Chapter 3 – The Second Rejection of the King (Part 5 of 8)

 

The Beginnings of Jesus

In Matthew 1:18, Matthew uses the same Greek word γενέσεως as is used in verse 1, however this time, it is translated “birth.”

“This is how the γενέσεως (birth) of Jesus Christ came about…”

In verses 1-17 of chapter 1, Matthew gave us the “beginnings” of Jesus, the Son of Man, thus denoting Jesus’s human side and His right to reign as King of the Jews, in the line of David.

Here, in verse 18 and following, he is giving us the “beginnings” of Jesus, the Son of God, thus denoting Jesus’s divine side, and His right to reign as God.

This is critical, folks.

Matthew could have used other words, but under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, he was making a point. Jesus was more than just a human king. Jesus could redeem, something only God can do, which becomes a major focal point in his gospel account and critical to our understanding of the incarnation. Even the Pharisees and teachers of the Law, when confronted with Jesus’s claim to have the power to forgive sin, understood this point and took issue with Jesus ultimately saying He was God. They wanted to stone Him on the spot, and when they could not, they plotted to discredit Him and eventually murder Him  (Matthew 8:1-17, 28-34; 9:1-8, 18-34; 11:4-6; 12:1-8; 13:1-17, 34-35; 36-43; 14:22-36; 15:21-28, 29-39; 16:14-17; 17:1-27; 21:12-17, 28-32, 42-44; 22:15-22, 41-45; 24:30-31; 26:62-64; 27:11; 28:16-20).

In one particular instance in Matthew 9, Jesus healed a man who had been paralyzed. Because of the faith of his friends, who had brought the man to Jesus with the expectations of having the paralytic healed, Jesus told the paralytic to “take courage” and that his “sins are forgiven.” Immediately, some scribes who were there recognized what Jesus had said. For those of us today, we gloss over this section because we know “the rest of the story.” However, in real time, these scribes were watching a “person of interest” make an outlandish claim: He was claiming to have the same rights and power that only Almighty God possessed. Their response was that Jesus was committing blasphemy (v. 3).

Jesus, hearing their claims and knowing their hearts, puts a question to them in verse 4: “Which is easier? To say, ‘Your sins are forgiven’? Or to say, “Get up and walk’?” The obviously answer would be to say, “Your sins are forgiven.” No proof needed to say that. You say it, and whether it is true or not is only known by God. As a matter of fact, in the eyes of the scribes and those standing around watching, they would have looked at Jesus as some kind of blaspheming charlatan (and the scribes did!) unless He had some way to back up His claim. So, what does Jesus say? “But so that you may know that the Son of Man has the authority to forgive sins…” Then He turned to the paralytic and said, “Get up, pick up your mat, and walk home” (vv.5-7).

On its face, it sounds cruel to tell a man—who had possibly been paralyzed from birth—to get up and walk. If he had been able to do that, don’t you think he would have done so already? However, that thought probably never crossed the minds of the crowd watching, because enough of them knew the man, or at least of him. They knew he was not faking it. They knew his malady was real.

Instead, this story was a flash point, one of many, in the ministry of Jesus. The scribes believed Jesus made an outlandish claim that was worthy of stoning. Therefore, the test wasn’t whether Jesus could say the man’s sins were forgiven. It was all about if He could demonstrate the power that went along with the claim, for they believed that only God could heal too. It’s one thing to say you’re God in the flesh with mere words. But if you demonstrate it, well, that’s another matter entirely.

Of course, as we know, such displays of Jesus’s authority to rule spiritually fell on deaf ears and blind eyes when it came to the scribes, the chief priests, the teachers of the law, the Pharisees, and the Sadducees. They still did not want to believe. However, they heard Jesus’s claims and saw Him back up those claims time and time again. And with each authoritative word and each miraculous demonstration, Jesus drove another nail into the coffin of their self-righteousness and religious phoniness.

Another Aspect to Consider About Jesus’s Birth

Also, in Matthew 1:18, notice how careful Matthew is about the relationship with his parents. He refers to Mary as “His mother Mary,” but does not refer to Joseph as “His father Joseph,” because again, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, he wishes to make sure it is understood that Jesus had no earthly father.

Mary “was pledged to be married” to Joseph. They called this the “Betrothal.” Marriages were arranged differently in Jesus’s day than they are today, especially in the West.

Today, young people decide who they are going to marry, which was not how things were done in Jewish culture during the time of Jesus. In the play, Fiddler on the Roof, which later became a movie, Tevye was being forced, from one daughter’s betrothal to the next, to change his cultural way of thinking and “get in step” with the times. Tevye kept holding on to the “tradition” of his forefathers which mirrored something similar to what the people in Jesus’s time would have embraced.

In Jesus’s culture, it was marriage first, then love followed. Despite popular opinion, it tended to be a stable pattern for marriages as Genesis 24:67 indicates. In contrast, Esau married foreign wives like our society goes about marriage today, and it caused nothing but headaches and problems (Genesis 26:34; 27:46; Malachi 1:3; Obadiah 1:18).¹

Before the betrothal period began, in Jewish culture during the days of Jesus, a close and trusted friend of the bridegroom would negotiate on behalf of the prospective bridegroom’s father with a representative of the bride’s father. Arrangements had to be made for compensation, as the bride’s departure from the family would take a valuable worker, and possible wage earner, from the bride’s family. This negotiation was called the Mohar, and it was paid to the bride’s family. A dowry was also paid to the bride’s father. (Interestingly, in western culture, it’s the bride’s family that pays for the wedding, which does seem backwards when you think about it.)

