. 22). By expressing two different parts of this Psalm, he is also wanting you to look and meditate on the psalm as a whole and connect it to the son. The psalm begins in verse 2 with, “Do not hide your face from me” and talks of the YHWH arising and having pity on Zion and appearing in his glory. These are describing the return of Christ. It must be noted that in using the phrase “You Lord” the writer of Hebrews is not only connecting his quote with verse 12 of the psalm, but he is also connecting us to the one who is the subject of the psalm. He is connecting Jesus with the sacred name of God, YHWH. And so not only is Jesus said to have had no beginning of days, but he is also called YHWH and one day he will be revealed in the fullness of his nature. And the writer of Hebrews is not alone in this.

The Apostles found Jesus in the Old Testament

                Many of the writers of the New Testament were men who knew the man Jesus, knew his humanity but also knew there was something more. In their experience with him, they had come to believe and proclaim that he was the son of God. Jesus was the one that all of history had been waiting for. While with them, Jesus had taught them, “You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me” (John 5:39). So, in coming to understand this man who had walked amongst them, they would have followed Jesus’ command and looked to the stories, prophecies, psalms, and wisdom of the scripture. In the passage of Hebrews above, he seems to pull a passage out of nowhere, yet he didn’t. He was following Jesus’ instructions to search the scriptures for they bear witness of who Jesus is. They found their foundation in understanding the nature of Jesus from the Old Testament.

No one has ever seen God?

John writes, “No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known” (John 1:18, ESV). But wait a minute, . . . did not men in the Old Testament see God?

I had heard of you by the hearing of the ear,

                                but now my eye sees you;

                therefore I despise myself,

                                and repent in dust and ashes.” (Job 42:5-6, ESV)

Then the LORD appeared to Abram and said, “To your offspring I will give this land.” So he built there an altar to the LORD, who had appeared to him. (Genesis 12:7, ESV)

So Jacob called the name of the place Peniel, saying, “For I have seen God face to face, and yet my life has been delivered.” (Genesis 32:30, ESV)

Then Moses and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel went up, [10] and they saw the God of Israel. There was under his feet as it were a pavement of sapphire stone, like the very heaven for clearness. And he did not lay his hand on the chief men of the people of Israel; they beheld God, and ate and drank. (Exodus 24:9-11, ESV) [Note: Just as Jesus ate in his resurrection body to show its reality, so too did these men eat and drink.]

Thus the LORD used to speak to Moses face to face, as a man speaks to his friend. (Exodus 33:11a, ESV)

In the year that King Uzziah died I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up; and the train of his robe filled the temple. (Isaiah 6:1, ESV) 

Moses asks to see God’s glory

So, if the scripture in the Old Testament speaks of men seeing God, where is John getting this from, that “No one has ever seen God”? John knows of the story of Moses asked to see God’s glory and what God said.

Moses said, “Please show me your glory.” And he said, “I will make all my goodness pass before you and will proclaim before you my name ‘The LORD.’ And I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy. But,” he said, “you cannot see my face, for man shall not see me and live.” And the LORD said, “Behold, there is a place by me where you shall stand on the rock, and while my glory passes by I will put you in a cleft of the rock, and I will cover you with my hand until I have passed by. Then I will take away my hand, and you shall see my back, but my face shall not be seen.” (Exodus 33:18-23, ESV)

When Moses asked to see God’s glory, God said, “you cannot see my face, for man shall not see me and live.” God did show Moses his glory, but not the fullness of His face, Moses was covered by the hand of God. So, what did Job, Abraham, Moses, and Isaiah see? Who did they see?

Jesus speaks of Abraham seeing him.  “Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.” (John 8:56, ESV). And after quoting from Isaiah 53 and 6, John says that Isaiah saw the glory of Jesus, “Isaiah said these things because he saw his glory and spoke of him” (John 12:42, ESV). When the Old Testament men and women encountered God, they were encountering Jesus. In the Old Testament, we see Jesus described as the right hand (or hand) of God, the angel of the LORD, the Name, the Word, the Savior, the Creator, and the glory of the LORD, descriptions not a part or separate from YHWH, but YHWH himself, revealing himself to humanity in a way that they would not be destroyed.

