Both God and Boy
Preached by Jason Abbott
October 16, 2016
There’s a very old account of Jesus as a boy in the temple that fashions him as more than a precocious, young student of the Torah. This ancient writing called “The Arabic Gospel of the Infancy” imagines a twelve-year-old version of Jesus “as instructing [all the religious teachers and onlookers] in the statutes of the Law and [in] the mysteries of the Prophets, as well as in astronomy, medicine, physics, and metaphysics.”1 It’s a fantastic picture which is truly too good to be true!Apocryphal accounts like this one often depict Jesus as an ancient superhero, essentially making too much of Jesus’ divinity at the expense of Jesus’ humanity (and also at the expense of the inspired word of God!). As we’re going to see, Luke’s account, which is the only biblical account of Jesus’ boyhood, temple visit, contains no such exaggeration, no such hyperbole. Rather, Jesus is a bona fide boy according to Luke’s gospel.Yet, while we laugh at the accounts which make too much of Christ’s deity, which portray him flying around the world of the Ancient Near East with a cape on while simultaneously pontificating about astrophysics and inventing the light bulb, I wonder if we’re not inclined to make a similar mistake in the opposite direction. In short, I wonder if we’re not tempted here to make too much of Jesus’ humanity at the expense of his divinity.Well, let’s read this passage first, and then we can take up this question concerning the God-boy, Jesus Christ. You can find the text on page 973.
Luke 2:41-52
41 Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the Feast of the Passover. 42 And when he was twelve years old, they went up according to custom. 43 And when the feast was ended, as they were returning, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem. His parents did not know it, 44 but supposing him to be in the group they went a day's journey, but then they began to search for him among their relatives and acquaintances, 45 and when they did not find him, they returned to Jerusalem, searching for him.46 After three days they found him in the temple, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. 47 And all who heard him were amazed at his understanding and his answers. 48 And when his parents saw him, they were astonished. And his mother said to him, “Son, why have you treated us so? Behold, your father and I have been searching for you in great distress.” 49 And he said to them, “Why were you looking for me? Did you not know that I must be in my Father's house?” 50 And they did not understand the saying that he spoke to them. 51 And he went down with them and came to Nazareth and was submissive to them. And his mother treasured up all these things in her heart. 52 And Jesus increased in wisdom and in stature and in favor with God and man.
As we study this passage together, I want us to establish two things in turn. (1st) Mary and Joseph were good parents and (2nd) Jesus was more than a good son. If we can establish these two things, I think we’ll begin to grasp some vital lessons which God has for us in this account.
1. Good parents (vv. 41-48)
It’s tempting here to be critical of Mary and Joseph for losing track of Jesus during this trip home from Jerusalem, unless of course you have kids of your own. Then, you sympathize and recognize how very easy it actually is—in a large group of people—to lose track of a child.When Josiah was ten-years-old, we took a vacation with my entire family. We went down to Pigeon Forge, Tennessee and Smoky Mountains National Park. During our time there, we visited the Titanic Museum (because nothing says I went to East-Tennessee like visiting a replica of an English luxury liner which was sunk by an ice burg in 1912). Anyhow, while we were in the museum with my family, Natalie assumed I had Josiah while I assumed my mom did, and so on and so forth, until we recognized that none of us knew where he was.I imagine that something like this is what happened while Mary and Joseph traveled home to Nazareth with this group of family and friends and neighbors. They just assume Jesus is with one of the others or running around with some pals; after all, he’s twelve and pretty much able to take care of himself.No, Mary and Joseph aren’t negligent parents in the least. Luke says, in fact, quite the opposite about them. Just consider some details, and what they indicate about Mary and Joseph’s parenting.
Luke tells us that they were faithful worshipers of God.
Now his parents [Mary and Joseph] went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the Passover (v. 41).
Going each year to one of the major celebratory feasts in Jerusalem was customary for devout Hebrew men. But notice that it’s not just Joseph who goes to the feast—Mary goes too, and she goes with him every year. These are faithful role models for their children—these are good parents!2
Luke shows us that they were good instructors of their children.
After three days they found him in the temple, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. And all who heard him were amazed at his understanding and his answers (vv. 46-47).
It’d be easy for us to assume that Jesus amazed everyone in the temple because he’s the God-boy. It would be easy to assume Nature over Nurture in this passage. There is, however, no good reason in the text to assume this. After all, Luke tells us plainly that “Jesus increased in wisdom . . .” (v. 52). Jesus, in other words, learned. I think consequently it’s fair to say that some of his understanding and some of his answers came by faithful instruction from mom and dad—again, these are good parents!
Luke records for us that they cared deeply about their kids.
So Mary confesses to Jesus: Your father and I have been searching for you in great distress (v. 48).
You don’t rush back a full day’s journey and search another two days if you’re callous, uncaring parents. Both Mary and Joseph treasure their boy. When he’s missing they rush to find him. They search for him desperately. This is a loving mom and dad—these are good parents!
