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

 

The historical backdrop referenced in Part 7 last week became the setting in which Matthew introduces us to the Magi (i.e., Wise Men; see Matthew 2:1). As we noted last time, they were looking for a successor for their Persian king, Phraates IV.

During the years 10-7 B.C., Phraates IV not only had some physical issues, but he had become corrupt and a political pawn of Rome. He was viewed and being weak and feeble by a growing number of Persians both inside and outside the royal circle. The Magi, a political and religious group of advisors who existed in historical records dating back to the seventh century B.C, were part of the king’s or emperor’s advisory council in all of the four major empires to affect Israel: the Babylonians, the Greeks, the Persians, and the Romans. Even the Old Testament prophet, Daniel, crossed paths with these “magicians” and was made chief of the Magi by Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 2:48; 4:9) during his reign. Daniel’s position of prominence carried on into the Medo-Persian Empire under the reigns of King Darius and King Cyrus (Daniel 6:28).

Of all the roles the Magi played, kingmakers was one of the more prominent. They helped choose kings. They anointed kings. They gave their “blessing” and became trusted advisors to kings due to their abilities. As a result, they amassed great power and influence. 

Of course, like any group with power and influence, they always wanted to protect their status by making sure the kings they served could protect the current kingdom or empire. Such aspirations were always a vested interest. In this case, they wanted a new king who could defeat the Romans and make the Persian Empire dominant once again in that region of the world. 

How History Affects God’s People

It must be understood at this point that Rome had always been fearful of the Persians. Trying to guard the northeast corner of their own empire had always been problematic due to the distance from Rome and the ferocity of the Persian forces. The two empires fought in 63 B.C., then again in 55 B.C., and again in 40 B.C., and Rome didn’t always win, as we discussed last week. 

However, guess where the battlefield between these two behemoths always ended up? 

In the region of Israel and the Middle East. 

It was this historical backdrop, with a powerful oppressor (Rome) already occupying the land of Israel and an equally powerful adversary just to the east (Medo-Persians), adding tension to Matthew’s account in Chapter 2. 

Enter the Magi 

At this point in our study, I’m sorry to burst your Christmastime, manger-scene bubble, but when the

Magi came into Jerusalem in Matthew 2:1, it was not on camels. And there would have been more than three. And they would have been heavily guarded. 

Verse 3 of Matthew’s account in Chapter 2 tells us that when King Herod heard these Persian kingmakers were asking where the newly born King of the Jews resided, he and all of Jerusalem were troubled. The word “troubled” (some versions use the word “disturbed”) means “to stir up; to agitate, like water in a pool, and includes the emotions.” Matthew says King Herod was caught off guard. He was shaken, and so was everyone in the city. Why? 

First, these Persian kingmakers (and everyone knew who the Magi were) had ridden into town, asking, “Where is the one who has been born King of the Jews?” Herod knew they weren’t looking for him. He hadn’t been born “King of the Jews.” Octavian bestowed that title on him over three decades earlier. Herod wasn’t even Jewish. He was Idumean, and he also knew the Magi knew who he was. He’d been reigning as “King of the Jews” for well over thirty years, and he was the “king” who defeated their armies, with the Romans help, no less. 

Let’s face it, three old men on camels, by themselves, would not have made King Herod nor the entire town of Jerusalem “troubled” or “disturbed” as Matthew describes it. Not to mention that because they were carrying gold, frankincense, and myrrh, highway bandits surely would have picked them off on their thousand-mile trip.

We also must note that Herod understood the situation well enough, including the Old Testament scriptures, to summon the chief priests and teachers of the Law and ask them where the Messiah was to be born (v. 4). He knew who the Messiah was supposed to be. He’d probably heard the people of Jerusalem talk about the Messiah off and on many times over his thirty-plus years as king. He also knew when the chief priests and teachers of the Law quoted Micah 5:2, they were talking about a “ruler” who had the pedigree to be king. The Messiah would not be a Roman-appointed hack. He would be a Son of David, a Son of Abraham, because Micah said the Messiah would come out of Judah. 

In the Israeli’s eyes, no Roman-sanctioned king could compare, and because Herod was a lunatic who had anybody and everybody killed when he believed they were after his throne, including his own son, the people of Jerusalem would have been happy to see him go. 

These Magi storming into town unannounced were royal statesmen with great political power. They would have been adorned in their royal, priestly garb and conical hats. They used Royal Persian steed (Arabian horses), which was their preferred mode of transportation, and because of their position, they never would have embarked on a journey of a thousand miles up and over the desert, following what is known as the fertile crescent, and descend south into Israel, into Roman-occupied territory, mind you, on camels, by themselves. 

These kingmakers would have been accompanied by soldiers. Some historians believe they may have had their own army, kind of like the Knights Templar in Medieval times. Either way, historians believe the size of the army would have been formidable, possibly as large as a thousand soldiers, all on horses, all armed, all skilled with the bow and arrow, all excellent swordsmen, and all ready to protect these royal subjects. 

Now do you understand why King Herod and all of the Jerusalem were frightened? 

To top everything off, Herod had sent the majority of his own army to fight a battle many miles away, so he and his country were extremely vulnerable at this moment in time. This explains why Herod desires to meet with them secretly. He knows his army is too far away to help. Rome is even farther away. So, he accommodates them. Phraates IV is still king of Persia, so he’s hedging his bets that the relationship between Rome and Phraates IV will hold until he can find out exactly what these Magi want. 

More than likely, the Magi told him about their journey. How they saw the star rise in the east, how it led them there, how it was unlike any other star they have ever witnessed as priests entrenched in the religion of Zoroastrianism. They believed in astrology as much as astronomy, often seeing them as interchangeable, with a sizeable dose of alchemy thrown in for good measure. Yet, even being wrapped up in this religion, they were in awe of this star. And give them credit. They noticed it when nobody else did.