God’s patience and love in hiding His face

                Because of Adam’s fall, and because of our sin, men cannot see God’s face and live. Jesus said that the more we know the more our judgment. When we see God face to face, there is no more to be known and we will be judged. “And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, (Hebrews 9:27, ESV). And so, for now, because of God’s patience with mankind, and to call a people to himself, God’s face is veiled. Yet we are given hope that this will not always be the case. God gave Israel a blessing to encourage them that one day, both heaven and earth would be reconciled, and we would one day see the face of God.

The LORD spoke to Moses, saying, “Speak to Aaron and his sons, saying, Thus you shall bless the people of Israel: you shall say to them,

                The LORD bless you and keep you;

                the LORD make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;

                the LORD lift up his countenance upon you and give you peace.

                “So shall they put my name upon the people of Israel, and I will bless them.”

 (Numbers 6:22–27, ESV)

Because of His love for us God has not abandoned us, nor left us on our own. We will see his face once again. But for now, He has revealed Himself to us through Jesus. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, . . .” (John 3:16, ESV). And he has fulfilled his promise to put his Name upon his people through Jesus.

He has given us His name

 In the Old Testament, the tabernacle was the place where God’s name dwelt. When Jesus came, God’s name tabernacled amongst us “For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily,” (Colossians 2:9, ESV).

For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross. (Colossians 1:19–20, ESV)

And the Word became flesh and dwelt [to set up a tent] among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John 1:14, ESV, italics added)

It is God pursuing us, revealing himself in a way that we will not die. And God has done so much more. Now, through Jesus, He has given us His name and put his name upon his people. Jesus said, “I have manifested your name to the people whom you gave me out of the world. Yours they were, and you gave them to me, and they have kept your word” (John 17:6, ESV). And because of what Jesus has done his name dwells in us and we have become the body of Christ, the temple of God.

As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. (1 Peter 2:4–5, ESV)

We are all under this one hope, all mankind throughout history who have put their hope in Jesus.

There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call— (Ephesians 4:4, ESV)

But for now, we have not seen Jesus in his fullness, for when he was with us the fullness of the deity was hidden, tabernacled in a human body. “For now we see in a mirror dimly,” (1 Corinthians 13:12, ESV). But Jesus has promised to return, and at his return will be the revelation of Jesus Christ, where he will appear, and we will see him for who he is. It will not be an invisible return, for every eye shall see him.

Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him, and all tribes of the earth will wail on account of him. Even so. Amen. (Revelation 1:7)

Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. (Matthew 24:30, ESV)

When Jesus returns, God’s face will no longer be hidden. The verse goes on,

“For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known. (1 Corinthians 13:12, ESV).

John states,

“Beloved, we are God’s children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when he appears we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is” (1 John 3:2, ESV).

Revelation states,

“No longer will there be anything accursed, but the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and his servants will worship him. They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. (Revelation 22:3–4, ESV)

This is our one heavenly and earthly hope, when God reconciles heaven and earth through Jesus, we will see God face to face. His face shall shine upon us, and his Name shall be upon us.

The Name

                The writers looked to the Old Testament to find Jesus and they found him. They read verses like Isiah 45:22-23 and Joel 2:32 and saw Jesus

                “Turn to me and be saved,

                                all the ends of the earth!

                                For I am God, and there is no other.

                By myself I have sworn;

                                from my mouth has gone out in righteousness

                                a word that shall not return:

                ‘To me every knee shall bow,

                                every tongue shall swear allegiance.’

                “Only in the LORD, it shall be said of me,

                                are righteousness and strength; (Isaiah 45:21–24, ESV)

And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved. For in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be those who escape, as the LORD has said, and among the survivors shall be those whom the LORD calls. (Joel 2:32, ESV)

                therefore, thus says the Lord GOD,

                “Behold, I am the one who has laid as a foundation in Zion,

                                a stone, a tested stone,

                a precious cornerstone, of a sure foundation:

                                ‘Whoever believes will not be in haste.’ (Isaiah 28:16, ESV)

The apostle Paul, a learned Pharisee, who once killed those calling on the name of Jesus, takes hold of these three verses to show that they refer to Jesus, the name above all other names and that it is by calling on the name of Jesus name that salvation comes,

Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Philippians 2:5–11, ESV)

To him all the prophets bear witness that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.” (Acts 10:43, ESV)

because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” (Romans 10:9–13, ESV)

This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone. And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” (Acts 4:11–12, ESV)

Because Old Testament used YHWH while describing Jesus, the New Testament writers who follow their example do not have a problem substituting YHWH with Jesus. Paul takes the name of YHWH in Joel 2:32 and replaces it with Jesus.  And in both Romans 10:11 and Acts 4:11, he supports this substitution by referring to Isaiah 28:16.

