The Gospel of Luke: Bound for Bethlehem

Transcript

JRNT 69
11/03/2024
The Gospel of Luke: Bound For Bethlehem
Luke 2:4-5
Jesse Randolph

Alright. Well, last Sunday, in our study in the Gospel of Luke we launched right into Luke 2 in a sermon titled “Advent’s Administrative Arrival.” And it was a fascinating study, at least for me, as we considered some of the governmental administrative machinery which was at play, from a human perspective, leading up to the birth of our Lord Jesus at Bethlehem. And you’ll recall it all centered around this decree that was issued by this great Roman emperor named Caesar Augustus. And we spent a lot of time on this last Sunday. But that decree was issued in 8 B.C. during the days of a man named Quirinius, the governor of Syria (probably better stated was that he was governing in Syria during that time). And Augustus’ decree called for a “census,” you’ll recall, “to be taken of all the inhabited earth,” and the purpose of that decree was taxation. The surest way to tax your subjects and to know how much tax revenue you’re going to get from your subjects is by knowing how many subjects you have and where they are. And we saw in verse 3 how in eventual compliance with that imperial decree for the census, somewhere between 6 and 4 B.C., “everyone was going to be registered for the census,” it says, “each to his own city.”

And that’s where we left off last week. With that statement, in verse 3 of Luke 2. That everyone, meaning everyone in the inhabited earth, meaning the Roman Empire in context, was going to their own city, their ancestral homeland, their city of origin, to be registered for this once-every-14 years census. So, our focus last week then as we worked through those first three verses of chapter 2 of Luke’s gospel, was empire wide. The focus was broad. The focus was universal in scope. Today, now, as we continue to work on to the narrative, we’re going to see that Luke funnels down to a focus on Israel. So he takes it from the world news state, the Fox News, CNN level down to the local stage, the KLKN Lincoln Journal-Star level.

Now, remember the immediate recipient of Luke’s gospel was this man named Theophilus. And as Theophilus was reading Luke’s account up to this point, he would have been reading it through the lens of someone who had this common knowledge at this time. That Caesar Augustus would have been the Roman emperor during the days that Luke is reporting on. Caesar Augustus, during the time of Jesus’ birth, was the sovereign ruler of the whole world. And Caesar Augustus had issued this decree by which, again, he was going to generate more tax revenue for his empire. And then his subjects are scurrying all over from east to west, and north to south to comply with his royal edict.

Now, as we turn to our text today, Luke 2:4-5, we’re going to see a couple of things happening.
On the one hand we’re going to see the focus of Luke’s narrative of the birth of Christ sharpening as he moves from that broader focus on Caesar’s empire-wide decree to again honing his focus on the land and the people of Israel. And also, and on the other hand he’ll start highlighting the fact that there’s this divine decree that transcends even the Emperor’s decree. There’s this divine decree which would culminate in the birth of Jesus happening in the place it did and at the time it did. So, on one level then, the events leading up to the birth of Christ happened according to the plans and the purposes and workings of men, very powerful men, like the Roman Emperor Caesar Augustus. But on the other hand and on another level these events were brought about according to the eternal decree and counsel of God. We remember what Ephesians 1:11 says, that God, “works all things according to the purpose of His will,” “the counsel of His will,” it says.

And that’s one of those transcendent realities to which we can all relate. As we remember that God ordains and superintends each and every moment of each and every one of our lives. And that God ordains and superintends each and every detail of the world in which we live. Including the authorities we live under and all affairs of state. Kings come and go. And emperors like Augustus come and go. And political parties and initiatives come and go. And elections come and go. But they are all provisional. And tottering. And temporary. And like dust. And the reality is there’s this greater Sovereign, God Himself, who rules over it all.

So, that’s the setting here in Luke. Caesar Augustus, this benevolent ruler, this perceived savior of the Roman Empire. Even as he’s issued his decree, he’s ultimately doing so in accordance with God’s decree whereby God plans to introduce His Son, God the Son, the Messiah, to Israel. And eventually to the entire world. So, again, in our text today, Luke gets local and he focuses on Israel. But at the same time, he gets transcendent, as he highlights the big-picture plans that God had for Israel and ultimately for the world, through the sending of His Son, Jesus.

With that, we’ll get into our text this morning. If you’re not there already, I’d invite you to turn with me, in your bibles, to Luke 2. And again, we’ll be in verses 4-5. Luke 2:4-5, God’s word reads,
“And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and family of David, in order to register along with Mary, who was betrothed to him, and was with child.”

