First Suday after
Christmas
Matthew 2:13-23
Exegetical Notes by Brian
Stoffregen
1 Christmas A: Matthew 2:13-23 --
Exegetical Notes
The material in chapter 2 is unique
to Matthew. It can be divided into
four parts with each of them
containing an OT quote, probably inserted
by Matthew into traditional material:
vv. 1-12 - The Visit of the Magi -
with a quote from Micah 5:2
vv. 13-15 - The Escape to Egypt -
with a quote from Hosea 11:1
vv. 16-18 - The Killing of the
Children - with a quote from Jeremiah 31:15
vv. 19-23 - The Return from Egypt -
with a quote from the prophets
(note the plural! -- no known source)
Liturgically, we upset the narrative
of chapter 2 by reading verses
13-23 *before* verses 1-12, which are
assigned for the Epiphany of Our
Lord, January 6, (which, this year
will be celebrated on Sunday).
Our text is the last three parts
listed above. However, the incident
in these verses is "set up" by the
star in the first part. If the star
had led the magi directly to the
child in Bethlehem rather than to
Herod in Jerusalem, there wouldn't be
the massacre of the innocents
with Joseph and the family fleeing to
Egypt to protect the life of
Jesus.
As a general theme, life after
Christmas is not all that sweet.
Following the birth there is anger
and murder, weeping and wailing,
moving and resettling. After our
wonderful Christmas celebrations we
are again confronted with the fact
that the kingdom has not fully
arrived. The "peace on earth" sung by
the angels at Jesus' birth (in
Luke), is followed by death and
destruction, suffering and evil
(according to Matthew's account).
Nearly every day as we read the
papers or watch the news on TV, we
hear of more deaths in Iraq. We
hear of turmoil in Israel. In most of
our larger cities, someone will
be murdered. There is a lack of peace
between nations and even within
nations.
Salvation for Joseph and his family
meant hearing and believing the
word from God and then doing it -- as
one who packed up and moved last
summer -- it's not fun. It's hard
work.
IRONY
There is also great irony in this
section. Chapter 1 proclaims that
Jesus is the Son of God -- Emmanuel
-- God with us, but now we see
"God-with-us" fleeing for his life.
We see the "savior" needing to be
saved from Herod's anger. Two
thoughts from this "reversal": (1) It is
an indication of the "emptying" of
Jesus who comes as a suffering
servant, rather than a powerful god.
(2) For Matthew, Jesus "needed"
to do these things to fulfill OT
prophecies. Jesus comes "to fulfill
all righteousness" (3:15). He comes
to do what God requires of him and
not to fulfill his own desires or the
desires of the people. Keener
(_A Commentary on the Gospel of
Matthew_) writes: "... this text shows
that God called his son Jesus to
identify with the suffering and exile
of his people as he identified with
their exodus" (p. 112).
Matthew 2 indicates two responses to
the revelation about Jesus --
*Gentile* Magi come to worship the
child -- the Jewish Messiah! The
*Jewish* king seeks to destroy the
child -- the Jewish Messiah! It is
important, especially in Matthew, to
recognize that it is not all "the
Jews" who reject Jesus. It is likely
that in Matthew's Christian
community, there were many Jewish
converts.
Warren Carter (_Matthew and the
Margins: A Sociopolitical and
Religious Reading_) offers this
dichotomy of responses:
Chapter 2 contrasts two responses to
God's initiative. (1) The empire strikes back as Herod, Rome's vassal
king, and Jerusalem's settled elite of chief priests and scribes
respond negatively. Herod employs military, religious, and social
resources and strategies to thwart God's work. His murderous actions,
allied with the inaction of the religious elite, demonstrate the
oppressive structures from which Jesus is to save the world (1:21).
< (2) The new creation expands
through unlikely people who embrace
God's purposes: the very mobile magi,
Gentiles who have neither power
nor valued knowledge, witness to the
dawning of God's new age. And the
nonelite and mobile Joseph and Mary
receive angelic revelations, guard
the life of "the child," and protect
the divine purposes against
Herod. God's purposes prevail with
Herod's death, though the ominous
phrase "Archelaus reigned ... in the
place of his father" (2:22) warns
the audience that the pernicious
threat of empire is omnipresent for a
marginal community of disciples.
These responses are sometimes falsely
presented as a contrast between "rejecting Jews" and "believing
Gentiles." The role of Joseph and Mary, and Herod's origin as an
Idumean, clearly indicate that this division is not convincing. Rather
the division consists of a sociopolitical dynamic between the powerful
settled center (Herod, the religious elite) and the apparently
powerless, insignificant, and mobile margins (magi, Joseph and Mary).