This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone. And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” (Acts 4:10-11, ESV)

For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” (Romans 10:11

But he goes further and says, “And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:11, ESV) . . . . Wow! No other name. . . . This would be blasphemy if Jesus is not YHWH, for Paul would not only be contradicting the Old Testament but also stating that YHWH’s name had been replaced by another being and that other beings name is now the only name that can save, YHWH’s name can no longer save. He is not saying this. Paul was a learned man and knew the scriptures. He fully understands the implications of what he is saying.  He is saying that Jesus is YHWH.

The Confession: Jesus is Lord

                The New Testament refers to Jesus as Lord. The term Lord as seen in “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” or “if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord” often refers to the covenant name, YHWH. Lord also often refers to rule and specifically the throne of David. The apostles take hold of these two meanings and associate both meanings to the confession, “Jesus is Lord”. Jesus is Lord and sits on David’s throne, but he is also Lord, YHWH, the name whom men must call upon to be saved. Lord both declares Jesus’ humanity and divinity. Both aspects are important and require the Holy Spirits’ work for one to confess.

Therefore I want you to understand that no one speaking in the Spirit of God ever says “Jesus is accursed!” and no one can say “Jesus is Lord” except in the Holy Spirit. (1 Corinthians 12:3, ESV)

Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already. (1 John 4:1–3, ESV)

When speaking of the Father and the Son, the apostles often use a phrase similar to “God, our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” for this is an apt description describing each of their roles in creation and in the Gospel. It also follows the pattern of the Shema, “The LORD our God, the LORD is one”.

Paul uses this formula in describing the Father and Son and connects it with the confession of the Shema confirming that he believes “there is no God but one”,

“there is no God but one.” For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”— yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist. (1 Corinthians 8:4b–6, ESV)

As Jesus being one Lord is not to the exclusion of the Father being Lord, nor is the Father being one God to the exclusion of Jesus being God but both are descriptions apt to their roles in the Gospel. Paul is clear that he is including them both, when he says “there is no God but one” and then goes on to describe who that one God is, following the pattern of the Shema, which also includes Lord and God, the terms God and Lord both refer to one God, just as they do in the Shema. The Shema states, “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. (Deuteronomy 6:4, ESV).

The Confession: my Lord and my God

                Jesus is not only called Lord, he called God as well. When Thomas sees Jesus after his resurrection, he proclaims of Jesus, “My Lord and My God” or in Greek “the Lord of me and the God of me”. Jesus confirms his confession, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” If Jesus is not God, then either Jesus or John or both are guilty of blasphemy for not clarifying Thomas’ statement. This was a bold and clear statement by Thomas. No one in that culture would have just let it be if it were not true. Men picked up stones to stone Jesus for less. And no one in that culture would have said what Jesus said or wrote what John wrote if it were not true.

                John uses the phrase “I am” throughout his Gospel. It is tightly interwoven in the text. Jesus did not use the phrase “I am” casually. One instance, a mob had come to arrest Jesus, Jesus said, “I am”, and all the mob fell to the ground. John had a purpose in including this phrase in his Gospel.

[Now Judas, who betrayed him, also knew the place, for Jesus often met there with his disciples. So Judas, having procured a band of soldiers and some officers from the chief priests and the Pharisees, went there with lanterns and torches and weapons. Then Jesus, knowing all that would happen to him, came forward and said to them, “Whom do you seek?” They answered him, “Jesus of Nazareth.” Jesus said to them, “I am he.” Judas, who betrayed him, was standing with them. [6] When Jesus said to them, “I am he,” they drew back and fell to the ground. (John 18:2–6, ESV)

The ”I am” statements culminate with the confession of Thomas. And Thomas is not the only apostle to call Jesus God.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1, ESV)

waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, (Titus 2:13, ESV)

Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ: (2 Peter 1:1, ESV)

You shall not take the name of the LORD in vain

                The Law says, “You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not hold him guiltless who takes his name in vain” (Deuteronomy 5:11, ESV). The apostles understood this when they called Jesus Lord and God.