The title of this morning’s sermon is “Bound for Bethlehem.” We’ll be covering just these two verses, verses 4-5. They’ll have plenty to keep us busy. And we’ve got these two verses but we have four points. First, we’re going to see “The Distant Ride.” Second, we’ll see “The Davidic Relation.” Third, we’ll see “The Defined Relationship.” And then fourth, we’ll see “The Developing Root.

We’ll start with verse 4, picking it up here with “The Distant Ride.” And again, it begins this way: “And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem.” Now, this isn’t the first time that Luke mentions Joseph in his gospel. Joseph was formerly introduced to us back in Luke 1:26-27, where we have the visitation of “the angel Gabriel [was] sent from God to a city in Galilee called Nazareth,” he’s sent, “to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph.” So, we’re just building on the narrative here in chapter 2.

And note in chapter 2:4, it says that Joseph “also”, the word there is “also,” went up from Galilee to take part in this empire-wide census. Now, the “also” there is Luke’s way of signaling that Joseph was a compliant, law-abiding citizen. We saw last week, as we ended in chapter 2:3 that “everyone was going to be registered for the census, each to his own city.” Well, Joseph was a part of that everyone. Like everyone he also was going to be registered.

Now, I’ve been asked a few times in recent weeks, when am I going to say something about politics? When am I going to say something about the election? I think this is probably the best time to wedge something in. Because here we have Joseph, who is acting in accordance with God’s eternal decree. And we know that there’s an eternal decree by which God brings about all of His plans and purposes. At the same time he’s being a law-abiding citizen doing the thing he’s called to do. So, here’s the chance with two days left, for you to hear from your pastor what I think about the election. And it’s going to be pretty limited. Ok? Here’s what I think we need to do about the election. Pray, that’s number one, pretty simple. Two, participate, however that looks, whatever that looks like. In these days they had to go register for a census. In our day in an American republic we have the opportunity to vote. So, use the vote that you have. Use your biblically informed conscience to promote what is good and to restrain what is evil. I’m not going to go into much more detail than that. But I’ll just say that. Promote what is good, restrain what is evil. Third, pray, pray more. Fourth, submit would be the next one. God has already ordained what will happen. Yes, we think we’re electing, but the reality is, God has already appointed who will be there. So, submit to His will ultimately, and to submit to the leaders that God lays over us. And then last, pray! Those are my thoughts on the election.

Back to the text. Luke goes out of his way here, you’re going to see, as we keep going into chapter 2. He’s going to lay out here with geographical precision where Joseph is headed in regard to the decree from Caesar Augustus. And how he got there. Again, it’s verse 4, he goes “up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem.” So, what we have here is Luke, ever-able, ever-precise historian that he is, spelling out this geographical pathway that brought Joseph to Bethlehem. And note the parallelism and the precision here. He mentions both the region and the city from which Joseph departed. And he mentions the region and the city that Joseph was headed toward. And he’s explaining this all for the sake of Theophilus. Who may not have been acquainted with all of these features of the terrain of Israel.

You know, earlier this week, we had a dinnertime conversation at the Randolph home. And we were trying to explain to our boys where Chadron was located. Our boys go to Lincoln Christian and the Lincoln Christian football team was playing in Chadron on Friday night. And there was discussion for all of about thirty seconds whether our family would be going there. And we were trying to figure out and explain to our boys that it’s just not feasible to go to Chadron for many reasons. And I think they had the assumption that, you know, it’s in Nebraska, so it’s like just over there. Right? No, no, no. We had to explain to them by reference to states like South Dakota and Wyoming how far Chadron is from where we sit in Lincoln. It’s not a hop, skip and a jump. And so, we had to give them other references like the Dakotas and Wyoming to explain where Chadron is. I think there is something similar happening here in verse 4 where Luke is explaining to Theophilus that it’s not just from here to there, to go from Nazareth to Bethlehem. That there are regions involved, namely, Galilee and Judea.

So, Joseph, it says here, back to verse 4, goes up from Galilee. Galilee is this rocky, mountainous region in the northern part of Israel. It’s sandwiched between the Mediterranean Sea and the Sea of Galilee to the east. It’s home to towns and villages like Bethsaida, Chorazin, Tiberias, Capernaum, and of course, Nazareth. And that’s where Joseph departed from. From Nazareth, that small, forgettable village where he and Mary were from. It was that village, we recall from John 1, that was this object of derision and scorn, when Nathanael says, “Can anything good come from Nazareth?” It’s the village where the angel Gabriel visited Mary in Luke 1:26.

