PDA

View Full Version : the story of when Jesus was twelve



Nihil Obstat
Mar 18th 2011, 04:49 AM
I wanted to share here some notes of mine on Luke 2:41-52.

1. This story occurs during Passover (v. 41). Jesus was crucified during Passover.
2. His parents were unaware that He had stayed behind (v. 43). The married couple returning to Emmaus were unaware that He walked with them (24:16).
3. They lost the young Jesus for three days (v. 46). Jesus was buried for three days.
4. His parents did not find Him in the caravan (v. 45). His disciples did not find His body in the tomb (24:3).
5. They were anxiously looking for Him (v. 48). The disciples had been anxious about what He as the Messiah might accomplish (24:21).
6. His parents questioned Him about His reasons for staying behind (v. 48). Cleopas questioned Him about not knowing the sad things that had taken place (24:18)
7. Jesus rebuked His parents for not knowing that, now being considered a man, He would begin His mission (v. 49). Jesus rebuked the married couple for not knowing the mission of the Messiah (24:26).
8. They found Him discussing Scripture (vv. 46-47). He opened up the Scriptures to the two disciples (24:27).
9. He amazed everyone who heard Him (v. 47). Their hearts burned within them as He spoke (24:32).
10. His parents did not understand His words (v. 50). The married couple did not understand the prophets (24:25).
11. He went with them to their house in Nazareth (v. 51). He went with them to their house in their village (24:28-29).
12. Mary treasured these things in her heart (v. 51). Their hearts burned within them anew (24:32).

There may very well be more parallels than just these twelve, but these stand out the clearest to me. What does this all say to you? One initial thought I had was that it caused me to wonder how much of the story of when Jesus was twelve (only found in Luke) might have been embellished, so to speak, or even formulated by tradition, that it might better mirror the crucifixion and resurrection of the Messiah (found throughout the NT by several authors). I would think this would be practiced for more than rhetorical reasons. What might some of these reasons be, if you think there's anything to that thought? Or, if you disagree, what are your reasons against such a thing occurring?

Happy to share. - astro

The Mighty Sword
Mar 18th 2011, 04:53 AM
What a _________________

Thanks for sharing.

notuptome
Mar 18th 2011, 12:41 PM
Who determined that the two disciples on the road to Emmaus were a married couple?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

keck553
Mar 18th 2011, 03:08 PM
13. Jesus submitted to his parents and returned home with them.

nzyr
Mar 18th 2011, 07:35 PM
Nice observation. I believe it's proof that the Holy Spirit wrote the bible. There's lots of parallels like that in the bible. Like Able was a shepherd, and David, and Jesus is the good shepherd.

keck553
Mar 18th 2011, 07:54 PM
Nice observation. I believe it's proof that the Holy Spirit wrote the bible. There's lots of parallels like that in the bible. Like Able was a shepherd, and David, and Jesus is the good shepherd.

Or consistancy.

Servant89
Mar 18th 2011, 09:23 PM
After 3 days they found out the child Jesus was asking questions.... It was forbidden in Mosaic law for the priests to minister before they were 30 years old. That is why Jesus did not make statements as a boy, he asked questions. Jesus asked questions to those walking to Emaus too.

Num 4:3 From thirty years old and upward even until fifty years old, all that enter into the host, to do the work in the tabernacle of the congregation.

Num 4:23 From thirty years old and upward until fifty years old shalt thou number them; all that enter in to perform the service, to do the work in the tabernacle of the congregation.

Num 4:30 From thirty years old and upward even unto fifty years old shalt thou number them, every one that entereth into the service, to do the work of the tabernacle of the congregation.

Num 4:35 From thirty years old and upward even unto fifty years old, every one that entereth into the service, for the work in the tabernacle of the congregation:

Num 4:39 From thirty years old and upward even unto fifty years old, every one that entereth into the service, for the work in the tabernacle of the congregation,

Num 4:43 From thirty years old and upward even unto fifty years old, every one that entereth into the service, for the work in the tabernacle of the congregation,

Num 4:47 From thirty years old and upward even unto fifty years old, every one that came to do the service of the ministry, and the service of the burden in the tabernacle of the congregation.