Really, most of us get this as we read the passage. Most of us sympathize with Mary and Joseph, and because of this, we don’t know what to do with Jesus. We don’t know what to do with his answer and his behavior here. We, in fact, might even be tempted to pin the blame on Jesus.A few years into my first pastorate we had a children’s ministry presentation in front of the whole congregation. Our volunteer children’s ministry director led it and, during his talk, referred in passing to this interaction between the boy Jesus and his parents—commenting that Jesus was rather disrespectful to both of them. Sitting behind one of the members of our elder team, I watched him instantly sit up in his chair. If he wasn’t paying attention before, he was now.Rest assured though, there was grace given to the volunteer ministry leader. Yet, nevertheless, a public correction was necessary because Jesus could not be without sin if he’d broken the fifth commandment—honor your father and mother. Jesus couldn’t be the Savior, even if as a child he had violated one of God’s laws. You see—this children’s ministry director was overemphasizing Jesus’ humanity at the expense of Jesus’ divinity. He was seeing Jesus as mainly a boy with parents instead of the only boy who ever lived that had parents whom he knew and loved before the foundations of the earth were laid.Friends, I wonder if we don’t do the very same kind of thing with Jesus when we look at this passage in Luke two. How many of us have shaken our heads at this interaction because we don’t know what to think or to say here? How many of us have simply seen Jesus as a boy and not as the God-boy here?Well, let’s try to take a much fuller and more balanced look at the interaction between Jesus and his earthly parents in our remaining time. Because Jesus was . . .
2. More than a good son (vv. 49-52)
I wonder how many here have seen the movie Freaky Friday. It’s the story of a mother and daughter who accidentally and magically switch bodies for a time. It’s a comedy and much of the humor is predicated upon the mother—who is now in her teenage daughter’s body—giving her daughter—who is now in her mother’s middle aged body—parental advice and orders (Like: Go to your room young lady! Or: Change your clothes; that skirt’s way too short!).Friends, something like this is taking place between Jesus and his parents. The God of the universe has put on flesh. The God of the universe is 12-years-old. The God of the universe has two human “parents” in this scene.But this boy is still the God of the universe! That hasn’t changed in the least. This is not your typical parent-child relationship. We must keep all this in mind when Jesus says to Mary and Joseph:
Why were you looking for me? Did you not know that I must be in my Father's house (v. 49)?
This is the line that our volunteer children’s ministry director took for sass. Yet, notice a couple things about it which indicate otherwise. First, note that Luke, in relaying this scene to us, neither reports nor implies that anyone was offended because of Jesus’ response to his parents. There’s no, “How dare you speak to me and your father that way!” following his response. Sure, nobody seems to get it. Nobody understands what he means. But there’s no offense at his reply to them. Instead, Luke tells us that Mary “treasured up all these things in her heart” (v. 51). I don’t know about you, but if my kids sass me, I don’t treasure it up in my heart. So Jesus’ response doesn’t seem to be taken as disrespectful.Second, notice that Jesus seems to be gently reminding his human parents about the abnormal character of their relationship to him as parents in his answer. When Mary says, “Your father and I have been searching for you . . .” (v. 48). Jesus’ response contains a subtle corrective:
Did you not know that I must be in my Father's house (v. 49)?
With this statement (the earliest recorded words in Scripture that we have from the mouth of Jesus) we get a glimpse of his awareness of his special calling by God the Father and his special relationship to God the Father. With these words, I really believe, Jesus is kindly reminding Mary and Joseph who his true Father is and what his true mission is. But, even as the disciples do throughout their time with Jesus, Mary and Joseph struggle to understand the full identity of the Christ. Who is this 12-year-old boy? What does he mean?They were good parents. They both understood he was exceptionally special. And so they didn’t take offense even though they didn’t fully get it.To me, what Jesus says to Mary and Joseph in this passage seems natural—even seems easy, at one level, to comprehend. It shouldn’t, at all, make us blush. None of us should worry that Jesus is showing dishonor to his earthly parents here when he says these things. This is no jaw-dropping scandal.Ironically, Luke does report a jaw-dropping scandal here which most of us, when we read this text, completely miss. I just want to bring it to your attention then allow you to ponder it on your own; because once you’ve noticed this scandal you’ll certainly never miss it again.See, after all seems to be resolved in this story. Luke gives us this tidbit:
And he [that is Jesus] went down with them and came to Nazareth and was submissive to them (v. 51).
Friends, behold our God! He was submissive to them! Jesus, help your mom with the dishes. Jesus, take out the trash. Jesus, help your brother find his sandals. Jesus, sweep the floor. He was submissive to them. Scandalous!We live in a time when the wealthy believe their power gives them the right to use other people for their pleasure. They don’t just believe it; they brag about it. We live in a world where we’re encouraged to write people off if they wrong us. “Get rid of the toxic people in your life,” we’re told.Yet, here’s the God of the universe walking back from Jerusalem with two of his creatures (mom and dad) and submitting to them. What a beautiful scandal! Don’t miss it.
To be fair, there is one accusation leveled at Jesus by Mary in this account. When she finally finds him in the temple, she asks him:Son, why have you treated us so (v. 48)?I would say that doubtlessly she intended this as a kind of reprimand of him at that very moment. A kind of—How could you do such a thing to your parents? But, oh, what a difference just a little time and just a little understanding can make with a question like this one.Did you know it’s very likely that Mary was one of the witnesses or sources whom Luke consulted when writing his gospel. How else would he get details like what Mary treasured in her heart? Or what Mary and Joseph didn’t understand about Jesus’ response? No, it’s very likely she talked with Luke.If so, consider what that question would have meant to her after the cross and the resurrection, after gathering a greater understanding of Jesus’ true identity. In the light of time and understanding, Mary would have remembered her question and would have felt shame at her indignation. She would have been so humbled when she thought about her accusing question.And, “Why have you treated us so [badly]?” would’ve been transformed—by time and understanding—into, “Why have you treated us so [beautifully]?”
Why have you treated us with such respect and dignity?
Why have you treated us with such grace and mercy?
Why have you treated us with such love and compassion?
1 Alfred Plummer, Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to Saint Luke, 76. Darrell Bock also references this apocryphal account in his commentary: Luke 1:1-9:50, 267.
2 See Darrell Bock, Luke 1:1-9:50, 263-264.
