The Birth of Jesus From
Matthew
The debate still goes on regarding
the time of Jesus’ birth. Many would probably agree
that His birth was not in December, and they point to
the fact that the December 25th date is based upon an
old pagan holiday. Without getting into the dispute
about the exact date, this article will focus upon the
fact of His birth and several of those Old Testament
prophecies that were fulfilled in that most important
event.
Of the four gospels only Matthew and
Luke give us an overview of the events surrounding Jesus’
birth. This should not surprise us when we consider
the purposes of the four accounts, and how they differ.
Matthew was a Jew who wrote his gospel to Jews about
a Jew who was the Jewish Messiah. Mark wrote to a different
group of people. Being in Rome at the time, the Roman
world was his target and his emphasis was upon Jesus
being the Servant. Luke presented Jesus in His perfect
Manhood, and gives a fresh and detailed description
of His birth. John’s gospel is different from the other
three. It was the last to be written, probably some
years after AD 70 and the destruction of Jerusalem,
and his focus was upon the deity of Jesus.
There is no contradiction between the
four writers and their work. The gospels present four
different views of the same event, much like four different
people witnessing the same event from four different
places. In this way each one adds detail and relevance
to the story.
But, Matthew is special in a certain
way. In order for us to understand the incarnation
of God the Son it is necessary for us to appreciate
the Jewishness of the event. And there is absolutely
no way to understand the Jewishness of the incarnation
without knowing the Old Testament prophecies that predicted
it.
There are numerous prophecies related
to the birth of Messiah, but this overview will be limited
to those specifically mentioned by Matthew.
The first prophecy Matthew mentioned
is in chapter one, verses 22,23: Now all this took
place that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet
might be fulfilled, saying, "Behold, the virgin
shall be with child, and shall bear a Son, and they
shall call His name Immanuel," which translated
means, "God with us." This prophecy is
from Isaiah 7:14, written some 700 years before the
event actually happened.
The reason Matthew included this reference
was probably because every Jew was at least somewhat
familiar with the text. You see, the nation was under
the heavy hand of Rome and its puppet king, Herod.
Due to his almost uncanny military and diplomatic abilities
he, for several decades, governed the Jews who hated
him and at the same time kept Rome satisfied with his
administration. The people were looking for some kind
of relief, and at least some of them were looking for
their Messiah (note Luke’s account of Simeon and Anna
in chapter two). In order to show his readers the validity
of Jesus’ credentials Matthew referred them to the Isaiah
prophecy and the literal way in which it was fulfilled
in the birth of Jesus.
The next prophecy Matthew mentions
is in chapter 2, verse 6: "But as for you,
Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans
of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler
in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, From
the days of eternity." The context of this
prophecy is the conversation between Herod and the Magi
who arrived in Jerusalem looking for the Jewish King
that had been born. A clear understanding requires
a little background as to who these men were and how
they knew about the birth of the King of the Jews.
The Magi were from the east, probably
from Persia, modern Iran. They studied astrology and
sciences such as primitive medicine. In the course
of their study of the night sky they noticed a star
to their west (when Luke says they “saw His star in
the east” he means the Magi were in the east, not the
star). How did they know the star was somehow associated
with the birth of a King? Nobody knows for certain,
but it is probable that the Jewish teaching about the
coming Messiah was still prevalent in that area of the
world from the days of the Jewish Babylonian captivity.
The answer to the Magi’s question about
the birth of the King was Bethlehem, the city of David
the great king. If anybody in those days had wanted
to know where they were on God’s time line for sending
the Redeemer all they had to do was watch Bethlehem.
Bethlehem was the key. And, the only thing that has
changed in that regard in the last 2000 years is the
place people should be watching today. If anybody today
wants to know where we are on God’s time line for the
rapture of the church all they have to do is watch Israel.
Israel is the key.
What is fascinating is that the pagans
were more interested in His birth than the Jews. How
do we know this? Because they knew something of the
prophecy, saw the star and took action. At the same
time the Jewish religious leaders, who also knew the
scripture and that He would be born in Bethlehem, placed
little or no importance to it. If they had been living
in expectation of the coming Messiah, while knowing
the place of His birth (and they did) they would have
had priests posted in Bethlehem on a rotating basis
carefully noting the circumstances of the birth of every
little boy. But, alas, the church must not be too hard
on those Jewish religious leaders, for most Christians
give little or no thought to His coming for His church,
though the scriptures are open for all to see and clearly
understand.
Another prophetic fulfillment had to
do with Herod’s murder of the little boys in Bethlehem.