Shalom

Firstfruits
Mar 18th 2011, 09:32 PM
I wanted to share here some notes of mine on Luke 2:41-52.

1. This story occurs during Passover (v. 41). Jesus was crucified during Passover.
2. His parents were unaware that He had stayed behind (v. 43). The married couple returning to Emmaus were unaware that He walked with them (24:16).
3. They lost the young Jesus for three days (v. 46). Jesus was buried for three days.
4. His parents did not find Him in the caravan (v. 45). His disciples did not find His body in the tomb (24:3).
5. They were anxiously looking for Him (v. 48). The disciples had been anxious about what He as the Messiah might accomplish (24:21).
6. His parents questioned Him about His reasons for staying behind (v. 48). Cleopas questioned Him about not knowing the sad things that had taken place (24:18)
7. Jesus rebuked His parents for not knowing that, now being considered a man, He would begin His mission (v. 49). Jesus rebuked the married couple for not knowing the mission of the Messiah (24:26).
8. They found Him discussing Scripture (vv. 46-47). He opened up the Scriptures to the two disciples (24:27).
9. He amazed everyone who heard Him (v. 47). Their hearts burned within them as He spoke (24:32).
10. His parents did not understand His words (v. 50). The married couple did not understand the prophets (24:25).
11. He went with them to their house in Nazareth (v. 51). He went with them to their house in their village (24:28-29).
12. Mary treasured these things in her heart (v. 51). Their hearts burned within them anew (24:32).

There may very well be more parallels than just these twelve, but these stand out the clearest to me. What does this all say to you? One initial thought I had was that it caused me to wonder how much of the story of when Jesus was twelve (only found in Luke) might have been embellished, so to speak, or even formulated by tradition, that it might better mirror the crucifixion and resurrection of the Messiah (found throughout the NT by several authors). I would think this would be practiced for more than rhetorical reasons. What might some of these reasons be, if you think there's anything to that thought? Or, if you disagree, what are your reasons against such a thing occurring?

Happy to share. - astro

Thanks Astrongerthanhe,

I am sure there are many more, happy hunting.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Nihil Obstat
Mar 19th 2011, 02:31 AM
Thank you for all your comments, but I was more wondering if you guys had anything to say about my thought that perhaps the story of when Jesus was twelve might have been formulated by tradition in order to mirror the account of the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus. Is it possible that this occurred? If so, to what purpose? Thanks!

Servant89
Mar 19th 2011, 08:19 PM
...perhaps the story of when Jesus was twelve might have been formulated by tradition in order to mirror the account of the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus. Is it possible that this occurred?

I do not consider the Bible the work of cunning men.

Shalom

Nihil Obstat
Mar 20th 2011, 02:32 PM
You misunderstood my suggestion. We know that Luke got much of his information from interviewing people (1:1-4), and so I was wondering if this story, for example, had over time taken on certain characteristics of the account of the crucifixion and resurrection. For example, did the young Jesus really get lost for *three* days? This is more what I'm talking about.

BrckBrln
Mar 20th 2011, 04:55 PM
You misunderstood my suggestion. We know that Luke got much of his information from interviewing people (1:1-4), and so I was wondering if this story, for example, had over time taken on certain characteristics of the account of the crucifixion and resurrection. For example, did the young Jesus really get lost for *three* days? This is more what I'm talking about.

I was rather stunned by the initial reaction to your OP, but now I think you will hear a chorus of boos. :)

Personally, I'm very open to your suggestion.

Phish
Mar 20th 2011, 05:54 PM
You misunderstood my suggestion. We know that Luke got much of his information from interviewing people (1:1-4), and so I was wondering if this story, for example, had over time taken on certain characteristics of the account of the crucifixion and resurrection. For example, did the young Jesus really get lost for *three* days? This is more what I'm talking about.