But this was home to Joseph and to Mary. How he and his family ended up there, how Mary and her family ended up there, how far back the Nazarene line went for either one of them, we’re not ultimately sure. All we know is that according to the scriptures these two hailed from Nazareth. They were Nazarenes. So their child, Jesus, could rightly, by virtue of his earthly parents, be called a Nazarene. As He was in Matthew 2:23.

So Joseph’s from Nazareth. And as he complied here with Augustus’ order for the census, we’re told that Joseph “went up from Galilee… to Judea.” So, let’s get our bearings for just a moment, to understand a little bit more about what’s happening here in the Israel of Jesus’ day, in the cradle of that valley there. There were really three large regions or three large territories. There’s Galilee in the north and Samaria in the center and Judea in the south. And the Jordan River hugs the eastern edge of each of those regions or territories. And the Jordan River flows from north to south, starting on Mt. Hermon and depositing in the Sea of Galilee in the north of Israel and then ultimately dumping into the Dead Sea in the south. So, back to the gospel here. As he’s making his journey (Joseph, that is) in compliance with Augustus’ decree, we know he’s headed south. He’s going from the region of Galilee up north, down to Judea, from Nazareth specifically, down to Bethlehem. He’s going from north to south. But at the same time (you’ve heard it said many times) as he goes from north to south he’s also going up in elevation where he was from Nazareth. It sat some 1,800 feet above sea level. Whereas Bethlehem, where he was going, sat 2,600 feet above sea level. So he’s proceeding downward, as we would think about it on a 2-D map. But from Joseph’s perspective, as Luke travels here, he’s going up, up in elevation. And the journey would have been somewhere around 85-90 miles, by the way, to go from one town to the next.

Now, as we read on, we see that Luke gives the city of Bethlehem, Joseph’s destination here, a specific description. He says that Joseph was headed, still in verse 4 here, “to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem.” Now, that’s an interesting statement. And one we’re going to have to spend a little time camping out on and exploring. Luke here refers to Bethlehem, Joseph’s destination, as the city of David. And why that’s interesting, is there are a few different places in the Old Testament where it’s not Bethlehem mentioned as the city of David, but Jerusalem. In fact, why don’t you go back with me to 2 Samuel. We just want to do some homework here, some Old Testament homework, to sort of hash some things out. And get some clarity on what Luke is actually referring to. And specifically, where he’s referring to.

Look at 2 Samuel 5. This is the scene pictured where David is anointed as king. 2 Samuel 5, we’ll pick it up in verse 4, it says, “Now David was thirty years old when he became king, and he reigned forty years. At Hebron he reigned over Judah seven years and six months, and in Jerusalem he reigned thirty-three years over all Israel and Judah. Then the king and his men went to Jerusalem against the Jebusites, the inhabitants of the land, and they said to David, ‘You shall not come in here, but the blind and lame will turn you away’; thinking, ‘David cannot enter here.’ Nevertheless, David captured the fortress of Zion, that is the city of David.”
Then, drop down to verse 9, still in chapter 5, it says, “Then David lived in the fortress and called it the city of David.” So, what that’s describing for us is that during the reign of David as king over unified Israel there was this hill in Zion in the city of Jerusalem which was known as the city of David.

So, in one sense, Jerusalem was David’s city. But we also know that Jerusalem was not where David hailed from. And if you’ve ever lived in two different places in your life, you know the difference between those two statements. You know that difference between calling a place home and then calling the place where you hail from. At the Marriage Conference this weekend we sat next to a couple that is from Minnesota. And they pointed out, they hail from Minnesota, but Nebraska’s home, Lincoln is home. That’s where we’re getting at here in 2 Samuel 5, and also here in Luke’s gospel. That David’s home, as king, was in Jerusalem, but David hailed from Bethlehem. So, technically both cities could properly be referred to as the city of David.

Well, back to the gospel account here in Luke 2. Describing these events here in verse 4, it’s clear that Luke is not referring to Jerusalem as the city of David. But rather, he’s referring to Bethlehem. He says that Joseph was headed “to the city of David,” and here’s our defining qualifier, “which is called Bethlehem.” He was headed, in other words, to David’s ancestral home.