Herod, using the Magi to his advantage, asks them to go find this newborn king and then report back to him on his location “so that I too may come and worship him” (v. 8). The Magi believed Herod. They would have no reason not to, I suppose. They probably believed the Jewish people were just as excited to see their newborn king as they were. 

The Magi left and went on their way, finding the star hovering over a house (vv. 9-10).¹ They presented their gifts, fell to the ground and worshipped Jesus. Then, they were warned in a dream not to return to Herod, thus leading us to believe that if they did not understand Herod’s intentions before this moment, they understood after the dream. 

Once the Magi left, Joseph is visited by an angel of the Lord and instructed to take his family to Egypt because Herod is plotting to murder the child. Joseph obeyed, and he and his family stayed in Egypt until Herod died (v. 14). 

The Second Rejection is Made Manifest 

This is where the story gets horrific and important all at the same time. 

When King Herod finds out the Magi did not obey him and had left the country without giving him the location of the “one born King of the Jews,” he goes berserk. Herod was a madman, and he had the reputation to prove it. Historians believe, as do I, this explains why Jerusalem was troubled along with Herod. Witnessing a group of Persian Royal Advisors come marching into town, on Persian steed, backed by as many as a thousand of the best Persian soldiers, would have been alarming enough. However, to know Herod would respond in his usual, maniacal way must have terrified the people of Jerusalem even more. 

Herod gives orders to his remaining troops “to slay all the male children who were in Bethlehem and all its vicinity, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had carefully determined from the Magi” (v. 16). 

Apparently, in the joyous and zealous retelling of their journey, when the Magi were meeting secretly with Herod, they told him how long their journey had lasted. It may have been even longer than a year, and the star may have been visible for even longer than that. Otherwise, Herod would not have known the relative age of the male child when he gave his heinous, murderous command. Or he tacked on additional time, just to be sure. We’ll never know exactly. But to get bogged down in an argument over why Herod chose “two years and younger” misses the point of the entire passage. 

For it is at this point in the story when The Second Rejection of the King comes to a head. 

Herod Rejects the King 

Herod rejects the King, the Messiah, Jesus. Herod understood what the Magi were asking. When they told him of their trip and how they were looking for the “one born king of the Jews,” Herod immediately pulled the chief priests and scribes aside and asked where the Messiah was to be born. He obviously knew enough about Jewish theology to put two and two together and ask such a question. He hated Jesus so much because he understood who the Messiah was. He understood what the Messiah was to come and do. He knew the Messiah was coming to be the King of Israel. And he was never going to allow that to happen. 

Herod was so protective of his throne and his power, he was willing to kill innocent male infants and toddlers. Seriously, how dangerous could one of those be? And to think one of these innocent boys could be an enemy at all, to an adult, to a sitting king and his throne, is another picture of how evil and deranged Herod was. Most people would inquire. Most people would monitor the situation and see if this child could be identified. But not Herod. 

The mothers and fathers of the slaughtered children must have been devastated, for they surely received no forewarning. Otherwise, they would have fled like Joseph and Mary did.² You also must know that the Herodian soldiers didn’t bother asking for birth certificates either. Some older children, no doubt, who looked like they matched the specified age range, were killed because the soldiers couldn’t tell if they were two or not, thus adding to the carnage.

The Chief Priests and Scribes Reject the King 

Even more unbelievable was how the chief priests and scribes behaved during this entire ordeal. They were indifferent. And complicit. They immediately knew where to go in the Old Testament to find the answer to Herod’s question about where the Messiah was to be born. They read the prophecy from Micah 5:2 to Herod in verses 5-6. They, no doubt, sat in that secret meeting, heard the Magi recount their journey, and didn’t do anything. They didn’t even ask to accompany the Magi, in an effort to investigate. They didn’t follow-up at all. They didn’t even take enough initiative to step outside and look for the star. They didn’t say to themselves, “Maybe we should go check this out.” They didn’t even know about the star, and they were the experts in the Law. It had been in the sky for likely days, maybe weeks, if not more, leading up to the moment when the Magi arrive in town, yet they didn’t even notice it, getting closer, getting larger, coming their direction, which is a warning to us today about being prepared for Jesus’s Second Coming, wouldn’t you say?³ 

Instead, the chief priests and scribes just sat there in the palace. Indifferent. Content with being vassals to Rome. And even when Herod gave the order to his soldiers, they remained silent. 

Therefore, we can only conclude that in the midst of this heart-wrenching moment in Jewish history, when we hear the staccato-like pounding of horses’ hooves against the hardened dirt road as they gallop off into the distance, these priests and scribes turned a blind eye as Herod’s soldiers left a grieving Bethlehem in their wake. 

Dust clouds rose and drifted at the will of the slight breeze that brought no comfort.  

Horrified mothers wailed as they clutched their dead children. 

Angry fathers cried out with loud shouts of utter helplessness toward the heavens. 

 “Then what had been spoken through Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled, saying, ‘A voice was heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and she was refusing to be comforted because they were no more” (emphasis added; Matthew 2:18; cf. Jeremiah 31:15; Legacy Bible). 

Do you remember when I asked you to tuck away the name of a place back in Chapter 2 of this Bible study series? The place was called Ramah. It was in Ramah when Israel first rejected God as King. God warned the people of Israel about earthly kings, human kings, and how demanding they could be, how self-centered they could be, how ruthless they could become. However, that admonition to think before you act did not deter the elders of Israel from demanding God give them a king. 

They wanted to be like all the other nations around them, and man-oh-man, did they get their wish. 

Now, in the person of King Herod, Israel was like all the other nations. 

Evil.