This commandment is similar to the words of Jesus when he said, “unless you believe that I am, you will die in your sins.” (John 8:24, NASB).  Jesus wanted his disciples to understand that he is the I am. Jesus told his disciples, “I am telling you this now, before it takes place, that when it does take place you may believe that I am he.” (John 13:19).

This is sobering. . . . for there is no other name by which men can be saved. “. . . no one can say ‘Jesus is Lord’ except in the Holy Spirit.” And  “every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God.” Both of these are necessary to call upon the name of the LORD. Shortly after referring to Jesus as firstborn and creator (his humanity and divinity), Paul makes this statement again referring once again both to Jesus’ divinity and humanity . . .

See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, (Colossians 2:8-9, ESV)

We cannot ignore the name of the Lord, and we cannot use the Name of the Lord in vain. While it is still called Today, we must follow the great confession found in scripture, “Jesus is Lord”. And though we did not walk, touch, nor ate with Jesus while he was on earth, we must boldly and clearly proclaim the confession of Thomas, “My Lord and my God.” And God who is faithful will keep his covenant of Love with his people.

                 “You are my witnesses,” declares the LORD,

                                “and my servant whom I have chosen,

                that you may know and believe me

                                and understand that I am he.

                Before me no god was formed,

                                nor shall there be any after me.

                 I, I am the LORD,

                                and besides me there is no savior.

                 I declared and saved and proclaimed,

                                when there was no strange god among you;

                                and you are my witnesses,” declares the LORD, “and I am God.

                 Also henceforth I am he;

                                there is none who can deliver from my hand;

                                I work, and who can turn it back?”   (Isaiah 43:10–13, ESV)

“I, I am he

                                who blots out your transgressions for my own sake,

                                and I will not remember your sins. (Isaiah 43:25, ESV)

I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you believe that I am he you will die in your sins.” (John 8:24, ESV)

Reading:

Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
— Philippians 2:4-8

The Gospel is very personal. Christ was not aloof, acting from a distance in order to bring about salvation for His people. He came near, was born as a babe, and walked and lived among us. He “made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.” God came into our world. This means that obeying God in ministering to the poor and catching His heart for the poor does not happen from a distance. There is no aloofness. This is at the heart of the command of Christ,

“All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

This command challenges us to engage people, because it can only be fully obeyed by coming near and being involved in people’s lives.

In Jesus’ ministry, he didn’t just preach, he was involved in the lives of those around Him. The Pharisees often used this fact as a means for accusing Jesus. “Now the tax collectors and sinners were all drawing near to hear him. And the Pharisees and the scribes grumbled, saying, ‘This man receives sinners and eats with them.’” The Pharisees were upset because Jesus engaged “sinners” in such a personal way. This disturbed them. How could a righteous man associate with these “sinners”? This truth doesn’t just strike and disturb the heart of the Pharisees, it disturbs my heart as well. I prefer being aloof, distant, and safe. I don’t want to touch someone who is dirty or smelly. I don’t want to bring someone who is needy and annoying into my life. . . .

But God loves us, and He knows the richness of what it means to minister to the poor. And He knows that these riches cannot be gained from being far away from the poor. He knows the joy of what it will be like in our lives if we love as Christ loved. If we engage people as Christ engaged people. And this is why He commands it and why He has ordained that there will always be the poor in the land. There is richness as the poor and rich interact with each other. They both desperately need each other, neither one being better than the other, but both being richer for the other. James writes,

“Let the lowly brother boast in his exaltation, and the rich in his humiliation, because like a flower of the grass he will pass away. For the sun rises with its scorching heat and withers the grass; its flower falls, and its beauty perishes. So also will the rich man fade away in the midst of his pursuits. . . . My brothers, show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory. For if a man wearing a gold ring and fine clothing comes into your assembly, and a poor man in shabby clothing also comes in, and if you pay attention to the one who wears the fine clothing and say, “You sit here in a good place,” while you say to the poor man, “You stand over there,” or, “Sit down at my feet,” have you not then made distinctions among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts? Listen, my beloved brothers, has not God chosen those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom, which he has promised to those who love him? But you have dishonored the poor man. Are not the rich the ones who oppress you, and the ones who drag you into court? Are they not the ones who blaspheme the honorable name by which you were called?”

