Smoodock's Blog

If we consider Jesus’ public and formal claim to being the promised Messiah (Luke 4:16-21), why should we or even why should Jesus believe, the people should receive him or accept his claims as true? It seems evident that Jesus had begun his ministry sometime prior to his coming to Nazareth to preach (cp. Luke 4:14-15, 23). In other words, Jesus had been healing folks for at least a few weeks, between the time he was baptized by John and Jesus’ visit to his home town of Nazareth, where it seems he wished to formerly begin his campaign as Israel’s Messiah. Therefore, there was at least some evidence that he’d been sent by God to his people. Yet, Jesus was formally rejected by his hometown as their Messiah (Luke 4:28-29). Thus, the miracles, they heard of him doing elsewhere, were not enough to convince the people that Jesus was who he claimed to be. Nevertheless, why did the people reject Jesus, and just as importantly, why did Jesus believe, he should have been received by the people as their Messiah?

First, we need to keep in mind that it became very evident during the reign of Solomon that the Lord took his place in the newly built Temple in the Most Holy Place on the Ark of the Covenant (1Kings 8:10-11). Secondly, it also became evident that the Lord left Solomon’s Temple just prior to the Babylonian exile and the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple (Ezekiel 10:1-19). Moreover, although there had been a second Exodus of the people out of bondage and into the Promised Land, this time out of Babylon and back to Jerusalem (Ezra 1:1-11), it was not evident that the Lord had returned to dwell in the Temple, which the Jews rebuilt, after their return to the land (Ezra 6:15). Yet, it was promised that he would return to his people (Malachi 3:1).

In the earlier metaphor of our perfect storm, the return of God was the hurricane from the south that mixed in with the cold front from the north and the high-pressure system from the west. In the context of expecting God to return to bless and solidify the people’s aspirations to be free of gentile tyranny, we are able to consider four rulers of Jerusalem: Judah the Hammer (better known as Judas Maccabees), Herod the Great, Simon bar-Giora, and Simon the Star. With each ruler there was a promise of victory over the pagan oppressor, a cleansing of the Temple or a rebuilding of the Temple or at least a promise to rebuild the Temple. Nevertheless, although the cold front of the north (the pagan oppressor) mixed with the high-pressure system of the west (the political aspirations of the people), the arrival of God to set all things right didn’t occur in the manner that was expected.

The people rejoiced in the freedom acquired through the efforts of the Maccabees, and that family reigned both as priests and rulers of the people, even though they were not of either the family of Aaron or of David. Nevertheless, although the Maccabees were received by the people, it became clear very soon that God had not returned to his people in either the cleansing of the Temple or the victory attained by Judas Maccabees and his brethren over their gentile oppressor.

Although Herod the Great is an unlikely candidate for the office of Messiah, he did reign as King of the Jews, and although he was a cruel man, he did at least make an effort to rule according to Jewish law. Moreover, he took measures to restore the Temple to its former glory under Solomon, for the rebuilt Temple under Ezra and Nehemiah couldn’t even approach in appearance the excellence of its predecessor (Haggai 2:3; Ezra 3:10-13). Nevertheless, although the House of God was, indeed, a glorious sight to behold, according to Josephus, it was very evident that the Lord had not returned to his people because of anything Herod the Great had done.

Simon bar-Giora is not a well-known figure, but he did rule Jerusalem, and in that context had authority over the Temple, during the Roman-Jewish War of AD 66-70. There were several rebel leaders in Galilee and Judea, but Simon bar-Giora was distinguished as the leader and ruler in Jerusalem, and he did enjoy popular support. Nevertheless, he was unable to gain victory over the Roman oppressor, or save the Temple from destruction. In that context, therefore, it became apparent that the Lord didn’t come to his Temple as expected, and the prophecy in Malachi 3:1 appeared to go unfulfilled. Herod’s Temple was destroyed by Rome in AD 70.

Simon the Star is a better-known figure in Jewish history, and he rose to power about 60 years after the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. The Emperor Hadrian changed Jerusalem into a pagan city, levied heavy taxes on the Jews and forbade the practice of circumcision. This seems to have been the cause of the Jewish rebellion that occurred in AD 130 under Simon bar-Kosiba, who was later dubbed Simon bar-Kochba (Simon “son of the Star”). Nevertheless, after some initial success, and although he was received as the promised Messiah by Rabbi Akiba, the revolt ended in Simon’s death, and the Lord had not returned to his people in any of Simon’s exploits.

What can be said of all these things? Why did the people receive these failures as messiahs but reject Jesus, and just as importantly, why did Jesus believe he should have been received by the people as their Messiah? Jesus came announcing that the Lord had returned to his people, and they needed to repent and believe the good news. Nevertheless, although Jesus had done works no other man was able to do, showing he had, indeed, come in the power of God, the people rejected him, because he didn’t fit the image, they had of who the Messiah would be (John 12:34). They expected a general, who would lead them to victory over their enemies. Instead, Jesus came telling them to love their enemies! Why should Jesus have expected the people to receive him as Messiah? It is precisely so, because he was not as other leaders who led the people to violently oppose their enemies. Jesus was rejected by the people for the same reasons they told Samuel to make them a king. The Jews **wanted** to be like the other nations. They did not want God to rule over them (cp. Romans 1:28). God had returned, just as he promised (Malachi 3:1), in the person of a man (John 1:1, 14), but he was rejected, just as he was in the days of Samuel, the prophet.