This isn’t fair. I’ve already turned you to 2 Samuel. I should have told you to keep a finger there. Please go back with me to 1 Samuel. We’re giving our fingers a workout today. Let’s go to 1 Samuel. 1 Samuel, the setting here is after the days of the judges. Israel has been clamoring for a king, we know. They got one, they got King Saul, but he lacks in many respects. And so through the prophet Samuel, God raises another king, King David. And go to 1 Samuel 16. How all that transpires is recorded in 1 Samuel. But I wanted to just show you a couple of things here and I’ll hopefully be able to tie this back to our text and why Joseph was traveling, in his time, to Bethlehem, the city of David, and give you more background there. But look at 1 Samuel 16:1. This gives us the whole episode in which God sends the prophet Samuel to a man named Jesse from whose sons God would raise up a king over Israel.

Look at 1 Samuel 16:1, it says, “Then Yahweh said to Samuel, ‘How long will you be grieving over Saul? I have rejected him from being king over Israel. Fill your horn with oil and go; I will send you to Jesse the Bethlehemite, for I see among his sons a king for Me.’” And then drop down to verse 10 of that same chapter, it says, “Thus Jesse made seven of his sons pass before Samuel. But Samuel said to Jesse, ‘Yahweh has not chosen these.’ And Samuel said to Jesse, ‘Are these all the young men?’ And he said, ‘There remains yet the youngest, and behold, he is shepherding the sheep.’ Then Samuel said to Jesse, ‘Send and bring him, for we will not turn around until he comes here.’ So he sent and brought him in. Now he was ruddy, with beautiful eyes and a handsome appearance. And Yahweh said, ‘Arise, anoint him, for this is he.’ Then Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the midst of his brothers; and the Spirit of Yahweh came mightily upon David from that day forward.”

So that’s the story of how David came to be the hand-picked, selected, anointed king over Israel. But note, back in verse 1 there of chapter 16, there’s that crystal-clear depiction of where he was from, where David was from. He was from Bethlehem. His father was Jesse the Bethlehemite.

Or turn the page over to 1 Samuel 17 where we’re going to get even more references to David’s origins there in Bethlehem. 1 Samuel 17:12 says, “Now David was the son of the Ephrathite of Bethlehem in Judah, whose name was Jesse. And he had eight sons.” Or down in verse 15, it says, “David went back and forth from Saul to shepherd his father’s flock at Bethlehem.” Or go all the way down to verse 57 of this same chapter, chapter 17. This is after David defeats Goliath. And look at how he identifies himself in verse 57. It says, “So when David returned from striking down the Philistine, Abner took him and brought him before Saul with the Philistine’s head in his hand. And Saul said to him, ‘Whose son are you, young man?’ And David answered, ‘I am the son of your servant Jesse the Bethlehemite.’”

Bethlehem, then, was the town of David, the city of David. It was only appropriate then, getting back to the gospel account here, that David’s Messianic descendant would also hail from there, that he would be born there. In fact, we know that was the prophetic expectation. We looked at it last week just briefly in Micah 5:2, which is all about the location of where the Messiah would come, where He would be born. Micah 5:2 reads, “But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel.”
So, Bethlehem Ephrathah, that’s the same town we’re talking about, Bethlehem. And Micah says of this town, that it is “too little to be among the clans of Judah”, meaning it’s a very small place, it’s insignificant. “But as for you…” Micah says, “One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel.” Meaning Bethlehem would one day produce a ruler. But we know that this ruler couldn’t be David Himself. And we know that because Micah was written some 300 years after David’s birth. David was born somewhere around 1,000 B.C. Micah is not writing until the 700’s B.C. So he couldn’t have been talking about David. No. Micah was writing in anticipation of One who would be in David’s line, one who would come later. And not only that, One who would be an eternal being, One who had been alive forever, One who would be God. Because Micah 5:2 also says of this One who would be born in Bethlehem, “His goings forth are from everlasting, from the ancient days.”

Now, interestingly, this Luke account here doesn’t mention the prophecy of Micah. But every Jew who was waiting for the Messiah knew of the prophecy of Micah. It was a clear expectation of the Jews of Jesus’ day, that their Messiah would be born in and come from Bethlehem. In fact, when we look at some of the other gospel accounts, that is stated with crystal clarity. In fact, go with me, if you would, over to Matthew’s gospel just a couple books over to your left. Look at Matthew 2 and what this passage says about the Jews of this time anticipating and expecting a Messiah who would come from Bethlehem.

Matthew 2:1 says, “Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, magi from the east arrived in Jerusalem, saying, ‘Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we saw His star in the east and have come to worship Him.’ And when Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him. And gathering together all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he was inquiring of them where the Christ was to be born. And they said to him, ‘In Bethlehem of Judea; for this is what has been written by the prophet: “And you, Bethlehem, land of Judah, are by no means least among the leaders of Judah; for out of you shall come forth a Leader who will shepherd My people Israel.”’”