Rachel, the mother of Jacob, who later became Israel, is weeping for her children, her descendants. She’s weeping in Ramah because that’s where the decision to reject God began. Not only are the children who were killed by Herod’s soldiers “no more,” but more importantly, the nation Israel was no more. At least, not how God intended. With Him as King. With a thriving theocracy. With Israel being qadosh as God is qadosh. With the nation Israel being the Old Testament “salt and light” God intended, bringing His salvation to a dying world.⁴ 

Even this late in the history of Israel, under the reign of a brutal, heartless, Roman-appointed maniac like Herod, her religious leaders would rather have an appointed, human king “to judge” them, “such as all the other nations have” (1 Samuel 8:5), “a king to lead us and go out before us and fight our battles” (1 Samuel 8:20). They had totally abandoned God as King. They had traveled so far away from God spiritually, when wise men from the east showed up, looking for the Messiah, the religious leaders didn’t care. They were happy to have their appointed, human king, even if he killed innocent children and murdered the Messiah in the process to keep his throne. These religious leaders are ultimately reliving the 1 Samuel 8 incident in “Ramah.” They rejected God as King in Ramah, and now, they are rejecting His Son. As a result, Rachel weeps for her children because they are spiritually dead. 

At this moment in time, the Second Rejection is complete. God comes in the flesh, fulfills Isaiah 9:1-7 as well as many more prophecies, reestablishing His Kingship, and they continue to reject Him. 

But God is merciful, and He is to give them one last chance. 

And that brings us to Final Rejection of the King, which will be our topic in Chapter 4.

  

Thought of the Week:

See Endnote #3 below.

NEXT WEEK:

We will begin to look at the Third Rejection of the King.

Endnotes

1. Sorry, folks, but Jesus wasn’t in a manger when the Magi arrived in Jerusalem. He was in the manger when the shepherds did, though (Luke 2:16), which was several months, possibly up to two years before the Magi arrived, if Herod’s decision to kill all the baby boys two-years-old and younger can be used as a possible timetable. Herod did inquire as to when the Magi saw the star, so it stands to reason that it took them up to two years to prepare for the trip, travel the long distance, and arrive in Jerusalem.

 

2. Some people ask, “Why didn’t God give them the same message as Joseph and Mary? Why did God allow those children to be killed?” First, if all the families with children had been warned and told to leave town, Herod’s soldiers would have returned and reported that there were no children in Bethlehem. As a result, the countryside would have been ravaged by Herod’s jealousy, and no doubt, every male child in all of Israel would have been murdered. That’s how maniacal Herod was. He arranged to have his own son drowned and told those confidants to make it look like an accident, all because he was afraid his son would try and usurp the throne. So, you can understand, no male child would have been safe, if those in Bethlehem would have been warned. You see, when sin becomes so evil, no act, even by God, will end well for those who stand in the way of those who have evil intentions.

Second, God had to make specific plans to bring about His plan of salvation for all of mankind. Yet, at the same time, He is not obligated to protect everyone from everything that is harmful all the time. Mankind chose sin in the Garden. Mankind has chosen sin every day since. And in this particular instance, Israel, of whom the other children and families represent, chose to reject God over and over again down through the centuries. “But Kevin, these people are different.” Are they? These were the same people who would follow Jesus around thirty years later, see Him perform thousands of miracles and speak with divine authority. They would even hail Him as Messiah as He rode triumphantly into Jerusalem in His last week on Earth. But He did not live up to their expectations. He didn’t vow to overthrow Rome. He attacked the religious leaders instead. And as a result, in less than a week’s time, the very people who were chanting “Hosanna!” and laying palm branches and robes in the roadway as He entered Jerusalem chanted “Crucify Him!” by week’s end. Tens of thousands followed Jesus, but after the dust settled, only 120 were in the upper room on Pentecost. These facts prove the fickleness of the human heart, and God knew all this when He sent the angel to warn Joseph.  

 

3. The signs of the times are all pointing to Jesus’s return being imminent. The world is setting itself up like never before, in a unified front all around the globe, over issues that pit themselves and their beliefs against (“anti”) God, against (“anti”) Bible, and against (“anti”) Christ. This globalization and unification of their message will become more and more pronounced in the coming weeks, months, and even years, if Jesus tarries that long.

Yet, at the same time, the world is setting itself ablaze. “Wars and rumors of wars” are on the front page headlines. Earthquakes in various places happen often. Just this week, one hit the mountains of Georgia, just north of Atlanta. Killings in our streets, killings in our classrooms, killings in our neighborhoods, and killings in our homes are all on the rise, while lawmakers make it easier and easier for criminals to “get away with it.” They believe this because of some notion that culture should dictate what is right and wrong. The only absolute truth in their relativistic worldview is that there is no absolute truth. It’s insanity by another name. 

Therefore, as these anti-God, anti-Bible, and anti-Christ “beliefs” permeate societies around the globe at an alarming rate, they inadvertently promote selfishness and violence while promising “hope.” However, they never deliver hope in any real, true sense. And people know this as their souls tell them otherwise. This is why so many young people are committing suicide and other atrocities today. They hear all the “promises” propagated as truth, such as, “We will bring about social justice,” “We must rewrite the laws of our nations to make them more inclusive,” “Gender is whatever you want it to be,” “Those who have told you what is right and wrong were wrong, and we will fix it,” and the like. Young people are told things will get better while divorce tears their families apart and leaves them as “ropes” in a financial tug of war, aided and abetted by judges and laws that, in actuality, have little interest in their overall well-being, regardless of what they promise. 

You see, the false promises of those who do evil and true reality clash as lies are told as truths, and as truths are called lies. This breeds frustration, because if you believe this life is the only one you’ll have, then your worldview gets very narrow and very self-centered.