I personally don't think the story took on any characteristics but rather a representaion of those exact events. This is why Gods wword is so vibrant and exciting to go through because His fingerprints are everywhere, only He could put together a collection of writings over several thousand years from at least 40 authors and call it His word. I don't think God would tell anything through His Word that wasn't true just by his very nature with the exception of Parables which are understood to be storys to illistrate a point. we are talking about the life of His Son, would God allow parts of His life to take on false accounts just to link to two events. He is God, he could easily just plan the events.

BroRog
Mar 20th 2011, 06:12 PM
Thank you for all your comments, but I was more wondering if you guys had anything to say about my thought that perhaps the story of when Jesus was twelve might have been formulated by tradition in order to mirror the account of the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus. Is it possible that this occurred? If so, to what purpose? Thanks!I read your list of comparisons and didn't find them to be parallel.

thethirdtuttle
Mar 20th 2011, 11:50 PM
astrongerthanhe:

While I appreciate what you are saying, I would have to respectfully agree with Phish and Servant89 on this one. I see it as much more likely that God superintended/orchestrated/engineered the circumstances of the life of His Son so that every aspect of it had deep spiritual significance, rather than human authors adding on false/untrue traditions to make His life fit some sort of pattern. Luke was divinely inspired to write what he did, so he didn't need to lie/make things up in order for the stories he wrote to fit some sort of arbitrary and/or predetermined pattern he decided on himself ahead of time before he started writing. Besides, if he did add things/traditions/lies to the stories to make them fit some sort of pattern, and it was found out later that he did so, that would discredit both himself as a historian and his message as an evangelist. That's how I see it, anyways. God bless, and have a great night in the Lord!

Yours in Christ,

Benjamin

Servant89
Mar 21st 2011, 08:39 AM
You misunderstood my suggestion. We know that Luke got much of his information from interviewing people (1:1-4), and so I was wondering if this story, for example, had over time taken on certain characteristics of the account of the crucifixion and resurrection. For example, did the young Jesus really get lost for *three* days? This is more what I'm talking about.

I consider the Bible the work of the HS which is perfect. To me the Bible is free of human negative influence that added errors. If the Bible says he was lost 3 days, he was lost 3 days. That is how I see it.

Peace

Nihil Obstat
Mar 21st 2011, 01:38 PM
I read your list of comparisons and didn't find them to be parallel.

Maybe "parallel" was too strong of a word. "Echoes" is probably more what I was going for here.

Nihil Obstat
Mar 21st 2011, 02:00 PM
I consider the Bible the work of the HS which is perfect.

No one here is arguing against that belief. We all share that belief, myself included.


To me the Bible is free of human negative influence that added errors.

There is a pretty sizable difference between "tradition" and "error". The Bible contains a number of inaccurate traditions, some spoken by God, others affirmed by Jesus. No big deal. Yahweh wants to communicate with people, and people have traditions to help formulate their thinking. To me this speaks of the humility of God, and causes me to be thankful for His ways!


If the Bible says he was lost 3 days, he was lost 3 days.

So you might say that Luke added this story because it really did play out along a similar pattern as that of the crucifixion and resurrection, am I right? I'm fine with that, because my main reason for starting this thread was that I might better understand why Luke put this story in his Gospel account at all. How I mean that is, (if we're in agreement about the similarities, that is,) why does it matter that the two stories have the same dance steps? Was Luke's point one of destiny?

keck553
Mar 21st 2011, 03:15 PM
You misunderstood my suggestion. We know that Luke got much of his information from interviewing people (1:1-4), and so I was wondering if this story, for example, had over time taken on certain characteristics of the account of the crucifixion and resurrection. For example, did the young Jesus really get lost for *three* days? This is more what I'm talking about.

Usually I can read any idea into any writing, Biblical or not. Have you considered that possibility? This could have been His Bar Mitzvah, which would actually make sense.

Some other details. It couldn't have been a double-Shabbat passover, so the correlation of the actual days would be off, meaning the third day was some other day than Sunday. One would think if this was that well orchestrated, everything would fit.

Perhaps Jesus was a bit puzzled as to why they didn't go to the Temple first to find him.