Or then there’s this account, you can turn there if you’d like, you don’t have to, but in John 7:40 it records it this way. It says, “Some of the crowd therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, ‘This truly is the Prophet,’” speaking of Jesus, of course, “Others were saying, ‘This is the Christ.’ Still others were saying, ‘No, for is the Christ going to come from Galilee? Has not the Scripture said that the Christ comes from the seed of David and from Bethlehem, the village where David was?’” And then, of course, we get over to Luke’s gospel, to a familiar passage in Luke 2:11(right next to where we are today). And we remember the angel of the Lord making that annunciation where he says, “For today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord.” The angel there, making that annunciation, was speaking of Christ being born in the city of Bethlehem, the city of David.

And back in our passage, back to Luke 2:4. Luke here is framing this account in such a way as to say, that Joseph the Nazarene was headed to Bethlehem, the city of David, in compliance with Caesar Augustus’ decree. Why? Because what we see in the rest of verse 4, “because he was of the house and family of David.”

That brings us to our second point this morning. We’ve seen “The Distant Ride” in the beginning of the passage. Now, we’re going to look at “The Davidic Relation.” We’ll take the passage as a whole again. “And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem,” and then this, “because he was of the house and family of David.” We covered this briefly when we were back in Luke 1. But Joseph was of the line of David as it says here, “he was of the house and family of David.” And those are highly significant words. Why? Well, going back 1,000 years before this, God, through the prophet Nathan, gave a promise. And it’s found in 2 Samuel 7:16 where he says, “And your house and your kingdom shall endure before Me forever; your throne shall be established forever.” This is known as the Davidic Covenant, a promise made by God to David that the Messiah of Israel would come through his line and one day sit on his throne.
That’s why, when we go to Isaiah 9, Christmas time, and read Isaiah 9:1-7, there’s David language there. “For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; and the government will rest on His shoulders; and His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace,” and then this, “There will be no end to the increase of His government or of peace, on the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish it and to uphold it with justice and righteousness from then on and forevermore.”

In other words, if any future Israelite were, after this promise was given to David in 2 Samuel 7, were to claim that they had come to fulfill this prophecy, in other words, that they were this promised Messiah, it would have to be established that they came from this Davidic line, that they were of the line of David, that they were of the house of David. And back to our text, that‘s exactly what’s being said, that Joseph was of the family of David, he was of the house and family of David. We saw that back in Luke 1:27, again with that instance where Gabriel visits Mary, and Joseph there is described as being of the house of David. It’s also mentioned, Joseph’s Davidic descent or his lineage, over in Matthew’s gospel.

In fact, go back to Matthew 1 where we’re going to see more Davidic credentials here. Matthew 1 has the genealogy, Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus Christ, the Son of David. The son of Abraham. Look at Matthew 1:16, it says, “And Jacob was the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, by whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.” And Jacob, Joseph’s father was a descendant of who? Well, look up at verse 6 of chapter 1, it says, “And Jesse was the father of David the king. And David was the father of Solomon by the wife of Uriah.” So, you can see it right there between verse 6 and verse 16, that Joseph was of David’s line. It comes out not only in Luke’s gospel but in Matthew’s genealogy. He was a direct descendant of David, in David’s royal line.

And the way that worked, according to Jewish law of the time, is that since at the time of their betrothal (and we’re going to get into this in a minute) Joseph and Mary were already considered externally to be husband and wife, assuming that he were to accept parental responsibilities to any child that was born to Mary. Whether it was Joseph’s child or someone else’s child, that child would be legally regarded as Joseph’s. And if you stick with the Gospel of Matthew, that’s exactly what you see laid out in Matthew’s account. In Matthew 1:24, you might remember, Joseph once he learns that his betrothed is with child, rather than sending her away divorcing her, he takes on the Son as his own.

And what all that means legally and practically is that Jesus, like Joseph, would be deemed the rightful descendant of the royal line of David. Which would give Him the legal right as Joseph’s adopted son to one day sit on David’s throne. That’s why one of the reasons why Gabriel would announce to Mary, back in Luke 1:32 that “He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David.” That’s one of the reasons why Zechariah in prophesying over his son, John the Baptist, would say this in Luke 1:68-69, “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, for He visited and accomplished redemption for His people, and raised up a horn of salvation for us in the house of David His servant.” So, Jesus’ true Father, of course, is God. But Joseph would be his legal father here on earth. And it’s because He was adopted by Joseph, son of David, that Jesus, in His humanity, could be considered to be of the royal line of David.