As a result, selfishness and violence will continue to rise and will usher in “the AntiChrist,” who will not only embrace the aforementioned “beliefs,” but will promise “to do the job God failed to do”: bring peace and salvation to the world. He will be hailed as the true savior and actually bring “peace”…for three-and-a-half years, the Bible tells us. Then, literally, all hell breaks loose, and in the end, the blood will rise to the horse’s bridle and cover 1,600 stadia (Rev. 14:20), which is almost 158 miles. The point being, with all that bloodshed, the AntiChrist will bring anything but peace and salvation. However, by that time, it will be too late for those who believed God Almighty was the enemy, His Word was false, and His Son was a liar. 

Therefore, if you say you are a believer, make sure (Matthew 7:21-23; 2 Peter 1:10). Time is running short for this Earth as we know it. Prepare yourself. Draw near to God in these Last Days. 

 

4. Once again, we must make the note that this is not an anti-Semitic Bible study. Although things are looking bleak, and it seems God is building a case to utterly destroy Israel and completely abandon them, eradicating them from His redemptive plan for all time, it must be brought to light that this passage, quoted from Jeremiah 31:15, sits right in the middle of some of the most encouraging chapters in Jeremiah’s book (chapters 30-35). Although they were about to be carried off into captivity by Babylon and Nebuchadnezzar in Jeremiah’s day, there is hope for a remnant to come out of the ashes of captivity. So, too, in this scene in Matthew, in spite of the horror committed by the one appointed “King of the Jews” by Rome (Herod), there is another anointed “King of the Jews,” who is coming as the Messiah (Jesus). He will bring hope to Israel in the midst of their spiritual captivity. He will bring salvation and call out of bondage those who call upon the Name of the Lord and into the once and for all promised land (Roman 10:9-13).

 Pictures courtesy of  Unsplash and the following photographers/artists:

Israel - by Tetiana Shyshkina

Wisemen ornament - by Robert Thiemann

Star - by Ales Krivec

Chapter 3 – The Second Rejection of the King (Part 7 of 8)

 The Rejection of Israel’s King Finds Its Roots in History

 The year was 48 B.C. The Roman Republic (it was not an empire yet) was in turmoil. Pompey, the ruler at the time, had become jealous of a certain general, whose armies had conquered much of the region of Gaul (northeast Europe), crossed the English Channel, and invaded Britain. The general’s name was Julius.

Julius was the governor of Gaul, and had been elected to serve as a member of the Roman council, no doubt, to help Rome govern that region of the Republic by receiving regular updates.

Julius was known to be a ruthless and cunning commander, and proved this to be so in the Gallic Wars. He was responsible for building a bridge across the Rhine River in order to make it to English Channel.

When Pompey and his supporters decided Julius was amassing too much power, they ordered him to return to Rome and give up the command of his armies. He refused. Instead, in a bold move, he “crossed the Rubicon” River and triggered a civil war with Pompey and his supporters.

Julius pursued Pompey through several areas, finally catching up to him in Egypt. Egypt’s leader, Ptolemy VIII, a child himself, ordered for Pompey to be captured, and to keep Julius from invading Egypt, he offered Pompey’s head in exchange for peace. Julius agreed, and Ptolemy obliged.

Soon, Julius found himself caught in a civil war between Ptolemy and co-regent, Cleopatra. He and Cleopatra aligned against Ptolemy and defeated him, lifting Cleopatra to the position of queen. And in the process, they became lovers who never married.

Such is the life of corrupt royalty. And to add to the drama, when you trace your lineage back and claim you are the offspring of the goddess, Venus, as Julius did, then your head swells to abnormal dimensions, both figuratively and spiritually.

The Rise and Fall of Julius Caesar

Julius spent the next two years chasing down Pompey’s supporters and eliminating his enemies. Then, in 46 B.C., he was declared dictator of the Republic for a period of ten years, claiming the name “Caesar” in the process.¹

This act of naming him a dictator didn’t sit well with those still alive who sided with Pompey. But what prompted the beginning of the end was when Julius declared himself emperor for life in 44 B.C. Just two years in, and the power overtook him. Ten years wasn’t going to be long enough. He wanted it all, and he wanted it now. An all too familiar, oft-sang “tune” in human history.

Two men, Marcus Junius Brutus and Gaius Cassius Longinus, better known as Brutus and Cassius, believed assassinating the dictator for life Caesar would help restore the Roman Republic to its former glory and take Rome back to a representative republic. Thus, they conspired with another senator and stabbed Julius twenty-three times on the Senate floor, in front of a statue of Pompey, no less.

Oh, the irony.

However, their seditious act had the opposite effect of what they desired. It emboldened those who believed Brutus and Cassius were right. War broke out, and as a result, two others, both military men, led Roman forces against the sympathizers following Brutus and Cassius, winning a decisive battle in Philippi. The year was 42 B.C.

One of those two military men was Octavian, who would later, in 27 B.C., change his name to Augustus (see Luke 2:1) and become the first emperor of the newly established Roman Empire. The other military man was Marcus Antonius. You know him better as Marc Antony. He and Octavian were contemporaries of such notable historical figures as Cleopatra, Queen of Egypt, Cicero, as well as an individual whose name you may also have heard: Herod.

Secular and Biblical History Collide

During this coup attempt of Brutus and Cassius, the ruler of Judea at the time, a man by the name of Antipater (pronounced An-TIP-pa-ter), was a loyal supporter of Julius Caesar and Rome. He remained in his position until his murder in 43 B.C., the year after Julius Caesar’s assassination. When Octavian and Marcus Antonius finally won the battle against Brutus and Cassius in Philippi in 42 B.C., which was the year after Antipater’s death, they appointed Antipater’s sons, Phasael and Herod, as joint rulers of Judea. The Romans referred to them as “governors” at that time, which was a common, official title the Romans used, even of their own people, as was mentioned earlier concerning Julius as the governor of Gaul (cf. Matthew 27:11; Mark 15:1; Luke 23:1; John 18:28-29).

