Last updated on August 16, 2022
41 Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the Feast of the Passover. 42 And when he was twelve years old, they went up according to custom. 43 And when the feast was ended, as they were returning, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem. His parents did not know it, 44 but supposing him to be in the group they went a day’s journey, but then they began to search for him among their relatives and acquaintances, 45 and when they did not find him, they returned to Jerusalem, searching for him. 46 After three days they found him in the temple, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. 47 And all who heard him were amazed at his understanding and his answers. 48 And when his parents saw him, they were astonished. And his mother said to him, “Son, why have you treated us so? Behold, your father and I have been searching for you in great distress.” 49 And he said to them, “Why were you looking for me? Did you not know that I must be in my Father’s house?”50 And they did not understand the saying that he spoke to them. 51 And he went down with them and came to Nazareth and was submissive to them. And his mother treasured up all these things in her heart.
52 And Jesus increased in wisdom and in stature and in favor with God and man.
This record of Jesus’ childhood is the only one we have (that can be trusted…other early apocryphal sources talk about the boy Jesus in a way that paints him like a 1st-century Harry Potter), and it is only recorded by Luke. I’ve often wondered what this tells us about Luke himself. He clearly acquired many details about Mary and Elizabeth not found in the other Gospels as well. Perhaps he was a friend of the family? And surely this was not the only distinctive moment from the young life of God incarnate. So why recount this story, assuming there were other options?
First, lets consider what’s actually in the text. Jesus is 12 years old, following Jewish customs along with Joseph, Mary, and other relatives. It’s probably a good-size crowd of familiar people, and it’s unlikely that they would have noticed he was missing right away. They apparently got pretty far from Jerusalem since it took them 3 days to find him. And lets be clear, given how they traveled back then, this wasn’t Mary and Joseph being irresponsible. As we see in v. 48, Jesus’ stayed behind willingly.
At this age, he would have begun to learn the Torah (that is, the Jewish scriptures), but this is Jesus we’re talking about. He would have been the greatest conversation partner a Rabbi could have had. James R. Edwards writes that, in this account, “Jesus is presented as a boy of unusual wisdom and nearness to God, whose spiritual endowments and understanding are similar to those of Simeon (v. 25) and Anna (vv. 36-37). He displays remarkable understanding of Torah, but his spiritual understanding exceeds both Torah and temple. In response to Mary’s reprimand for causing anguish to “your father” (v. 48), Jesus testifies to a prior and higher obedience to “my Father” (v. 49). His filial relation to God as Father is the alpha and omega of the gospel, both his first (2:49) and last word (24:49) in the Third Gospel. (Pillar NT Commentary, The Gospel According to Luke. Eerdmans, 2015)
Edwards’ commentary also notes two additional points that I think are interesting here. First, in verse 49, our translation is “Did you know that I must be in my Father’s house?” But the Greek for “house” here is more complex and there’s no English equivalent. Instead, it’s both a statement that Jesus must be in His heavenly Father’s “abode” but also “doing his Father’s business.”
A second point by Edwards’ is worth quoting in full:
“The story of Jesus in the temple bears subtle witness to his two natures, the divine and human. The all-too-human separation of a child from his parents in a crowd, and the equally human panic of the parents, attests to the humanity of the characters. Nevertheless, this very human boy is at home in the temple and natively identifies with the work of God, whom he calls “my Father.” Two fathers are mentioned in the account, one human, one divine, and Jesus is the son of both. His parents “did not understand what he was saying to them” (v. 50), nor do we. Faith and understanding are not guaranteed by the privilege of proximity to Torah, angels, God, or even Jesus. Zechariah was visited by Gabriel, yet he disbelieved (1:20); Mary (and Joseph) received more revelation than he, yet they do not understand. The story of Jesus is the story of the inscrutable and unfathomable ways of God. This story is not understood in a flash of insight. Time, struggle, even suffering are required of the parents of Jesus, as of all people, if they are to know and follow Jesus.”
(Pillar NT Commentary, The Gospel According to Luke. Eerdmans, 2015)
Indeed, there is necessarily a mysteriousness to Jesus and His ministry. This is not due to deliberate obstruction or deception, but because He is the Son of God. He is fully human, but also fully divine. To understand what Jesus is doing requires faith and struggle, as well as the grace and guidance of the Holy Spirit. We cannot do this on our own.
I also find Martin Luther’s reading of this passage insightful, where he writes:
“See, [Jesus] rebukes his parents for running around and seeking him in earthly and human things and affairs, among acquaintances and friends, and not thinking that he must be in what is his Father’s. By this he wants to show that his government and the whole Christian life exists only in the Word and in faith, not in other external things . . . or in temporal, worldly life or government. In short, he will not let himself be found among friends or acquaintances, or in anything outside of the office of the Word. He does not want to be worldly or to be in what is worldly, but in what is his Father’s, as he has always demonstrated throughout his life, ever since his birth. He was certainly in the world but did not cling to the world, as he said to Pilate: “My kingdom is not of this world.” He was with friends and acquaintances and whomever he came to, but he did not take an interest in any of that whole worldly life, except that he traveled as a guest through it and used it for the necessities of his body. He attended only to what is his Father’s (that is, the Word’s). There he lets himself be found. There he must be sought by whoever wants to meet him truly.
From The Church Postil (1540): First Sunday After Epiphany. Quoted in Reformation Commentary on Scripture, Vol. III: Luke. Ed. By Beth Kreitzer. IVP Academic, 2015. p. 72
Luther’s “dualism” seems a little excessive here (and elsewhere), but his point that we often look for Jesus in the wrong places is worth reflecting on. Or, perhaps, I’ll put it this way: we’re kidding ourselves if we think we can draw closer to Jesus while eschewing Church, His Word, and prayer. Jesus is never “lost,” unapproachable or inaccessible to those who seek Him. And He’s told us where to find him. Why look anywhere else?
Comments are closed.