Nihil Obstat
Mar 24th 2011, 01:53 AM
Usually I can read any idea into any writing, Biblical or not. Have you considered that possibility? This could have been His Bar Mitzvah, which would actually make sense.

Sure I've considered it. I just think that there are a number of things here (maybe not all twelve that I listed) that clearly echo the events at the end of Luke. I'm simply exploring why that might be the case.


Some other details. It couldn't have been a double-Shabbat passover, so the correlation of the actual days would be off, meaning the third day was some other day than Sunday. One would think if this was that well orchestrated, everything would fit.

Was Jesus crucified during a double-Shabbat Passover?


Perhaps Jesus was a bit puzzled as to why they didn't go to the Temple first to find him.

Perhaps. Though it doesn't specify where all they looked first in Jerusalem. He was missing three days (v. 46), but two of those days were them traveling (one day's journey out, v. 44, then one back). On the third and final day, even as the sun was rising, they may have gone straight to the temple (cf. 24:1). But whatever the case may be, His question to them is basically the same as the one asked by the angel at His empty tomb (24:5-7): Why were they looking for the Christ where He would not be?

keck553
Mar 24th 2011, 03:34 PM
Sure I've considered it. I just think that there are a number of things here (maybe not all twelve that I listed) that clearly echo the events at the end of Luke. I'm simply exploring why that might be the case.

Yeah, it's fun. I've done things with Genesis that makes Fenris cringe.




Was Jesus crucified during a double-Shabbat Passover?

Yes. Passover was thursday evening to friday evening that year. Shabbat started friday evening, which is why they needed to take Him down. Note they waited until post-shabbat to finish with the spices.




Perhaps. Though it doesn't specify where all they looked first in Jerusalem. He was missing three days (v. 46), but two of those days were them traveling (one day's journey out, v. 44, then one back). On the third and final day, even as the sun was rising, they may have gone straight to the temple (cf. 24:1). But whatever the case may be, His question to them is basically the same as the one asked by the angel at His empty tomb (24:5-7): Why were they looking for the Christ where He would not be?

Interesting. Thank you.

sudds
Mar 26th 2011, 03:26 PM
the story of when Jesus was twelve


I wanted to share here some notes of mine on Luke 2:41-52.

1. This story occurs during Passover (v. 41). Jesus was crucified during Passover.
2. His parents were unaware that He had stayed behind (v. 43). The married couple returning to Emmaus were unaware that He walked with them (24:16).
3. They lost the young Jesus for three days (v. 46). Jesus was buried for three days.
4. His parents did not find Him in the caravan (v. 45). His disciples did not find His body in the tomb (24:3).
5. They were anxiously looking for Him (v. 48). The disciples had been anxious about what He as the Messiah might accomplish (24:21).
6. His parents questioned Him about His reasons for staying behind (v. 48). Cleopas questioned Him about not knowing the sad things that had taken place (24:18)
7. Jesus rebuked His parents for not knowing that, now being considered a man, He would begin His mission (v. 49). Jesus rebuked the married couple for not knowing the mission of the Messiah (24:26).
8. They found Him discussing Scripture (vv. 46-47). He opened up the Scriptures to the two disciples (24:27).
9. He amazed everyone who heard Him (v. 47). Their hearts burned within them as He spoke (24:32).
10. His parents did not understand His words (v. 50). The married couple did not understand the prophets (24:25).
11. He went with them to their house in Nazareth (v. 51). He went with them to their house in their village (24:28-29).
12. Mary treasured these things in her heart (v. 51). Their hearts burned within them anew (24:32).

There may very well be more parallels than just these twelve, but these stand out the clearest to me. What does this all say to you? One initial thought I had was that it caused me to wonder how much of the story of when Jesus was twelve (only found in Luke) might have been embellished, so to speak, or even formulated by tradition, that it might better mirror the crucifixion and resurrection of the Messiah (found throughout the NT by several authors). I would think this would be practiced for more than rhetorical reasons. What might some of these reasons be, if you think there's anything to that thought? Or, if you disagree, what are your reasons against such a thing occurring?

Happy to share. - astro I think this is beautiful. Thanks for sharing it.