Joseph, in a dream, was warned to take Jesus and Mary
and flee to Egypt, which he did. When news came that
Herod had died Joseph then loaded up his family and
brought them back to Israel. Matthew clearly says this,
too, was the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy,
And he arose and took the Child and His mother by
night, and departed for Egypt; and was there until the
death of Herod, that what was spoken by the Lord through
the prophet might be fulfilled, saying, "Out of
Egypt did I call My Son” (Hosea 11:1; Matthew 2:14,15).
Matthew then records that the killing
of the little boys, though quite terrible, was also
a prophetic fulfillment, Then that which was 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 refused
to be comforted, Because they were no more” (Jeremiah
31:15, Matthew 2:17,18). Nobody knows for sure how
many baby boys were killed that day in Bethlehem, but
at least one estimate, based upon the estimated population
at that time, says it was as few as seven and as many
as twenty. Because they were two years old and younger
it is possible the visit of the Magi happened when Jesus
was well past the age of a new-born.
Returning from Egypt, Joseph took his
family to Nazareth, a small town in the region of Galilee.
Again, prophecy was fulfilled, for Matthew records,
But when he heard that Archelaus was reigning over
Judea in place of his father Herod, he was afraid to
go there. And being warned by God in a dream, he departed
for the regions of Galilee, and came and resided in
a city called Nazareth, that what was spoken through
the prophets might be fulfilled, "He shall be called
a Nazarene” (Isaiah 11:1; Matthew 2:22,23).
However, it is at this point that a
question is raised. Since neither Nazareth nor Nazarene
is mentioned in the Old Testament, how can Matthew say
Jesus’ residence in Nazareth is a fulfillment of prophecy?
The answer, it is believed, lies in the meaning of the
word “shoot” in Isaiah 11:1. From The Zondervan Pictorial
Bible Dictionary we find these words, “It is usually
thought that he refers to Isaiah 11:1, where the Messiah
is called netser or shoot out of the roots of
Jesse. The name Nazareth was probably derived from
the same root. Matthew sees a fulfillment of Isaiah’s
prophecy in the parents of Jesus taking up their residence
in Nazareth.” (“Nazareth.” The Zondervan Pictorial
Bible Dictionary. 1967 ed.).
We believe this to be the case for
the simple reason Matthew was writing under the inspiration
of the Holy Spirit. Further, because we are not familiar
with every detail involved in the birth of Jesus we
are in no position to challenge Matthew’s statement.
Westerners 2000 years removed from the event itself
cannot be privy to every word spoken by every player
involved. If the Holy Spirit says it was a prophetic
fulfillment we accept His words at face value.
It is interesting that in just the
first two chapters of Matthew we find no less than five
instances where events happened in order to fulfill
prophecy regarding the birth of Jesus. Furthermore,
they were fulfilled literally. There can be no allegorizing
or spiritualizing these events. They happened in just
the manner the prophets said they would happen.
So, what might be the meaning of these
things? Certainly, we understand they were in direct
relation to the birth of Jesus, and the Christian world
recites and celebrates this magnificent story each December.
Yet, there is more. We must pause in our study and
consider something else. If these events happened exactly
as they were prophesied, can we find any logical reason
to believe the balance of the prophecies written about
Messiah will be fulfilled in anything less than a literal
way? I believe the laws of scriptural interpretation,
the logical means of human communication and the scriptural
context of God’s prophetic word all demand a plain-sense
and logical interpretation.
If the prophetic events listed by Matthew
in his gospel were all literally fulfilled, then why
should any student assign anything but a literal fulfillment
to Matthew 24, etc.? The Jews of the first century
reading Matthew’s account would not even consider anything
but the plain-sense meaning. Still, most people in
the modern church turn scripture on its ear when interpreting
future events, thus revealing a dramatic inconsistency
in how they study and teach the Bible.
We can be thankful to God that we have
the account of the birth of Jesus. The narrative of
God becoming human flesh and finishing His life with
absolute victory over sin along with His triumph over
death and the grave is the greatest story ever told.
There would be no salvation without His virgin birth,
vicarious atonement in death and His resurrection.
And, along that line of thinking there would be no hope
without the promise of His return for His church.
Most of us really enjoy the Christmas
season with family gatherings and church celebrations,
but without Easter the Christmas holiday would be void
of joy. And, although His birth and His resurrection
are indispensable, yet we would have no hope if it were
not for the promise of His coming for us. Each aspect
of the plan of redemption has its own important role
to play. What has happened we accept literally. What
is before us we must expect literally. DLM
|