Enter The Persians

Two years later, in 40 B.C., anti-Rome, pro-Brutus and Cassius sentiments were still running high, especially in the region we now call the Middle East. The Persian Empire (also called the Medo-Persian Empire, the Medes and the Persians, and the Parthian Empire) decided to take advantage of the situation. They invaded Judea in 40 B.C., towards the end of the Hasmonean dynasty which lasted from 140-37 B.C., and set up a Hasmonean leader, by the name of Antigonus (pronounced An-TIG-gon-us), to act as leader of that region. He was to be the “priest-king of Jerusalem.”

The Persians captured and killed one of the co-governors of Judea, Phasael. The other co-governor, Herod, escaped to Rome and no doubt, told them the entire story of the Persian invasion.

It was shortly thereafter that the Roman Senate, under the leadership of Octavian and Marcus Antonius, declared Herod “King of the Jews.” With the full support of the Roman Empire, Herod traveled back to retake that region of the Empire. It was no easy task, but with his Roman-supplied army, Herod laid siege to Jerusalem for three months before it fell in 37 B.C., thus ending the Hasmonean Dynasty and beginning the reign of King Herod.

The Plot Thickens

During this time when Herod was retaking Judea, the Persian Empire was undergoing some turmoil of its own. Their newly established king, Phraates IV, was just starting his reign, and he did so in a very violent manner. He murdered his own father and brothers so that he could usurp the throne. It was a case of “the apple and the tree” syndrome, for his father did the exact same thing.

The next year, in 36 B.C., Marcus Antonius invaded the Persian Empire, but Phraates IV defeated Antonius’s army and sent them away with heavy losses.

Two years later, in 34 B.C., one of Phraates IV’s vassal kings aligned with the Romans and Marcus Antonius. They started a kerfuffle within the Persian Empire, challenging the Persian king.

This sequence of events started a civil war within the Persian Empire, and Tiridates II of Armenia drove Phraates IV from the throne in 32 B.C. Phraates IV escaped and lived with a ruthless band of cutthroat nomads known as “Scythians” for some time (see Colossians 3:11) until he came back and regained his throne years later. At that point, Tiridates II fled to Rome with one of Phraates IV’s sons as a hostage. This entire saga led Octavian to make peace with Phraates IV and return his son.

Octavian (his name was Augustus by this time) reigned as Emperor of Rome until 14 A.D. He had many other battles, one notable skirmish involved fighting against Marcus Antonius, who had aligned himself with Cleopatra after they had become lovers. The two lovebirds were defeated by Octavian and his general, Marcus Agrippa. Antonius and Cleopatra fled back to Egypt and eventually committed suicide. As a result, Octavian occupied Egypt and made it part of the Empire.

Phraates IV Opens the Door for the Magi

During his second stint, Phraates IV reigned as the Persian King until 2 B.C.² In his last few years, Phraates IV’s health was declining, and decisions he was making didn’t make sense. Particularly, he was viewed as being a pawn of Rome, and corruption encircled his throne. As a result, the leaders within the Persian Empire knew his time was short, both physically and politically. 

It was in these waning years when the leaders surrounding Phraates IV believed his frail leadership would cause other empires, namely Rome, to launch another offensive the Persian Empire could not overcome.

Therefore, they sent their “kingmakers” on a quest. A quest to find a new king. With that mandate, a band of Persian leaders, known as the Magi, left the region of the Medes and the Persians, heading east, following a “star.”

Thought for the Week:

Today, in the twenty-first century, I believe we read the biblical accounts of such figures as the Magi, Herod, and the like, and somehow, we see them as groups or individuals detached from reality, detached from history. We read these stories almost like the parables Jesus used to get across great spiritual truths to His disciples and the multitudes. Seeing them as historical fact is somewhat foreign to us.

Yet, when we dig, we see that God’s Word is chocked full of historical events. These events sometimes happened in conjunction with biblical accounts, like when Joseph and Mary had to go to Bethlehem because of the census, recorded in Luke 2, ordered by none other than Octavian, who by that time had changed his name to Augustus Caesar. Sometimes historical events, recorded by secular writers, help to fill in gaps the Bible doesn’t see necessary to record. Yet, when we get those details, the Word of God and its meaning come alive for those of us living so many centuries removed.

We never want to take the history surrounding the people and regions of the Bible for granted. Their lives and actions were all part of God’s plan, because as you may have heard, it’s all HIS-story anyway. As Christians, if you believe in Jesus, then you must believe God controls the destinies of men and women and uses them when He sees fit. If you don’t believe me, then ask Julius, Octavian, Brutus, Cassius, Cleopatra, Marc Antony, and Herod—just to name a few—and see if they agree.

If you still don’t believe me, then ask yourself this: How did the Magi know to look for a “star,” let alone follow it? Who told them? Who gave them that information? How did they know, when they got to Jerusalem, to ask for “the One who has been born ‘King of the Jews’?”

A careful study of Scripture shows us that centuries earlier, God made sure a faithful servant named Daniel was in a prominent, influential position within the Babylonian Empire. When the Medo-Persians defeated Babylon and became the reigning superpower, Daniel was elevated in that Empire as well. “Chief of the Magi,” he was called (Daniel 4:9; 5:11). Daniel was the president of the organization. He was the CEO. He was the “high priest.” And you have to believe someone as faithful as Daniel—who had survived hungry lions and a fiery furnace because of his unwavering faith—would be faithful enough to share the truth about the God of Israel, His introduction of a Messiah, and His redemptive plan for both Jew and Gentile with the bunch of Zoroastrianism-believing, Persian priests.

