Epiphany of our Lord
January 6th, 2002
Title: “Religious knowledge give us insights into the “heart” of God.” Matthew 2: 1-12
In the time of King Herod, Magi, Gentiles from the east, follow a star that leads them to Jesus, whom they recognize as King and God. They worship him and offer him gifts.
Chapters one and two, deal with the pre-birth, birth and infancy of Jesus. Matthew has different stories about that period than Luke has. Matthew’s stories are told from Joseph’s point of view, while Luke’s are told from Mary’s.
Chapter two, has only three stories about the period after Jesus’ birth: 1) the visit of the Magi; 2) the flight into Egypt; and 3) Herod’s slaughter of the children of Bethlehem. In chapter three Jesus is a full-grown adult ready to begin his public ministry.
Chapters one and two, show how God protected this child and how he frustrated the plans of sinful people in order to fulfill what he promised through the prophets.
Matthew knows the Old Testament. It is a source of spiritual light and nourishment for him. He sees present events fulfilling, bringing into focus, bringing into reality, being realized or “enfleshed,” what God revealed, promised through his spokesmen, the prophets, in the past. Prophecies are not really forecasts for Matthew, like a weatherman would forecast the future weather, but are more like undeveloped Polaroid film revealing hints of what is there by this now fuzzy detail or that now foggy signpost. Once the event happens Matthew is able to look back into the Old Testament and point to its “prediction” or, at least, a detail or two. What the prophet saw in undeveloped form, promise, is now clearly developed, fulfillment. There are between ten and fourteen of these Old Testament quotes in Matthew depending on different theologians. The exact number is disputed because the formula which accompanies them is not exactly the same in every case, although the idea is there. That idea is this: “This happened to fulfill what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet.” Isaiah is that prophet in eight of the citations. Five citations are found in chapters one and two alone. Some scholars have erroneously maintained that Matthew made up these stories to fit the Old Testament text. However, the stories generally make perfect sense without them. More correctly, Matthew knew of the stories and knew his Old Testament. He saw in the events details which he also saw in his meditations on the Old Testament and put the two together in order to strengthen and highlight the divine involvement in the events, events intended by God long before they happened, foretold long ago and fulfilled despite human opposition.
Matthew is telling his readers that the Old Testament is still relevant as a source of revelation. The New Testament has not abolished it, but “fulfills” it, 5:17. Matthew could see the marvelous concurrence between what God said long ago and what happened later. God is faithful, reliable and what he says will be will be. This God is in Jesus, a fact that the Gentile Magi recognized, they represent the whole Gentile world, before the Jews, who were supposed to know their Scripture, did.
These first two chapters are an overture to the gospel, introducing themes which will be fleshed out in the body of the work, even if they are written in a different key, in the style of Midrash, which is an exposition of the underlying significance of a Bible text in a style of literature written during the first Christian millennium. The text before us introduces both the rejection and acceptance of Jesus and has many parallels with the Passion Narrative.
In verse one, “after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea.” Matthew does not say how long after Jesus’ birth this event took place.
In the time of King Herod, Herod was not a Jew. His father was an Idumean; his mother an Arabian. He was an unscrupulous tyrant, having been made king by fiat of the Roman emperor in 40BC, who died in 4BC. Jesus was born before that, somewhere between 7 and 4BC. Called “the Great” because of his building achievements, like renovating the Temple, he was nonetheless paranoid about being overthrown, as are all tyrants. The Jews needed little else than the fact he was not a Jew to do so.
Magi: This term could refer to astronomers, serious scientists, medics, and philosophers as well as to quacks, charlatans, fortunetellers and magicians, derived from Greek magos. These here would be the serious ones, probably astrologers from Babylonia or Persia where the “science of the stars” was practiced by the Priestly caste. Tradition has them as three in number, a number derived from the three mentioned gifts, but no number is in the text, and as kings, because the gifts are fit for a king and because of the influence of Psalm 72 and Isaiah 60 which mention kings, but this text has them as magi.
In verse two, who has been born king of the Jews? This title for Jesus will not appear again until Jesus is crucified. For now it reflects the belief that the birth of a great person is signaled and accompanied by the birth of a new star. See also the Old Testament story of Balaam, Numbers 24: 17. Balaam was a magus, the singular of “magi” from the east who is supposed to curse Israel, but instead blesses it: “A star shall rise from Jacob.” This was, of course, interpreted messianically in late Judaism. For Christians Jesus is the “star of David.” Their careful observation of facts revealed to them this new star’s “rising” and when their following it led to Jerusalem they assumed it meant a new king was born for the people of which Jerusalem was the capital. We saw his star: Many attempts have been made to identify this star scientifically. It has been explained as a conjunction of planets, Saturn and Jupiter, happening in 7BC, as the explosion of a supernova observed by the Chinese for seventy days in 5/4 BC, or as the appearance of a comet in 12/11 BC, a bit too early?.