[p. 73]
At Jesus' birth, it is King Herod who
seeks to destroy Jesus. At his
crucifixion, other Jewish and Roman
authorities seek to destroy Jesus.
In both cases, they are unsuccessful.
Jesus is taken away for a time,
and then he is brought back.
There are some connections between
our text and the passion. The word
_apollumi_ is used of Herod's desire
to "destroy/kill" the child in
2:13; and the chief priests' and
elders' desire to "have Jesus killed"
in 27:20. The word _empaizo_ is used
to refer to what the Magi do to
Herod in 2:16 ("tricked" in NRSV);
but its four other uses refer to
Jesus being "mocked" by others at his
crucifixion (20:19; 27:29, 31,
41). Our text might be used to
pre-figure the crucifixion/resurrection
event.
GOD IS HERE AND THERE
Verses 13-15 and 19-23 have many
parallels.
* Both begin with a genitive absolute
and end with a (supposed) quote.
* The words: "Behold an angel of the
Lord appeared in a dream to
Joseph" are exactly the same in both.
* The words from the angel: "Getting
up take the child and his mother"
are exactly the same in both.
* Joseph's actions: "Getting up he
took the child and his mother" are
exactly the same in both.
The God who came to Joseph in
Bethlehem does exactly the same in
Egypt! "God-is-with-us" when in
Bethlehem and when in Egypt.
OT IMAGES
Matthew through the narrative and
through the quotes brings in a
multitude of OT images.
The flight to Egypt and the name
"Joseph" recalls how "Joseph," son of
Jacob/Israel, was sold by his
brothers and taken to Egypt (Gen
37:12-36) -- later to provide a place
of refuge for his family during
the famine in Canaan (Gen 46-47).
However, since it wasn't persecution
that the family was fleeing; some
scholars have also looked at the
Jacob/Israel flight from Laben (Gen
31) -- but this flight, as far as
I can tell, never gets to Egypt.
Egypt has traditionally been a place
of refuge for those fleeing
tyranny in Palestine. When King
Solomon tries to kill Jeroboam, he
flees to Egypt (1K 11:40). When King
Jehoiakim wants to kill Uriah the
prophet, he flees to Egypt, but he is
captured, brought back to
Jerusalem, and killed (Jer 26:21-23).
It would be quite believable
that Joseph would have fled with his
family to Egypt.
The quote in v. 15 from Hosea 11:1
illustrates Matthew's loose way (by
our standards) with OT scripture.
First of all, he has been talking
about the flight *to* Egypt, and the
quote is about *leaving* Egypt.
Secondly, "my son" in the quote
refers to the nation of Israel -- not
a specific individual. In fact, the
LXX uses "children" rather than
"son". Thirdly, Hosea follows the
quote with a chastisement of Israel.
Something Matthew certainly doesn't
intend to do with Joseph and his
family.
Regardless of Hosea's context,
Matthew uses the quote to: (1) connect
Jesus with Moses and the Exodus and
(2) repeat Jesus' identity as
God's son -- which can only be
revealed by God (see Matthew 16:17).
The Moses connection continues in vv.
16-18 with Jesus being saved
from Herod's anger and the killing of
the infants as Moses was saved
from Pharoah's anger and the killing
of male infants (Ex 2:1-10).
It is estimated that Bethlehem was a
town of about 1000 at this time
and, at the most, included 20 male
infants. Later legends have greatly
expanded the number of infants killed
to 14,000 (Byzantine liturgy);
64,000 (Syrian calendar of saints);
144,000 from Rev 14:1-5 -- the
number of those "who have not defiled
themselves with women".
DID THE KILLING OF THE CHILDREN
REALLY HAPPEN?
There are no other records of such a
massacre. No other writing in the
NT mentions it. While Josephus tells
us that Herod ordered the
execution of three of his sons; and
at his burial one member of every
family was to be slain so that the
nation might really mourn (Ant.
XVII. 181), he says nothing about the
Bethlehem massacre. His writings
indicate that Herod was the type of
person who could have ordered such
a slaughter and the small number of
children might have gone
unrecorded.
The plot of a king fearing for his
power and seeking to kill any
possible usurpers is very common.
Besides the similar incident in
Moses' life, there are similar
stories in Greek and Roman mythologies
as well as in Egyptian and Babylonian
folklore. Matthew (or an earlier
story-teller) could have imported
such a story and applied it to
Jesus' early life.