So, back to our text, verse 4, Luke 2:4. The point of Joseph’s trip from Nazareth to Bethlehem was his own ancestral registration. He had to go to Bethlehem. Why? Because “he was of the house and family of David.”
Now, that word “house” there, it’s always interesting to read the commentaries and to see the theories out there. But that doesn’t mean that Joseph owned a house in Bethlehem. It’s not like he had a summer place in Bethlehem. If he did, then that would be odd why he’d seek lodging with Mary in visiting Bethlehem for a number of reasons. No. Luke, in saying “house and family” there, he’s just being comprehensive. He’s intentionally doubling his language, when he says, “house and family.” Verbally he’s putting on both suspenders and a belt. It’s called a hendiadys in grammar. He’s not saying Joseph owned a home in Bethlehem. He’s rather saying this was his ancestral home, his family home.

Meaning, we’re one step closer to Luke explaining how it was that the divine promise and purpose of the Davidic Covenant and the prophetic prediction of Micah 5:2 would be fulfilled through Jesus being born in Bethlehem. Like David, Jesus would hail from Bethlehem. And it would start with his legal father Joseph returning to his ancestral home, the city of David so that God the Son could be born there. The whole point is this was perfect timing, perfect placement, all being fulfilled in the perfect plan of God. Getting Joseph and Mary to where they needed to be to fulfill prior prophecy.

Now, as we read on in the passage. We come across this very interesting phrase. And after learning that “Joseph went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and family of David,” we’re told this in verse 5, that he did so “in order to register along with Mary, who was betrothed to him.” Here’s our next point, if you’re taking notes, this is “The Defined Relationship.”

There was a common dating term I’m told -- I haven’t dated in a long time so I’m looking at these young folks in the two front sections -- called “defining the relationship.” Am I getting anything? Is that true? Ok. Somewhat, I guess. “Defining the relationship”, DTR as they called it, was your way of trying to figure out, ‘Are we dating?’ Like, ‘Are we a boyfriend/girlfriend type of thing? Or is this something else? Are we courting? Dating? What is this?’ That’s what they would say, when they would say, defining the relationship.

That’s what we’re going to do in this section of Luke 2:5. We need to “define the relationship,” specifically between Mary and Joseph. Were they only betrothed at this point? Or were they actually married? And why? Why was she on this trip to begin with? Was he the one registering for the census? Or was she there to register? Were they both registering? And if so, why? We need to work through all of it.

Let’s start with the language here that Mary “was,” Luke 2:5 here, “betrothed to him.” Now, that word “betrothed” is one that is used in a few different places in the gospel accounts to describe the relationship between Joseph and Mary. We see it here in verse 5. It very clearly says she was betrothed to him. We saw it earlier in verses 26-27 of chapter 1. Again, this is Gabriel’s angelic visitation to Mary, “Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city in Galilee called Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David, and the virgin’s name was Mary.” We see that same word “betrothed” in Matthew’s gospel, where he uses that same word to describe the nature of the relationship these two had while she was pregnant. Matthew 1:18 says, “Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: when His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit.”

Now, back when we went through verses 26-27 of chapter 1, in that sermon., I did take some time to work through the whole idea of what it meant to be “betrothed” in this context, in this culture. And we spent some time looking at the fact that to be betrothed back then in these times didn’t at all line up, didn’t exactly line up with our modern-day concept of being engaged. There’s no apples-to-apples correspondence between modern-day conceptions of engagement and the Old Testament Jewish expectations of what it means to be betrothed. There are many differences. For starters, betrothal during this period usually took place when a young girl was still quite young. A young girl like Mary would typically be betrothed sometime around the age of 12, 12 1/2, maybe 13. Really, just as she’s coming of age. And it was all done at the behest of her parents who would arrange for the betrothal and draw up the contracts and negotiate the price. And in terms of logistics, there’d be this betrothal ceremony where there’d be witnesses present and promises made. And it was at this betrothal ceremony that this girl would be formally transferred out from under the authority of her father and under the legal authority of her husband. And then after this betrothal ceremony the couple was considered externally to be legally bound.

But unlike modern-day engagements the betrothal relationship was actually a binding contractual relationship. You couldn’t just walk away from it. They were considered to be husband and wife. And the only way to terminate a betrothal was to actually go through the legal process of divorce. That brings to mind again, Matthew 1:18, which says, “Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: when His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit. And Joseph her husband,” this is verse 19, “being a righteous man and not wanting to disgrace her, planned to send her away secretly.” Those words “send her away” can also be translated, like the ESV has it, “divorce.” He planned to “divorce her secretly.” That indicates the nature of this relationship compared to a modern-day engagement.