None of these, however, accounts for the miraculous movement of the star. Matthew is describing the guidance, miraculous, divine guidance, divine light which this star, however it might be based on some natural Phenomenon, gave to Gentiles. God reveals himself or, at least, his will, even to Gentiles, people without benefit of Scripture.
“Come to pay him homage.” The verb, Greek proskuneo, indicates either an act of reverence, literally, “bend the knee,” toward a great personage or an act of worship of God. Matthew means the word in its full worship sense. The worship of the Messiah was an important way for Matthew to indicate Jesus’ divinity. He has ten instances where humans saw in Jesus the divine presence; here, 2:8, 11; 8:2; 9:18; 14:33; 15: 25; 20:20;
28:9, 17. He is saying here that the attitude of the Magi toward the baby was the attitude proper in the presence of God.
In verse three, “When King Herod heard this, he was frightened, and all Jerusalem with him.” No doubt Herod felt he had not a chance against a legitimate Davidic descendant as a claimant to the throne. He was paranoid to begin with and this news would make matters worse. Just as the Magi are representative of Gentiles, those non-Jews who have not benefit of the Scripture, and their reaction to Christ, so Herod represents those out to destroy Christ and Christians, because he interferes with their lives and threatens to dethrone them as their own king and lord over others. He represents the reaction of hostility and hatred to the love of Christ.
In verse four, “calling together all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he inquired of them where the Messiah was to be born.” Although there was only one chief priest at a time, the term “chief Priests” was used to cover a number of officials such as the captain of the Temple guard, the financial minister, etc., the whole Temple staff. “Scribes,” on the other hand, were scholars in the Law, legal experts. As a group these priests, officials and lawyers represent another typical reaction to Christ and his message: indifference. They knew their theology and could quote Scripture, but missed its meaning. But not even a visit from foreign dignitaries piques their curiosity enough to travel the six miles to Bethlehem to find out for themselves. They are too involved in their own affairs and even running the “affairs of God” to be concerned about such matters as the birth of the Messiah. In the Passion narrative the secular authority, Pilate, is the indifferent one, washing his hands of the matter after his wife tells him to “have nothing to do” with Jesus. It is the chief priests, Sadducees, scribes, Pharisees and elders, Sanhedrin-Supreme Court who are the hostile and hateful ones.
In verses five and six, Bethlehem: This is Matthew’s second formula quotation. Throughout his gospel Matthew subtly conforms the way he expresses himself to the phraseology of the Old Testament. He would expect his Jewish readers, at least, to catch the allusions and delight in them as well as derive light from them. At times, anywhere from ten to fourteen, he brings these Old Testament background ideas and expressions to explicit quotation as examples of how God fulfills his word, a word given at one point in time but not completely fulfilled until another.
These explicit citations are but examples of the way God acts all the time.
Despite the explicit quote of Micah 5:1, Matthew is citing it freely, there were several versions of the Old Testament available to him, not to mention the expected variations when a text was cited orally, in order to make a point which the original text does not explicitly make. His point is that the situation, reputation, “fortunes” of insignificant Bethlehem is now reversed. The city is now famous as the birthplace of the Messiah.
To make his point he adds “since” and “by no means least,” iin order to stress the importance of Bethlehem and the contrast between what humans consider great and what God does.
He also wants to show that these religious officials knew their facts, the data of Scripture. The interpretation of those facts was another matter. That eluded them.
In verses seven and eight, when the star had appeared. Herod would gather his facts not only from the religious officials but also from those outside Judaism. His subjects would see through him, but maybe foreigners would not. Not knowing his psychopathic tendencies they would take him at his word, at least, for now. They would be unwitting informers, but for the intervention of God.
In verses nine and ten, the star that they had seen at its rising, until it stopped over the place where the child was. When they saw that the star had stopped, they were overwhelmed with joy.” Anyone walking on the ground who looks up at the stars, especially the moon, and continues walking will get the sensation that the moon and stars are following him or her. Stop and the moon stops. Turn a corner and the moon seems to turn. The Magi had a different sensation. They were following the star. It was leading the way. Matthew is saying this was no ordinary experience. It might be based on a natural phenomenon, a star in the sky, but it was more than that. The Magi had foolishly tinkered with the worldly leader, the secular realm, and had gotten off track. Now they are back to “looking up” and being guided once again.