As you can see, God is in control of it all.  

 

NEXT WEEK:

The gripping conclusion of the story of the Magi and Israel’s second rejection of their king.

 

Endnotes

1. Julius Caesar proclaimed himself as “Caesar,” which comes from the word cesar, which means “an emperor, a ruler, a dictator.” The word has been used across the world and transliterated into Russian (czar), Middle English (keiser), German (kaiser), among others.

He was also the person who developed the Julian calendar, and in doing so, named a month after himself, which is now known as July. And his successor, Augustus, named a month after himself as well. Guess which one that is?

            Julius wasn’t all bad. There were some things he did for the good of the Republic:

§  Regulating the distribution of subsidized grain

§  Increasing the size of the Roman Senate to represent more people

§  Reduce government debt

§  Support military veterans

§  Granting Roman citizenship to people in Rome’s distant territories

§  Reform the tax codes

 2. This historical information was gathered from multiple sources, most of which were brittanica.com (Subjects viewed: Octavian; Marcus Antonius; Cleopatra; Phraates IV; Tiridates II). Another crucial source was Bruce, F. F. New Testament History. (New York, BY; Doubleday, 1966), pp. 1-40. One last source for the information on Julius Caesar was from the History.com Editors. “Julius Caesar.” History.com. Nov. 4, 2019. Web. June 10, 2022. <https://www.history.com/topics/ancient-history/julius-caesar>  

 

Pictured courtesy of Pixabay.com

"Julius Caesar" by efrye

"Juliua Caesar Assassination" by GDJ

"Christmas" by Ambroz

Chapter 3 – The Second Rejection of the King (Part 6 of 8)

Last week we looked at the betrothal and marriage in the days of Jesus, and how the news of Mary’s pregnancy would have created real tension between the two teenagers and their families, based on the way such unions were arranged. And in the Law of Moses, it was customary to stone a woman who was found in Mary’s predicament along with the male partner (Leviticus 20:10, Deuteronomy 22:22).

As you can see, Joseph had a major decision to make: Have her stoned or divorce her, based on the verses referenced above and the allowance given by Moses in Deuteronomy 24. Both decisions were not good for Mary or her baby. It’s a good thing God sent the angel to clear things up (Matthew 1:20-23).

Man’s Way of Explaining God’s Ways

To add to the controversy and confusion, some scholars believe Matthew wrote chapter 1 of his gospel account specifically to counter a slander against his Lord which was prevalent in Jesus’s day. What was that slander exactly?

That Jesus wasn’t deity.

Are you surprised? The people around the incident surely would have talked. They would have gossiped and attempted to determine how Mary became pregnant. In Greek and Roman culture, the depraved and gross results of mingling and cohabitation between gods and goddesses with humans happened all the time. However, in Jewish culture, such occurrences were foreign. Therefore, for the Israelites living in Joseph and Mary’s village, the explanations in the minds of the onlookers would have been much more human-centered.

The most popular story propagated was that Mary either cohabitated with a Roman soldier during the early days of her betrothal to Joseph or right before the betrothal began. Therefore, the slanderous conclusion was that Jesus was an illegitimate son born out-of-wedlock. He was therefore the product of an illicit affair between Mary—a Jewish woman, and an unnamed Roman soldier—a Gentile. As a result, Jesus would have been a half-breed, a Samaritan, which in that day was a term of derision and mockery, and was not used specifically just to refer to people who were born in the region of Samaria.

In John 8, we have a confrontation between Jesus and some Jews who had chosen to believe His teachings to some degree but were having a hard time understanding them. They argue that they are children of Abraham (vv. 33, 39). Jesus tries to get them to see that if they were children of Abraham, they would do as Abraham did. In other words, they would do the will of their Father in heaven. However, they were trying to kill Jesus, which Jesus claimed was the work of their “own father” (v. 41), the devil.

Then, they respond by making an interesting comment in verse 41: “We are not born of fornication,” they protested. “We have one Father, God himself.”

Did you hear what they said? In a backhanded fashion, they beat around the bush and accused Jesus’s mother of having a sexual relationship outside of marriage (porneias in the Greek, from which we get the word “porno,” is always used to refer to sex between two people not married). This relationship “procreated” (gegennemetha in the Greek) a child as a result, in a very human manner, just like all other human births. They were claiming that there was nothing supernatural about Jesus’s birth. On the contrary, they were claiming not to have been born as illegitimate children like “others they knew,” namely Jesus. They were claiming to have been born of God as children of the promise, with Abraham as their father. What a stark contrast, and what a lie!

You see, they had heard the rumors too. 

Jesus responds by telling them in essence that their actions speak otherwise, and they are doing the work of their father, the devil, because he’s been a liar and a murderer from the beginning.

Jesus then asks these questions: “Which one of you can prove I am guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why do you not believe me? I’ll tell you the truth. The person who belongs to God hears what God says. This is why you cannot understand what I am telling you. You do not belong to God” (vv. 46-47). 

Jesus was telling the truth. If they believed in Him the way they were supposed to believe, then they would know everything He was teaching was true. But they could not believe it.¹ 

Do you know why?

The answer is found in their response. In verse 48, they answer Jesus: “Are we not correct in saying that you are a Samaritan? And demon-possessed also?” 

Wow. So much for beating around the bush. 

The “obvious explanation” of how Mary got pregnant was still alive and well over thirty years later. And not only was Jesus an illegitimate half-breed, according to them, He was also demon-possessed because He claimed to be God in the flesh. Jesus said they were of their father, the devil. So, they used an old rumor to accuse Jesus of the same thing because in their minds, Deity was never born of human flesh. That was a “pagan” thing. Thus, humanity once again tried to understand the realm of the Kingdom of Heaven, where God Almighty resides and reigns, and failed miserably.

