Matthew 2:13-23 God keeps the promised King safe, according to His word

theological

I've been posting a couple of threads to go through Matthew over the last few days. The first in the series is here, and the last post I did at the start of chapter 2 is here. It's been pretty fascinating to walk through the start of Matthew's gospel trying to look at it afresh.

Matthew 2:13-23 wrote:

13 Now when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, “Rise, take the child and his mother, and flee to Egypt, and remain there until I tell you, for Herod is about to search for the child, to destroy him.” 14 And he rose and took the child and his mother by night and departed to Egypt 15 and remained there until the death of Herod. This was to fulfil what the Lord had spoken by the prophet, “Out of Egypt I called my son.”
16 Then Herod, when he saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, became furious, and he sent and killed all the male children in Bethlehem and in all that region who were two years old or under, according to the time that he had ascertained from the wise men. 17 Then was fulfilled what was spoken by the prophet Jeremiah:
18 “A voice was heard in Ramah,
weeping and loud lamentation,
Rachel weeping for her children;
she refused to be comforted, because they are no more.”

19 But when Herod died, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, 20 saying, “Rise, take the child and his mother and go to the land of Israel, for those who sought the child's life are dead.” 21 And he rose and took the child and his mother and went to the land of Israel. 22 But when he heard that Archelaus was reigning over Judea in place of his father Herod, he was afraid to go there, and being warned in a dream he withdrew to the district of Galilee. 23 And he went and lived in a city called Nazareth, that what was spoken by the prophets might be fulfilled: “He shall be called a Nazarene.”

A few things stood out to me from today's passage:

The first thing to note briefly is that the threat is big on a human level. Herod is powerful. He has political power entrusted to him. And Herod is out to get Jesus.

God intervenes to save His Son:

In verse 13 we see that the angel warns Joseph that Herod is trying to kill Jesus and that he should go down to Egypt. Joseph then goes down to Egypt to keep Jesus safe from harm.

In verse 20 Joseph is told that he can return to Israel as Herod has finally died. God's hand is at work to ensure that the promised king survives to fulfil His mission.

Human opposition to God is futile:
Herod is furious because the wise men never returned (12, 16) and Herod uses the information that he got from the scribes to know to go to Bethlehem. Herod is a paranoid tyrant, he's afraid that this child is going to usurp his power and authority and so slaughters all the children under 2 years old in Bethlehem. This is tragic, but futile because God's promised king has already fled with Joseph and Mary.

God fulfils His promises in ordinary circumstances:
We see three ways this happens.
Firstly, by fleeing to Egypt, this fulfils the prophecy in Hosea 11:1 which is quoted in verse 15 of our passage.

Secondly, Herod inadvertently fulfils the Jeremiah 31:15 through tyrannically slaughtering the children of Bethlehem. God's word speaks of a day where Rachel will be weeping for her children. Rachel's tomb is in Bethlehem which is why Matthew is quoting this passage here.

Thirdly, and this was the harder one to work out of the three prophecies, but Matthew tells us that the prophets said that the Messiah would live in Nazareth. I wasn't able to find this in Scripture, so I can only presume this would have been an oral prophecy understood by the Jews.

It is fascinating that God fulfils His promises in this story in relatively ordinary circumstances. For example, being afraid of going back to Judah under the reign of Herod's son led Joseph to live in Nazareth.

Some thoughts for prayer:
Father, thank you that you preserved your Son for our salvation.
Thank you that you are faithful to your word and keep your promises.
Please help us to see that human opposition to God is futile and that what you have said will come to pass.

What do you think?
Is human opposition to God futile?
Do you find this passage encouraging, why or why not?

antiskeptic

theological wrote: »

I've been posting a couple of threads to go through Matthew over the last few days. The first in the series is here, and the last post I did at the start of chapter 2 is here. It's been pretty fascinating to walk through the start of Matthew's gospel trying to look at it afresh.



A few things stood out to me from today's passage:

The first thing to note briefly is that the threat is big on a human level. Herod is powerful. He has political power entrusted to him. And Herod is out to get Jesus.

God intervenes to save His Son:

In verse 13 we see that the angel warns Joseph that Herod is trying to kill Jesus and that he should go down to Egypt. Joseph then goes down to Egypt to keep Jesus safe from harm.