Raymond Brown (_The Birth of the
Messiah)) makes this conclusion:
There are serious reasons for
thinking that the flight to Egypt and the massacre at Bethlehem may not
be historical. Yet, at the same time, if one can trace the basic story
to another origin, there are good clues to why it has been cast in its
present form. A story of a massacre, based on the Pharaoh's massacre of
the male children in Egypt, could plausibly be attributed to Herod,
especially amid the horrors of the last years of his life. To ensure
mourning at his funeral, Herod wanted his soldiers instructed to kill
notable political prisoners upon the news of his death. His goal was
expressed thus: "So shall all Judea and every household weep for me,
whether they wish it or not" -- we are not far from Matthew's
scriptural comment upon the Bethlehem scene in terms of Rachel mourning
for her children. Plausible too is the Matthean story's insistence that
the massacre at Bethlehem came out of Herod's fear of the birth of a
rival King.... As for the flight to Egypt, ... Egypt was the standard
place of refuge for those fleeing the tyranny of kings in Palestine. As
with the story of the magi, such plausible details tell us nothing
about the historicity but tell us a great deal about intelligibility.
Matthew's story would not be fantastic to the reader who knew the
history of Herodian times. [pp. 227-8]
The first time I preached on this
text -- I was in seminary and was
filling a vacant pulpit for a couple
of Sundays -- I raised the
possibility that the massacre of the
innocents might *not* have
happened historically. I was thanked
by a number of people. The
gruesomeness of murdering infants can
keep some people from hearing
the message Matthew intends. On the
other hand, there are
congregations where such questioning
of the factual history of a
biblical text would raise charges of
heresy against the preacher and
keep them from hearing the message.
Keener (_A Commentary on the Gospel
of Matthew_) concludes: "The event
is thus neither historically
documented nor historically implausible"
(p. 111).
MORE OT QUOTES
Like the earlier quote, Matthew's
quote of Jeremiah 31:15 pays no
attention to the original context.
Rachel, wife of Jacob and mother of
Joseph and Benjamin, is weeping for
"her children" (Ephraim! in v. 18)
who have been taken into exile. It is
not clear whether Jeremiah
refers to the Assyrian deportation or
the Babylon exile. However, the
LORD comforts her in v. 16 with the
promise that "they shall come back
from the land of the enemy."
Jeremiah's message is one of joy and hope
-- which is not found in Matthew's
reference.
Thus Matthew picks up the two major
events of Israel's history: the
Exodus and the Exile in these verses.
The salvation delivered by God
in these two major events will be
surpassed through the one called
Jesus.
In words nearly identical to Exodus
4:19 LXX, Joseph is told that
"those seeking the life of the child
have died" -- (another connection
with Moses). When Herod died in 4 BC,
his territory was divided
between his three sons: Archelaus
received Judea, Samaria and Idumea;
Herod Antipas received Galilee and
Perea; and Philip received the
region east and north of Lake Galilee.
Perhaps like the Exodus, Joseph is
led by God through dreams "into the
land of Israel" and then "into the
region of Galilee," but the
decision to settle "in the city
called Nazareth" seemed to have come
from his own volition. Perhaps as
another illustration of this, Jesus
has commanded us to make disciples of
all nations -- that is not a
decision for us to make, but the
details of how each congregation and
individual will carry out this
command are left to one's own
decision-making process.
Nazareth is never mentioned in
pre-Christian Jewish writings, yet
archeology indicates that the city
has existed from the 7th century
BC. It was an obscure city. Nothing
notable about it.
The quote in v. 23 has no known OT
reference. Perhaps that is why
Matthew uses "prophets" (plural). It
is clear that for Matthew,
"Nazorean" means that Jesus lived in
Nazareth. In addition, it sounds
like it could be related to _nazir_
(nazirite) which referred to one
consecrated or made holy to God by a
vow. Both Samson and Samuel were
such people. However, Jesus didn't
demonstrate the Nazirite
aestheticism of drinking no wine. In
the LXX, _nazir_ is either
transliterated or translated with the
Greek _hagios_ = "holy" or "holy
one". Jesus was known as "the Holy
One of God" (Mk 1:24; Lk 4:34; Jn
6:69). "Nazorean" also sounds similar
to _netser_ = "branch" from
Isaiah 11:1: "A shoot shall come out
from the stump of Jesse, and a
*branch* shall grow out of his
roots." Perhaps Matthew was a punster,
and intended all of these word-play
connections. [These possible
connections are presented by Brown in
_The Birth of the Messiah_.]
