Smoodock's Blog

We need to keep in mind that there were several ways in which the ancients wrote biographies. The authors then, as today, had a point to make, whenever they wrote, and chronology wasn’t always used to make that point. Matthew’s message about Jesus had to do with fulfilling Jewish history, vis-à-vis what things occurred to the nation also occurred in the life of Jesus. He organized his narrative about Jesus’ life according to these themes, not chronology. The Gospel of Luke seems best suited for chronology, because its author tells us from the beginning that he wrote out the life of Jesus “in order” (Luke 1:3).

I’m bringing this up at this point, because Matthew’s next recording (Matthew 13:54-58) appears in Mark and perhaps also in Luke at different times in their narratives about Jesus’ public ministry. Mark records Jesus’ rejection in Nazareth near the death of John the Baptist, which occurred about a year and a half into the ministry of Jesus (Mark 6:1-6). Luke, on the other hand, if his account of Jesus’ rejection is the same as that of Matthew and Mark, has Jesus’ rejection occurring on the very first day of his public ministry (Luke 4:16-30). So, if all three are accounts of the same event, then we must conclude that chronology takes a “backseat” to the event itself.

Matthew has Jesus being rejected first by the Jewish authorities (Matthew 12:24), and the people, although willing to accept Jesus in the beginning (Matthew 12:22-23), followed their leaders and likewise rejected Jesus (cp. Matthew 12:30), and it was for this reason that he began speaking in parables (Matthew 13:11-15). Therefore, Matthew uses this event that occurred in Nazareth to conclude his account of Jesus’ rejection by the nation. It occurs in his own country, in Nazareth where he grew up. He taught in their synagogue and those who knew him were astonished at his words (Matthew 13:54). Neither Matthew nor Mark (Mark 6:1-2) record what Jesus said that astonished his neighbors. However, if Luke’s account, indeed, records the same event, Jesus openly claimed to be the Messiah they had been waiting for (Luke 4:16-21).

Many things had been written by the ancients about the Jew’s Messiah. Some claimed he was the first “being: created by God and was awaiting his destiny, until those days in the first century AD. When he would come, many rabbis concluded and taught that their Messiah would not be able to die (John 12:34). He was a mythical figure who seemed to be “able to leap tall buildings in a single bound.” So, when Jesus came to his own people telling them who he was, they responded with: “We know you… We know where you came from… who your parents are and your brothers and sisters” (Matthew 13:55). Surely, the Messiah would have a noble birth, not one so common as yours. “How dare you make these claims about yourself and reject our worldview of the coming messiah, as though it were a common or unclean thing!” (Matthew 13:56).

So, they took offense in his claims, and Jesus responded with “A prophet is not without honor, except in his own country and in his own house” or as another scholar put it: “A prophet is nowhere less esteemed than in his own country” (Matthew 13:57).

Therefore, due to their unbelief, Jesus didn’t do many miracles there during his visit (Matthew 13:58). Mark says that due to their unbelief, Jesus couldn’t do many miracles there, except to lay his hands on a few sick folks and heal them (Mark 6:5). Thus, knowing a man, vis-à-vis his history, his family, his roots, does not help one’s faith. Jesus, although a man, was God in the flesh (John 1:1, 14) and the forerunner of a new creature. As Paul puts it: “The love of Christ controls us… Although we have known Christ from a human point of view, now we do not know him in that way any longer. So, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation…” The old (worldview) has passed away, and the new (worldview) has come! (2Corinthians 5:14-17).        [EB1]