In verse 20 Joseph is told that he can return to Israel as Herod has finally died. God's hand is at work to ensure that the promised king survives to fulfil His mission.

Human opposition to God is futile:
Herod is furious because the wise men never returned (12, 16) and Herod uses the information that he got from the scribes to know to go to Bethlehem. Herod is a paranoid tyrant, he's afraid that this child is going to usurp his power and authority and so slaughters all the children under 2 years old in Bethlehem. This is tragic, but futile because God's promised king has already fled with Joseph and Mary.

God fulfils His promises in ordinary circumstances:
We see three ways this happens.
Firstly, by fleeing to Egypt, this fulfils the prophecy in Hosea 11:1 which is quoted in verse 15 of our passage.

Secondly, Herod inadvertently fulfils the Jeremiah 31:15 through tyrannically slaughtering the children of Bethlehem. God's word speaks of a day where Rachel will be weeping for her children. Rachel's tomb is in Bethlehem which is why Matthew is quoting this passage here.

Thirdly, and this was the harder one to work out of the three prophecies, but Matthew tells us that the prophets said that the Messiah would live in Nazareth. I wasn't able to find this in Scripture, so I can only presume this would have been an oral prophecy understood by the Jews.

It is fascinating that God fulfils His promises in this story in relatively ordinary circumstances. For example, being afraid of going back to Judah under the reign of Herod's son led Joseph to live in Nazareth.

Some thoughts for prayer:
Father, thank you that you preserved your Son for our salvation.
Thank you that you are faithful to your word and keep your promises.
Please help us to see that human opposition to God is futile and that what you have said will come to pass.

What do you think?
Is human opposition to God futile?
Do you find this passage encouraging, why or why not?

Human opposition to God achieves the aims of those opposing God all day every day. Sin achieves an aim, doesn't it. Certainly, the apparent value of sin will be as Anglo Irish Bank shares in time: worthless compared to the glory that awaits. And I suppose those standing condemned will curse their folly.

If you suppose (as I do) that a person's salvation is not a God determined thing (albeit God enabled) then the person's will being done "thanks but no thanks, God) is an aim achieved. "Resistance is futile" implies the resistor won't have his will done. Whereas the condemned will have their will done. They wanted no God. They get no God.

Futility is the wrong word, I think.

-

I'm not sure I'd thank God for preserving his Son past Herod. God had an aim: that Jesus die do that we might live. Dodging Herod was like an arrow pushing aside air on its way to the bullseye. A fairly insignificant aside.

I'd thank him for sending his Son to die so that I could live?

theological

antiskeptic wrote: »

Human opposition to God achieves the aims of those opposing God all day every day. Sin achieves an aim, doesn't it. Certainly, the apparent value of sin will be as Anglo Irish Bank shares in time: worthless compared to the glory that awaits. And I suppose those standing condemned will curse their folly.

If you suppose (as I do) that a person's salvation is not a God determined thing (albeit God enabled) then the person's will being done "thanks but no thanks, God) is an aim achieved. "Resistance is futile" implies the resistor won't have his will done. Whereas the condemned will have their will done. They wanted no God. They get no God.

Futility is the wrong word, I think.

-

I'm not sure I'd thank God for preserving his Son past Herod. God had an aim: that Jesus die do that we might live. Dodging Herod was like an arrow pushing aside air on its way to the bullseye. A fairly insignificant aside.

I'd thank him for sending his Son to die so that I could live?

Thanks for your post.

I think a few things. We're at an early stage in Matthew's gospel, if I am reading this by just looking at each piece as it comes it would be premature to jump to the crucifixion at this stage. It's good to start from the start and build up to this point. I think the aim of the prayers is to give thanks for what I've learned about God and what he has done in this passage and what challenges me from this passage. I accept that other people might have different methods. I welcome them on this thread.

I get your point about sin. I mean yes, the sin may itself be satisfied, but ultimately opposition to God is futile. We see this pretty clearly with Herod here in this passage. He tyrannically slaughters these children but he doesn't kill God's Son as he desired. God's Son is rescued to fulfil His purpose which cannot be thwarted. His mission is to save people from their sins as we saw in the previous passage.