This is how twisted the truth of God’s teachings and instructions in the Old Testament had become in the days of Jesus’s earthly ministry. It is here where the words of Isaiah come to light: “Woe unto them who call evil good and good evil; who call darkness light and light darkness; who call bitter sweet and sweet bitter. Woe unto them who are wise in their own eyes and prudent in their own sight!” (5:20-21).

This scene in John 8 is a continuation of Rejection #2, by the way. For when Jesus said in verse 58—“I tell you the truth, before Abraham was, I am!”—everyone understood what He meant because at once, the text tells us, they picked up stones and were going to carry out the will of their father, the devil, because Jesus had supposedly spoken blasphemy by claiming to be God. 

In other words, these “believers” had rejected God by rejecting Jesus, which was Jesus’s point through this entire episode. They were talking and acting just like their forefathers in 1 Samuel 8, only now, their thinking had become even more corrupt. 

Just to show how far the lie about Jesus being a half-breed Samaritan had gone, they actually knew Jesus wasn’t from Samaria. When Phillip told Nathaniel about Jesus and tells him to come see, Nathaniel responds, “Can anything good come from Nazareth” (John 1:46). Even after the scene in John 8, the crowds are hailing Jesus in Matthew 21:11 as a “prophet from Nazareth of Galilee.” They knew Jesus was from Nazareth. Calling Him a Samaritan was a slam. Therefore, it is true that Matthew could have been writing it to counter this slanderous accusation, and probably was, but the purpose was far greater than simply winning a debate with doubters.² 

When it comes to the actual birth of Jesus, Matthew is very careful with his wording in chapter 1. His phrase “before they came together” (v. 18) implies that Mary was not pregnant because of a premarital relationship with Joseph. No consummation yet. 

But what about the scoffers who concluded she had an illicit relationship with a Roman soldier, you ask? 

Matthew anticipates this too. His phrase in verse 18, “she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit,” implies that this birth was different. It was unique, and in the history of Jewish births, it was one of a kind. It was born of the work of the Holy Spirit. God’s Spirit. 

The Holy Spirit has always been in business of creating. In Luke 1, Mary is confronted by the angel,

Gabriel. He tells her of what is about to happen soon with her becoming pregnant. Even Mary, like we would be, was skeptical. She asks in verse 34, “How will this be, since I am a virgin?” Good question. 

Gabriel then uses some interesting imagery to describe this incarnational process: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.” In Genesis 1:1-2, we see the same imagery as the Spirit of God hovers over the formless, dark, empty waters of the earth. 

Out of nothing—ex nihilo—the Spirit of God creates what we know as planet Earth with all of its life forms as well as the universe in Genesis 1. Now, in Matthew 1, we have the same Holy Spirit of God at work again, creating out of nothing, despite no human relationship, a baby, the Son of God. The emphasis here is not that Jesus was born of a virgin so much as He was the work of the Holy Spirit.

In this one action, God was reestablishing His Kingship. This action would eventually lead to God’s reestablishment of His theocracy, but in a different manner. Instead of a group of specific people of a specific nationality, with boundaries and a geographical location they could call “home,” this reestablished theocracy would have no boundaries, no geographical location, and would be open to all peoples of all nationalities. We would call that The Church. Within this reestablished theocracy, in a more tangible manner, God made known the Kingdom of Heaven by having His Son, Jesus, exemplify what life in this kingdom looked like on a daily basis, thus renewing all the instructions and teachings (torah). This “Law and the Prophets” was not to be thrown away or rewritten. It was to be fulfilled in the person of His one and only Son (Matthew 5:17-20; John 3:16).

Thought for the Week:

“If something is repeated enough, it will become truth.”

Have you ever heard that phrase before, or something like it? We see it all the time in today’s culture, especially via media outlets. They call them talking points. When someone wants to get a narrative out there, they give media outlets "talking points” to use, and then one by one, you’ll see those points used over and over again for days on end. When a montage is pieced together, it becomes quite comical and disturbing at the same time.

The plan is simple. Have those “trusted news sources” say it enough, the vast majority of viewers and listeners will believe it to be true, whether it is or isn’t. To show how it works, you can watch the first two-and-a-half minutes of this clip and see it for yourself. And to be fair, you can watch this clip, too, as these two clips are proof that both sides of the aisle in Washington are equally guilty of doing the same thing. It’s not a “conservative” thing or a “liberal” thing. It’s a satanic thing. 

Satan has used this age-old method of fighting in the “arena of ideas” for centuries. And the people of Bethlehem, Nazareth, and the surroundings areas of Israel, to eventually include Jerusalem, fell prey to it as well when they believed the lie that Jesus was the product of an illicit affair. “Everybody is saying it, so it must be true.” 

People use these tactics when they want to hide something. They usually claim it’s their rights or their way of life they are defending. And sometimes, it does fall under the category of something “simple” or “benign.” Examples of this could be arguing against dieting when you really want to eat boxes of Oreos every day, or whether or not you should binge watch a certain TV show when you know you should be mowing the yard. 

However, in most cases, the act of spreading talking points is ultimately about hiding our sin. In the case of Jesus and the so-called believers in John 8, that is what this was all about. If they could discredit the One who was claiming their lifestyle choices were harmful, they would feel justified in continuing to live in their sin. In their minds, the “charlatan” would be exposed, and they would be off the hook. 