Where do we find our riches in how we interact with people – are we seeking prestige and comfort or are we seeking something that far outweighs the riches of this world? We need the poor, the physically, emotionally, and mentally challenged, the orphan, the unwanted, and the downtrodden in our lives. These people are not people to be sat down at our feet, they are to sit with us and near us. Do we realize that what we have from this world is so fragile and fading, but it is in these interactions with others in the church both rich and poor that we gain something that is eternal? This happens as we in a very personal and engaging way preach the Gospel to one another and come together as the Body of Christ.

So we don’t see ministry to the poor as something we do for others to help them. We do pursue relationships because we desperately need them as a part of our lives, and we need them to speak the Gospel into our lives, reminding us of the love of Christ. Therefore aloofness or setting the poor at our feet or in the back of the room is not ok with us. We see them as a treasure and desperately want them to be a part of our lives, so that in their riches, they can serve us. And my hope is that those who are poor materially in this world, but rich in faith, will also not stand aloof and keep their distance from those of us who need the riches of faith that they have to offer. Because when it comes down to it, we are all poor and in need of one another in the body of Christ, and we must engage each other and be involved in each other’s lives.
Paul writes,

“So if there is any encouragement in Christ, any comfort from love, any participation in the Spirit, any affection and sympathy, complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. Do nothing from rivalry or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

We have to remember, we are not equal with God, our kingdoms are not what we live for. We no longer live for ourselves. We live for something far better. We have laid our lives down for the Gospel. When it comes to the poor, the destitute, the broken, our purpose is not to just address a physical or social need or injustice (although this is important), but to address and engage the person and show them Jesus, because God in such a mighty and personal way engaged us with a powerful love.

Scripture reading:
Read these verses and discuss what they mean to you and in regards to ministering to the poor.

1 Corinthians 1:26-31
For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, so that, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.”

Luke 6:32-36
“If you love those who love you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. And if you do good to those who do good to you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. And if you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to get back the same amount. But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return, and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, for he is kind to the ungrateful and the evil. Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful.

Questions:
Jesus didn’t just preach he met physical needs as well, why?

When is giving a handout engaging the poor and when is it only making our consciences feel better, but in reality not engaging the person? When is it showing the Gospel?

Who do we value in this world? Are the poor and destitute, people that we desire as a treasure?

In ministering to the “undeserving poor” what does it mean to engage them?

Do you engage with people that are different from you, awkward, or make you feel uncomfortable? Why? What is your view of this attitude?

Johnathan Edwards wrote,

in many cases, we may, by the rules of the gospel, be obliged to give to others, when we cannot do it without suffering ourselves. As if our neighbor’s difficulties and necessities be much greater than our own, and we see that he is not like to be otherwise relieved, we should be willing to suffer with him, and to take part of his burden on ourselves. Else how is that rule of bearing one another’s burdens fulfilled? If we be never obliged to relieve others’ burdens, but when we can do it without burdening ourselves, then how do we bear our neighbor’s burdens, when we bear no burden at all? Though we may not have a superfluity, yet we may be obliged to afford relief to others who are in much greater necessity. As appears by that rule, Luke 3:11, “He that hath two coats, let him impart to him that hath none; and he that hath meat, let him do likewise.” — Yea, they who are very poor may be obliged to give for the relief of others in much greater distress than they. If there be no other way of relief, those who have the lightest burden are obliged still to take some part of their neighbor’s burden, to make it the more supportable. A brother may be obliged to help a brother in extremity, though they are both very much in want. The apostle commends the Macedonian Christians, that they were liberal to their brethren, though they themselves were in deep poverty. 2 Cor. 8:1, 2, “Moreover, brethren, we do you to wit of the grace of God bestowed on the churches of Macedonia: how in a great trial of affliction, the abundance of their joy, and their deep poverty, abounded unto the riches of their liberality.”

What do you think about this statement?

Questions:
Do you see the Kingdom of God as physically or spiritually present, or both?

When do you minister to the poor? Under what settings?