However, something else happened during their stop in Jerusalem. They got to consult Sacred Scripture. The “star,” natural revelation, could take them only so far. They needed Scripture, supernatural revelation, to give them more detailed information. Natural revelation may lead to a general knowledge of God, but only Scripture gives the “inside” information, personal knowledge and relationship with God. They now had that and it would lead them to their goal, the source of all knowledge, natural and supernatural. Their science took them only so far and they found no dichotomy between science and revealed religion.
In verse eleven, they knelt down and paid him homage.” The Magi represent the third reaction to Christ: worship. As such, in the overture to the gospel, they are prototypes of Jesus’ disciples who give up earthly treasures for heavenly ones.
“They offered him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. The word for “offer,” Greek aorist of prosphero, is used when referring to sacrifices. The gifts are “fit for a king” gold, frankincense a white resinous gum, obtained from several kinds of a certain tree in Arabia, used both medicinally and for cultic purposes, and myrrh the resinous gum of the bush “balsamodendron myrra”. Church fathers and Luther, saw the gifts as symbols of Jesus’ royalty, gold, divinity, frankincense and suffering, myrrh, which appears in Mark at the crucifixion, but Matthew says nothing of this. He would see these gifts as fulfillments of Scripture. “Homage” fulfills Isaiah 60: 1ff and Psalm 72:10ff, the first reading and responsorial psalm for this feast. The “gifts” remind of the gifts of spices and gold from the Queen of Sheba in 1Kings 10:2 as well as Psalm 72. The “myrrh” comes from Proverbs
7:17 where it symbolizes joy and festivity rather than suffering.
In verse twelve, “having been warned in a dream not to return to Herod, they left for their own country by another road.” A divine command is given in a dream, as on a number of occasions in Matthew. This time there is no angel, only instructions not to go back to Herod. Wisely, under the divine guidance no longer a star but a dream, a vision of reality, they return home, their present goal, but another route, rather than taking the direct one. Hidden in the details is a general principle of wisdom: if plan A does not work and the goal is noble or necessary, try plan B.
Sermon
Matthew knows that the Jewish people will reject Jesus as the Christ. So will much of the secular world. He also knows that some Jews and some Gentiles will accept Jesus. In his overture to the gospel he lays out the parameters of that scenario. The characters, or groups of Characters, stand for more than themselves. So do Christians, represented by the Magi. We should not lose sight of the fact that James, leader of the Church in Jerusalem, a conservative Jewish-Christian, would have known Matthew’s traditional teaching. He would have been familiar with this story that prefigures the entrance of the Gentiles into the Church. His reasons for accepting them at the meeting in Jerusalem were based on the Old Testament. He, also, quotes from an Old Testament
prophet, Amos, and alludes to the Levitical Law, a practice similar to Matthew.
We are being encouraged to do the same. We, as Christians, must learn from the Jews, the Old Testament history, long history, of salvation, just as the Magi had to. And for the same reason. Just as their own wits and the natural revelation of God, God reveals truth to everyone, could give them only so much information and insight but could not get them to their goal without supernatural revelation, found first in Scripture, so Christians cannot know the fullness of God’s “inner,” self without the Old Testament. No doubt the earliest Christians learned this from the example of Jesus himself. There is hardly a teaching, a pericope from the gospels, from the earthly life and teaching of Jesus, which does not have some Old Testament reference to it. Jesus, as a human, absorbed the Old Testament into the fiber of his being and the synapses of his mind. Jesus breathed the Old Testament revelation of God. As a human he knew God “from the inside.” He knew his character, what he was like over the long haul, over centuries. He learned that from his study of and meditation of the Old Testament. Then, he applied it to specific situations and contexts. He taught the same truth in a different key, using parables, metaphors, pithy sayings, pronouncements and even miracles to bring home to others the truth he experienced. For a Christian to only know the New Testament, while sufficient, is to not also know Jesus’ real “family,” and background. It is like knowing a friend without knowing where he or she came from, his or her past experiences that formed their present character, and without ever having met their family. It is an adequate but incomplete picture. In this wonderful story Matthew is saying that non-Jews, Magi, do not need to become Jews to be Christians, but they cannot ignore or bypass Judaism altogether. They will miss the sort of detail like that of Micah 5:1, that shortens the journey and gives one confidence that one is on the right road.