Well, according to the custom and practice of this day, this betrothal phase of a couples’ relationship would last about a year. Typically one year exactly, actually. And the girl would still live with her parents. And the young man would still live with his parents. And the whole purpose of this waiting period was to demonstrate the faithfulness of the father’s pledge of the daughter to the parents of the groom, or groom to be. That his daughter was actually pure. So, if she was found to be pregnant in that one-year period, it would then be determined that she had been involved in some sort of illicit sexual relationship. In which case the marriage could be annulled. The divorce could be granted. She would be treated as an adulteress and possibly even put to death according to the Old Testament Law. On the other hand, if she proved herself over that one-year period to be pure, what would happen is then there would be a marriage ceremony. They would consummate the marriage. The husband would go to the parents of his now wife. He would take her and lead her back in a procession back to their now home. And they would begin to live together as husband and wife and would consummate the marriage, physically.

So, much different than what we think of as engagement. And back to our text and our context. What we know as minimum is that they made their way to Bethlehem in this text here. In verse 5 of Luke 2, at minimum, Joseph and Mary were betrothed. But what people really want to know the answer to is, were they not only betrothed, were they married? By the time they went from Nazareth to Bethlehem, were they married?

Again, we know that they were considered to be married. And we know that she was now pregnant with child. But had they actually gotten married? Were they actually in every sense married? The answer is it seems to be so. It’s about as strong as I can say it. Here’s what the biblical record tells us. We have Luke 1:27, that tells us that Joseph was betrothed to this virgin. We have our text, Luke 2:5, where he and Mary are still discussed or mentioned as being betrothed, albeit with this new detail that she’s pregnant. But note that Luke there does not change the word. He doesn’t say married; he says betrothed. So, we have to work through that. If we’re going to say that they’re married, we have to have some other reason to say they’re married. So, what do we do?

Now, we have to think through this question a little bit. And work at some of our presuppositions and firmly held beliefs. I want to poke at that just a minute. What would it really add from a prophetic standpoint to say that Mary was married to Joseph, rather than to say that Mary was betrothed to Joseph at this very moment? When we go back in time, to the Old Testament prophecies like Isaiah 7:14, is the one we should be thinking about. It says there, “the virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel.” Nothing is said about her marital status. All that’s mentioned is her physical status, namely that she was a virgin. The focus is on the divine nature of the One who would be conceived in her womb. So, strictly from the standpoint of prophetic fulfillment, there was no requirement that the virgin be formally wed to Joseph at the time she gave birth to her Spirit-conceived son.

So, is there an answer? Where do we find the answer if there is an answer? Yes, there is an answer. And I believe the answer is in Matthew 1. I should have kept you there, too. That’s why we have these ribbons in our bibles. You can mark several places and follow along. But Matthew 1:24. Matthew 1:24 says, “And Joseph got up from his sleep and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took Mary as his wife, but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus.” That’s our answer. Chronologically speaking, I believe this passage, Matthew 1:24-25, sits somewhere between Luke 1:27 and Luke 2:5. So, Matthew 1:24-25 not only debunks the Roman Catholic notion that Mary was perpetually a virgin since the text of God’s holy word tells us that Joseph “kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son.” Which implies, very clearly, that at some point after the birth, she was no longer a virgin. But these words also answer the question immediately before us here in Luke 2. Which is, when did Joseph and Mary wed? When did they become husband and wife? Apparently, there was some sort of ceremony. How big or small, we don’t know. How public or private, we don’t know. But some sort of event took place before their journey to Bethlehem, and also, before they consummated the marriage. Because that’s mentioned in Matthew 1:25. The consummation didn’t happen until later. So, something must have happened that advanced this relationship from betrothal to being legally wed before the birth of Jesus.

So that, I believe, gives us our answer to the question, were they married as of the time of this journey? The text also tells us something else. Back to Luke 2:5, namely that Joseph was on his way to Bethlehem here ”in order to register along with Mary”, it says. It says, ‘in order to register along with Mary.” What are we to make of that? See, Joseph is the one identified here, as we’ve seen, as being from the line of David. And hence, he was the one who needed to return to the city of David, to Bethlehem to register in accordance with Augustus’ census decree. So why is Mary there? Why was she along for the ride? She’s nine months pregnant.
Well, for starters. It is important to note that the way this sentence is structured in the original language. It’s not saying, it’s not compelling the conclusion that Mary is registering with Joseph like she’s registering as he’s registering. When it says, “in order to register along with Mary,” it’s just saying here, that he is registering and she’s there with him as he does so. Put it another way, she’s accompanying him as he registers at his ancestral home there in Bethlehem.