Although Matthew was not the first
gospel written, it is the first
book in the NT. As our text
indicates, Matthew makes a bridge between
the old salvation stories and
prophecies and the new salvation event
in Jesus. I think that that's one of
the main messages he is trying to
relay to us.
A possible application might center
on forced moves: the elderly whose
health or financial situation forces
them to move from their home
place; the young whose jobs and
transfers force them to move from town
to town; the expanding families who
need to find larger housing, or
clergy receiving a new call. This
text tells us that Jesus knows what
it's like to be forced to move and
leave behind friends, family, and
security. This text also reminds us
that God is in the new place --
even if it is Egypt. Also, our
comfort and security should not be
centered in the old home-place or
hometown or old church building, but
in God.
I read an article, I think, in _The
Lutheran_ that made a distinction
between "Home Church" and "Church
Home." When one has moved away,
one's faith and church life can't
stay back in the old home church.
The active life of faith needs to
have a new church home.
Another application, perhaps further
removed from the text is the
analogy that we all deserve to die.
We are not innocent infants (if
they are really "innocent"), but
sinful human beings. However, just as
God's power saved Jesus from the
death meant for him, so God's grace
also saves us from the death meant
for us. This "salvation" required
faith on the part of Joseph -- to
believe the word of God and act on
it -- so also we need to believe the
Word and act on it -- another key
theme in the gospel of Matthew.
Carter's (_Matthew and the Margins_)
concluding words on these verses:
God's initiative in the conception
and birth of Jesus (1:18-25) is met by two responses: resistance,
violence, and rejection from the center elite of political and
religious power in Jerusalem, and worship, trust, and obedience from
those who, in the perspective of the center, occupy the insignificant
margins where God's purposes of liberation are being accomplished. The
danger and evil of empire constantly threaten and oppose those
purposes, places, and people. But the empire does not have the final
word. God's purposes are protected. [p. 89]
MODERN REFUGEES AND MASSACRES
Philip Pfatteicher (_Festivals and
Commemorations_) suggests
remembering "the innocents of all
ages killed in the slaughters of
history, such as
* Sand Creed, Colorado (November 29,
1864), a slaughter of 450 unarmed
Cheyenne men, women, and children.
* Wounded Knee, South Dakota
(December 29, 1890), a slaughter of
nearly three hundred Sioux men,
women, and children
* the massacre by the Turks of the
Armenians who lived in the Turkish
part of Armenia (April 24, 1915)
* Guernica (April 26, 1937),
destruction of a Spanish town by German
and Italian aircraft in the first
mass bombing of an urban community
* Latvia (June 13-14, 1941), over
fourteen thousand Latvians departed
to slave labor camps
* Lidice (June 10, 1942),
obliteration of a village by the Nazis in
reprisal for the death of Reinhard
Heydrich
* Oradour (June 10, 1944),
obliteration of a French town and all but
ten of its inhabitants by the Nazis
* Dachau, Aushwitz, and the
extermination camps (1939-1945)
* Dresden (February 13, 1945), fire
bombed by the Allies
* Hiroshima (August 6, 1945) and
Nagasaki (August 9, 1945), the first
and second atomic bombs used in
warfare
* the martyrs behind the Iron Curtain
As we look at Joseph, Mary, &
Jesus as refugees, one might also
remember the millions of refugees in
our century. The following
numbers come from the United Nations
Refugee Agency (www.unhcr.org).
Numbers at a glance – people of
concern to UNHCR
In North America ..1,143,000
In Latin America..3,543,000
In Europe.........3,427,000
In Africa.........9,753,000
In Asia..........14,911,000
In Oceania...........86,000
Internally
Asylum
Displaced
Stateless
Refugees Seekers
Persons Returnees
People Other
Africa
2,608,000 244,000 5,373,000
1,356,000 100,000 72,000
Asia
4,538,000 90,000 3,879,000
1,221,000 5,027,000 157,000
Europe
1,612,000 240,000
542,000 21,000
679,000 332,000
Latin
America
41,000 16,000
3,000,000
— —
486,000
North
America
995,000
148,000
—
—
— —
Oceania
84,000
2,000
—
—
— —
TOTAL
9,878,000 740,000
12,794,000 2,598,000 5,806,000 1,046,000
Brian Stoffregen
Faith Lutheran Church, 2215 S 8th
Ave., Yuma, AZ 85364
e-mail: brian.stoffregen@gmail.com
from
pericopeonline@yahoogroups.com