Reading:

“Older men are to be sober-minded, dignified, self-controlled, sound in faith, in love, and in steadfastness. 3 Older women likewise are to be reverent in behavior, not slanderers or slaves to much wine. They are to teach what is good, 4 and so train the young women to love their husbands and children, 5 to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, and submissive to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be reviled. 6 Likewise, urge the younger men to be self-controlled. 7 Show yourself in all respects to be a model of good works, and in your teaching show integrity, dignity, 8 and sound speech that cannot be condemned, so that an opponent may be put to shame, having nothing evil to say about us. 9 Slaves are to be submissive to their own masters in everything; they are to be well-pleasing, not argumentative, 10 not pilfering, but showing all good faith, so that in everything they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior.”
–Titus 2:2-10

You might be wondering what this verse has to do with poverty, well, quite a bit actually. Here Paul is describing daily behavior in the church – being sober minded, homemaking, good works, speech, and service – and he states “that the word of God may not be reviled.” It is the everyday life of the believer, his everyday actions, and his everyday interactions with others that “adorn the doctrine of God our Savior.” In the Law, ministering to the poor is described as something that is done in the everyday life of a righteous man. It is not this separate grand act committed, but a natural outgrowth of the life of the righteous. Ministering to the poor is an everyday life thing because, “the poor will never cease to be in the land; therefore I command you, saying, ‘You will freely open your hand to your brother, to your needy and poor in your land.’” This understanding is evident in Job, when he cries out,

“If I have withheld anything that the poor desired,
or have caused the eyes of the widow to fail,
or have eaten my morsel alone,
and the fatherless has not eaten of it
(for from my youth the fatherless grew up with me as with a father,
and from my mother’s womb I guided the widow),
if I have seen anyone perish for lack of clothing,
or the needy without covering,
if his body has not blessed me,
and if he was not warmed with the fleece of my sheep,
if I have raised my hand against the fatherless,
because I saw my help in the gate,
then let my shoulder blade fall from my shoulder,
and let my arm be broken from its socket.
For I was in terror of calamity from God,
and I could not have faced his majesty.

Job was not talking about grand ministries to the poor or social agendas, but an everyday caring for people that God placed in his life. The scripture states, “If there is a poor man with you, one of your brothers, in any of your towns in your land which the LORD your God is giving you, you shall not harden your heart, nor close your hand from your poor brother . . . .” The Christian is to be aware of the needs around him, and in the ability that God has given him, he is to reach out to meet those needs.

This brings a lot of comfort to me. Why? Ministry to the poor does not have to be this grand overwhelming all consuming ministry in my life. I can minister to the poor as I go about my every day, and sometimes boring life. All I have to do is keep my eyes open and take the opportunities that God places in my life to love on people. So this message is not for those who have given every aspect of their lives to the poor (and thank God for those people, we need them in the body of Christ). This message is for me and for all of us in the body of Christ, no matter what the circumstances may be.

The Gospel is pervasive and engages the whole of who we are. In Christ, the Kingdom of God has broken through into this world and our everyday lives. And how we live our everyday lives demonstrates what type of Kingdom this is. When Christ came to earth, He not only preached the gospel, but demonstrated what the Kingdom of God was like by meeting fleshly physical needs. He healed the sick and fed the hungry. He even saved men from a storm. Christians are not mystics, who see that the only things that matter are the spiritual. The Kingdom of God is not this mysterious mystical aspect of our lives. The Kingdom of God is not a fantasy, but very real and very real in the way it is manifested in our lives. The Kingdom of God acts on this world. This Kingdom does not look on poverty and injustice and ignore it or walk away, but instead acts like a Kingdom that is meant to rule and engages injustice and brokenness. Early in the church, this aspect of the physical manifestation of Kingdom of God is evident in the fact that a Church office was dedicated to this fact – the deacon.

How that plays out in mine and your life, is my asking God to keep me from hardening my heart or turning a blind eye to the needs of others and asking God to teach me to live with my hands opened wide to those God places in front of me in this world. I am still learning, but that too is the Gospel as God sanctifies me and helps me to grow.

God has ordained poverty, and He has ordained that we love the poor. And so we know there will be opportunities to minister to the poor in our lives. We can’t get away from that fact. And as we understand this truth, we will also understand that God enables what he commands in our lives. This is not an overwhelming burden God has placed on us, but an overwhelming joy that God delights to bring us into. God wants us to experience His heart and His excitement and delight as we minister to the poor. This is a blessing that God brings us into.

Scripture reading:
Read these verses and discuss what they mean to you and in regards to ministering to the poor.

Micah 6:6-8
“With what shall I come before the Lord,
and bow myself before God on high?
Shall I come before him with burnt offerings,
with calves a year old?
Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams,
with ten thousands of rivers of oil?
Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression,
the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?”
He has told you, O man, what is good;
and what does the Lord require of you
but to do justice, and to love kindness,
and to walk humbly with your God?