So, as Christians, we have to be careful what we defend. The only thing we should defend is truth, if we truly wish to be free. The truth of Scripture, that is. For that is the only truth Christians should defend. All other “truths” must be sifted through God’s Word. If a “truth” is proven otherwise, then we must expose that for what it is so others cannot be led astray, using God’s Word as our “preponderance of evidence.” Even Jesus, ministering in the midst of an oppressive Roman occupation in the land of Israel, didn't gather all the zealots and rabble-rousers and start a revolution. Instead, He was more concerned about the witness of Israel and their waywardness from God. Oh, if only the Church was so like-minded.   

This is what Jesus meant when He said in John 8 (and I’m paraphrasing here), “If you hear and obey God’s Words, then you are of God. If God is your Father, you will love Me. And if you continue in that Word, which is My Word, too, you will know the truth, and that truth will set you free. If you do not believe any of this, and you believe I am lying, then you are of your father, the devil, because he has been lying since the beginning about God and Me.”     

Jesus was more concerned about their relationship with God than their relationship to the Romans. We need to have the same mindset. 

  

NEXT WEEK:

We begin to see how the Rejection of Jesus becomes personal to those in positions of power as history comes together, like clay on the potter's wheel, in the hands of God Almighty.

 

Endnotes

1. This episode in John 8 is a classic example of how “believing” means so much more in the New Testament than how we perceive it today. In today’s culture, “to believe” means you believe it to be true, like the Earth being round as opposed to flat, or that the Earth revolves around the Sun as opposed to the other way around. However, do these “truths” affect your life or cause you to live your life any differently? Not really. In New Testament theology, “to believe” causes a significant change in your lifestyle. It’s not just words or an intellectual exercise. The “belief” causes one to change how he or she views life, interacts with it, and lives it on a daily basis.

For a believer in Jesus, it means to repent and follow Him, adhering to God’s instructions and teachings. It means a change of heart has taken place. Where God, Jesus, and the Bible were once viewed as irrelevant or even enemies, the person has “repented”—done an about-face, a one-eighty—and is now heading toward the things of God as opposed to away from the things of God. Hence the issue Jesus was having with these Jews in John 8:31, who obviously said they believed in Jesus but were having major issues with His teachings. They claimed to believe, but the evidence proved to the contrary. 

This is why Jesus referred to them (including the Pharisees and the teachers of the Law) as hypocrites and liars. He said in Matthew 15:7-8: “You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy about you: ‘This people draw near to me with their mouths, and they honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. In vain they worship me; their teachings are but commandments taught by men.’” These “believers” in John 8 are referred to as children of the devil because they wanted to carry out the desires of their father, Satan (i.e., murder Jesus). They said they believed one message but lived an entirely different one. 

We, the church, should take heed of these words, because as the current days speed recklessly toward the Last Days, those within our ranks unfortunately are looking more and more like these hypocrites and liars in John 8 than the kind of children who follow after Jesus because they believe correctly.

 

2. However, understand this: God’s Word was never written simply to argue against slanderous stories or theories or prove theological points in some kind of game of “one-upsmanship.” It was written to show us who God is (the Creator God who rules over His Creation justly and rightly) and what He requires of His people (His instructions and teachings). When we start saying that God’s sole purpose was to counter lies or merely prove points, as if arguing in a debate, then it lessens the sovereignty and authoritativeness of His Word and actually has the opposite effect of its intended purpose. 

We are witnessing this today. God’s Word in many circles is simply viewed as another piece of literature. Oh, it may be revered because it’s “the Bible,” but in their minds, it is no more authoritative than any other religious writing. This is how many so-called Bible scholars can tear it apart and come to the conclusion that most of the “red letters” really were not spoken by Jesus, but instead, they were myths and legends written down poetically by the biblical authors to argue against some accusation or hold up a particular truth as a lofty goal. However, it was never the singular, authoritative Word of God. 

Robert J. Miller, in a video associated with the Jesus Seminar—a liberal think tank from the 1980s—goes so far as to say that what occurs in Matthew 2 is written to prove the theological point, that “Jesus is recapitulating the entire history of Israel” (in other words, Jesus is a “type” for the nation Israel’s exodus from Egypt, their exile into slavery with Babylon, and their return to the promised land). There is truth in what he says. However, he goes on to say that the story of Jesus in Matthew 2 “won’t hold up in a realistic fashion.” Really? 

If you watch the video below, you can even hear Miller’s condescension in how he describes the Wise Men, or Magian priesthood, as they would have been known in that day. They weren’t “exotic strangers” from the East, as if nobody had ever seen nor heard of them before. They were very well known, and came from a people who had wreaked havoc in that region of the world, known as the Medo-Persians. The Medo-Persians (also known as the Medes and the Persians, the Persian Empire, and the Parthian Empire, in case your reading about them later) held multiple battles against the Romans and are the reason why the Roman Empire did not expand much past Israel’s boundaries. Even Marcus Antonius (aka, Marc Antony) was known to have fought a battle against Persian king Phraates IV in that region of the world. 

The Magian priesthood was present during all four major powers, the Babylonians, the Medo-Persians, the Greeks, and the Romans, and were known, among other things, to be “kingmakers,” as they would be summoned to anoint and consecrate kings as needed. Even Daniel is made, and referred to as, the “chief of the Magi” (Daniel 2:48; 4:9) by King Nebuchadnezzar during the Babylonian Empire. He continues to hold that position during the reign of King Cyrus as well. 

The Wise Men, or Magi, were well known, even to the Israelites, and both groups held Daniel in high regard in the days of Jesus. These kingmakers from the east were not some band of “exotic strangers” who came and went with little importance. 

You can find the excerpt of Robert Miller’s talk on “The Births of Jesus and Other Sons of God” here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNuwDg8B9bo.

 

 Pictures courtesy of  Unsplash and the following photographers/artists:

Book of Matthew by Tim Wildsmith

Angel by Andika Christian

Truth by Michael Carruth

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