At the same time, the “chief priests and scribes,” teach us that we can have all the detailed knowledge of Scripture and still miss its point, it import and its impact. Mere intellectual knowledge is not sufficient. These religious officials knew their facts and were doctrinally sound, but that kind of knowledge did not move them to “make the, six mile, journey” to see for themselves. They were not so much hostile to Christ, although they would become so when they realized their thrones were threatened along with Herod’s, as they were indifferent. Nothing, no news, no rising stars, no outside information, was going to move them from the “place” where they were. They would perform their functions perfunctorily and give the king the information he wanted, but it would make no difference to them. Instead of being examples of “religion-in-action,” they were examples of “religion: inaction.” They would hold on to their “earthly
Treasures,” of comfort, respectability, status, and officiousness, thank you very much. None of this opening their coffers for them. They would hold on to what they have.
The same God who revealed to the Jews his plan and will be revealed to the Gentiles his truth. The difference is in the lighting. No matter how bright the star, a star, by the way, the
Jews themselves missed. They were so dense they could not see what was obvious to the Gentiles, no matter how bright the star of natural revelation it
cannot read supernatural revelation. We need Scripture and Christ for that light.
We can come to a knowledge of God, albeit only a general, impersonal knowledge, though the use of human intellect, science, “natural revelation.”
We need divine revelation, outside of and beyond the human intellect, to come to know God intimately and personally.
The Old Testament gives us, personal, knowledge of God over centuries, far outdistancing what we can know of him in the short span of a personal lifetime.
Knowledge of divine revelation alone does not automatically give us intimacy with God. That requires faith, living faith
and faithfulness.
Listening to and following divine revelation gives us alternate routes to our goals when the preferred path is thwarted by evil.
Science vs. Religion: What we have so far discovered, thanks to the curiosity, questioning, research and careful explanation of some very intelligent human beings, of the make-up, workings, and operating principles of the universe is nothing short of
wonder-full. All of it reveals God, really the ways of God and even something of the mind of God, God’s intelligence. We now know, for instance, that we humans have two brains, connected to each other, yet capable of separate functions. The older brain, very similar to an animal brain, the more evolved, of course, antedates the newer brain by eons. The older brain can do everything an animal’s brain can do, maybe even more, but it is limited to reacting to external stimuli. Its purpose is the survival of the individual and the continuation of the species. The newer brain has other functions. It decides or responds, rather than reacts. It can look into future possibilities and take actions to make them real, make them happen, make them come true. It can plan. It can trump, emotional, reactions for the sake of a greater goal.
Science is that body of knowledge accumulated by the determined and disciplined use of the newer brain in order to first understand the otherwise hidden laws of nature and then to use them for human purposes. Yet, underneath that lies God, the incomparably higher, indeed, highest, intelligence allowing humans to tap into his brain and know something, undoubtedly quite limited, of the “person,” strictly speaking God is not a “person,” with the brain or behind the brain. That knowledge, if and when correct and true, can never contradict what God has revealed of himself through other means, means we generally categorize under the term “religion.” Religious knowledge does not give us insights into the intelligence or brain of God, but into his “heart.”
Strictly speaking God does not have a “heart,” any more than he has a “brain,” or is a “person.”
However, we must use human language to speak about these more-than-human realities, since that is all we have. Both science and religion have their own jargon, but not their own language.
Science and religion are two ways of knowing God, one impersonal, if you will, the other personal. Clearly, we would all rather know the person than merely know his or her writings. Indeed, the writings, scientific and religious, are a big help in knowing the person, but there is more to it than that alone. If science and religion conflict or contradict, then it is the humans who got it wrong, not God. The Magi show us how scientists who are truly honest, that is, humble, recognize the limits of their knowledge, while using that knowledge to bring them to the brink of religion. The religious experts show us how religious knowledge can be reduced to mere scientific knowledge and have little effect on behavior, unless it is enlivened by faith.
History vs., Mystery: Mystery is to God as history is to humans. We can say that mystery is God’s history. Mystery is the medium in which God operates, does his Godly thing. When we enter into that realm the rules are different from the rules of history, time and earth. Our history occurs in that context of mystery and when it is at odds with God’s history, his eons of consistent Behavior, it covers up and over his presence and disconnects us from communicating and communing with him. It leaves us on our own, to our own wits and lights, inadequate to the challenge of life. Amen.