Psalm 72:1
Give the king your justice, O God,
and your righteousness to the royal son!
May he judge your people with righteousness,
and your poor with justice!
Let the mountains bear prosperity for the people,
and the hills, in righteousness!
May he defend the cause of the poor of the people,
give deliverance to the children of the needy,
and crush the oppressor!

Luke 3:11
And he answered them, “Whoever has two tunics is to share with him who has none, and whoever has food is to do likewise.”

Luke 10:9
Heal the sick in it and say to them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.’

Luke 9:11
When the crowds learned it, they followed him, and he welcomed them and spoke to them of the kingdom of God and cured those who had need of healing.

Questions:
Under what conditions in our lives are we to minister to the poor?
God starts off angry at Israel, even though they claim to seek Him daily.

“Cry aloud; do not hold back;
lift up your voice like a trumpet;
declare to my people their transgression,
to the house of Jacob their sins.
Yet they seek me daily
and delight to know my ways,
as if they were a nation that did righteousness
and did not forsake the judgment of their God;
they ask of me righteous judgments;
they delight to draw near to God. . . .
And then God calls them to a true fast that is worked out in their daily life.
Is it not to share your bread with the hungry
and bring the homeless poor into your house;
when you see the naked, to cover him,
and not to hide yourself from your own flesh?

What do these verses in Isaiah 48 mean to you?

What does the Kingdom of God look like in our world? Does it have physical ramifications?

Who has all authority and power and rule? How is this displayed?

Jesus didn’t just preach he met physical needs as well, why?

How might this concept look in your life?

Who are some people in your daily life that you can minister too?

Are there ministries that you can support?

What does the scripture mean when it says to not harden your heart and to have your hands open to the poor?

Jonathan Edwards wrote,

Your money and your goods are not your own. They are only committed to you as stewards, to be used for him who committed them to you. 1 Pet. 4:9, 10, “Use hospitality one to another, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God.” A steward has no business with his master’s goods, to use them any otherwise than for the benefit of his master and his family, or according to his master’s direction. He hath no business to use them, as if he were the proprietor of them. He hath nothing to do with them, only as he is to use them for his master. He is to give everyone of his master’s family their portion of meat in due season.
But if instead of that, he hoards up his master’s goods for himself, and withholds them from those of the household, so that some of the family are pinched for want of food and clothing. He is therein guilty of robbing his master and embezzling his substance. And would any householder endure such a steward? If he discovered him in such a practice, would he not take his goods out of his hands, and commit them to the care of some other steward, who should give everyone of his family his portion of meat in due season? Remember that all of us must give account of our stewardship, and how we have disposed of those goods which our Master has put into our hands. And if when our Master comes to reckon with us, it be found that we have denied some of his family their proper provision, while we have hoarded up for ourselves, as if we had been the proprietors of our Master’s goods, what account shall we give of this?

What do you think about what he said?

Jonathan Edwards wrote,

Many persons are ready to look upon what is bestowed for charitable uses as lost. But we ought not to look upon it as lost, because it benefits those whom we ought to love as ourselves. And not only so, but it is not lost to us, if we give any credit to the Scriptures. See the advice that Solomon gives in Ecc. 11:1, “Cast thy bread upon the waters, for thou shalt find it after many days.” By casting our bread upon the waters, Solomon means giving it to the poor, as appears by the next words, “Give a portion to seven, and also to eight.” Waters are sometimes put for people and multitudes.

What strange advice would this seem to many, to cast their bread upon the waters, which would seem to them like throwing it away! What more direct method to lose our bread, than to go and throw it into the sea? But the wise man tells us, No, it is not lost; you shall find it again after many days. It is not sunk, but you commit it to Providence. You commit it to the winds and waves. However it will come about to you, and you shall find it again after many days. Though it should be many days first, yet you shall find it at last, at a time when you most need it. He that giveth to the poor lendeth to the Lord. And God is not one of those who will not pay again what is lent to him. If you lend anything to God, you commit it into faithful hands. Pro. 19:17, “He that hath pity on the poor lendeth to the Lord, and that which he hath given will he pay him again.” God will not only pay you again, but he will pay you with great increase. Luke 6:38, “Give, and it shall be given you,” that is, in “good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over.”

What do you think about what he said?