The father of the bride could use the interest from the dowry during the betrothal period, but he could not spend the dowry. The dowry was to be kept in trust for the bride in case she was ever widowed or divorced so that she would have a means of taking care of herself and not become a burden on anyone nor be homeless. Therefore, it acted as a “savings account” or “pension,” if you will, for the bride-to-be.

If such sums of money could not be paid for the Mohar and the dowry by the groom’s family, other means of payment could be negotiated. For example, poverty was a real issue for many grooms and their families, so working it off was one option, like in the case of Jacob working seven years for Rachel (Genesis 29:18). Another example could be called “deals.” David wanted to marry Saul’s daughter, Michal. So, Saul employed David’s services of killing one hundred Philistines (1 Samuel 18:25).

Marriages were arranged also with members of your own kin, meaning Jewish only, but not close kin (see Leviticus 18). An example of this is found in Genesis 24, where Abraham sent a servant to find a bride for Isaac from his own people. ²

Once all the betrothal negotiations were completed, the two participants, the bride-to-be and the groom-to-be, entered into the actual “Betrothal Period,” which normally lasted twelve months. Betrothals could last longer, especially when the bride-to-be was as young as twelve years old, which was not common but could be the case. However, in all cases, the betrothals could not last forever, and when the two participants were old enough, the wedding had to take place. As was the custom, twelve months was a typical agreed-upon length of time.

And one last important point: Betrothals were much more binding than engagements are in today’s society. They were as binding as an actual marriage and could only be broken through a divorce (cf. Matthew 1:19). Therefore, these arrangements were not entered into lightly like engagements are today.

The purpose of the betrothal period was singular: to prove the fidelity of both the bride and the groom. Fidelity, was something that covered many areas too. For example, in matters of character, for if one member of the betrothal arrangement was a thief or a swindler in matters of business, this would typically come out. Or if one member of the arrangement proved to have lied about something, like never having been married before, this, too, could be made known. And of course, fidelity covered matters of sexual purity as well. If a member was having an affair, or worse, if the bride-to-be got pregnant, or another woman did so, claiming the groom-to-be was the father of her child, a year was plenty of time to “show” the proof to the families.

Therefore, showing fidelity was the same as showing purity of heart. As the groom, you were vowing to your betrothed that you were pure, righteous, and worthy of having someone devote her life to you. As the bride, you were vowing the same. And I hope you can see the spiritual picture here. As we devote our lives to our spouses, we are also to devote our lives to Christ as His bride. Pure. Righteous, Holy hearts. Qadosh. Sacred. Different. Devoted to Him for life (Ephesians 5:21-33).  

It was during this time of the betrothal period, after the agreement had been made, after the dowry had been paid, but before the consummation of the marriage had taken place, when Mary was found to be pregnant (Matthew 1:18).

Hopefully, you can understand now the context in which Joseph and Mary found themselves. Imagine the controversy. Imagine the confusion. And consider the “dilemma” this news produced for both families.

 

Thought for the Week:

If a person takes enough time and looks at this Biblical account of Jesus, it amazes us—or at least it should—how many obstacles God had to overcome just to get to Matthew 1:18-25, let alone bring an infant into the world…BE THAT INFANT…put Himself in the hands of two righteous teenagers…and accomplish salvation for any human who chooses to believe in Jesus and follow Him.

Yet, obstacles are part of the fallen world, aren’t they? All of the obstacles were results of sin and its effect on people and nations, to include Israel. We often pray, as Christians, for God to remove all the obstacles from our lives so our days can be filled with joy and blessing. Yet, when Mary held the Messiah in her arms that evening in a stable filled with smelly animals, there were no obstacles present. And all the obstacles she and Joseph had overcome to get there were water under the bridge.

Salvation had come. What else mattered?

Do we see obstacles the way God sees them? We ask for Him to remove them, yet as is often the case, He gets very little glory when everything is peaches and cream, as they say. God is glorified when obstacles happened at the most inopportune time. He receives the glorification He deserves when obstacles are overcome with shouts of praise.

Don’t pray away your chance to praise God. Pray that when those obstacles occur, He will help you be as faithful and righteous as those two teenage Israelites in the stable.

 

                   

NEXT WEEK:

We will continue our study by looking at how critics have used this very section of scripture to attack Jesus’s claim to being God in the flesh.

 

Endnotes

1. It must be noted that any marriage arrangement based on cultural norms has its flaws because of human depravity and sin. Whether a spouse was chosen for you or whether you chose one for yourself, it still boils down to two things: 1) the marriage commitment and the “covenant” the man and woman make to one another must be sacred and not entered into lightly. Without such a commitment, no marriage can last and be all that it is intended to be, regardless of how the two participants were partnered; and 2) that marriage union had to be between a male and female, according to God’s Word (Genesis 2:24; Mathew 19:5; Ephesians 5:31).

 

2. We must take note here that in Leviticus 18, God reminds the Israelites to be qadosh, “sacred,” “different,” and “consecrated” when it came to everything, and this included His directives on marriage. It was about purity of heart and total devotion to God: “You must not follow the practices of the land of Egypt, where you used to live, and you must not follow the practices of the land of Canaan, into which I am bringing you. You must not walk in their customs. You are to practice My judgements and keep My statutes by walking in them. I am the LORD your God. Keep My statutes and My judgments, for the man who does these things will live by them. I am the LORD” (vv. 3-5 Berean Bible).

 

Pictures courtesy of  Pixabay and the following photographers/artists:

Payalyzed Beggar by Kasun Chamara

Praying by Pexel

Mary, Joseph, baby Jesus by Nick Stafford