So, that’s one issue. But again, why? Why is she there? Why the need to be there? She doesn’t need to register. Why is she taking this long and bumpy and dangerous road to Bethlehem at nine months pregnant? I mean, Luke really reports this so matter-of-factly. And he does so, mind you, as a medical doctor. Going back to the beginning of our series, he’s a medical doctor. And he apparently has no issue with the fact that she is going down this bumpy road at nine months pregnant. On an 85-to-90-mile journey. (This apparently was before the era of, you know, bubble-wrapped kids and five-point harnesses and the like.) But he’s just reporting the story for what it is. Like, yeah, she is nine months pregnant. She’s on this long and bumpy and treacherous road. She’s there with Joseph as he goes to Bethlehem to register in accordance with Caesar’s decree.

This has bothered people, that she’s there, as you go through the commentaries. There are all kinds of commentators who are up in arms, that she would actually be there. They’re calling into question Luke’s historical accuracy, for bringing all this out. Saying, how could she? Would she? There’s no situation in which she would be there on this road. So, the question we have to wrestle with, is there a good reason for this? Is there a good reason that Mary was there?
I think there are a number of really good reasons.

For instance. Joseph, we recall, had his own angelic visitation. In fact, go back to Matthew 1. And I keep turning to Matthew 1. Matthew 1:18. I’ve referenced pieces of this already, but Matthew 1:18 says, “Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows, when His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit. And Joseph her husband, being a righteous man and not wanting to disgrace her, planned to send her away secretly. But when he had considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, ‘Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the One who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. And she will bear a Son; and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.’”

So, he gets this visitation, Joseph does, from this angel. And we saw already, after receiving this visitation, he no longer had this plan to send her away. Rather, he married her. Which we just looked at in verses 24-25. So, this is now his wife. So, of course he’s going to stay with her. Not only that, he wasn’t going to leave her in Nazareth. Just putting two and two together with the evidence and the record here, there’s no doubt that by this point, Mary had been exposed to all sorts of ridicule and slander as her young belly is growing in size, as people are making accusations against her, and assuming that the child in her womb is some illegitimate child. Joseph was going to rescue her from that. Not only that, he was the only one that would have understood, maybe outside of Elizabeth who she had confided in earlier in Luke’s gospel what she was going through. So again, he would be her source of comfort and strength. He wouldn’t leave her behind.

Not only that, back to Luke here, I don’t think it’s completely out of the realm of possibility -- I’m not going to die on this hill, but I’m going to mention the hill -- I don’t think it’s completely out of the realm of possibility that both Joseph and Mary, like any devout Jew at this time, would have been familiar with Micah 5:2. And they would have understood that the Messiah, at this point they know Mary is carrying it in her womb, was to be born in Bethlehem. And yes, while it was God’s providential arrangement to bring about all these circumstances that we’ve studied thus far, and while it was Caesar Augustus’ decree which brought about this pilgrimage on this specific day -- it’s very possible that Joseph and Mary had a sense that the child that she was carrying was to be born in Bethlehem. And there was resolve to get her there to that city for that purpose. Again, not dying on the hill, just mentioning it.

So far, we’ve looked at “The Distant Ride.” We’ve looked at “The Davidic Relation.” We’ve looked at “The Defined Relationship.” Here’s our fourth and final one, “The Developing Root.”
That, of course, refers to Jesus. And it comes from the last few words of verse 5 where Luke tells us that Mary as she accompanied Joseph to Bethlehem as he went to register according to Caesar Augustus’ decree, that she was “with child.” You see it there. She was “with child.”
Almost as if Luke is taking his pen here or his yellow highlighter or maybe even his finger and pointing out to Theophilus, as if to say, ‘Do you see it? Don’t miss this. The virgin has conceived just as Isaiah prophesied would happen. And through her, the Messiah, the Savior, would be born.

And that’s where I want to drive us for the last few minutes here. I want to make sure, as we keep going through Luke, and Luke 2 specifically, leading up to the Christmas holiday, that we don’t miss Christmas. “Christmas,” you might be saying, “It’s not even Thanksgiving yet.” Let’s not start that debate. You’re right though, I mean, I’m a traditionalist. I think Christmas goes after Thanksgiving. But whether we like it or not. November 1st is now the official first day of Christmas. And the last trick-or-treater knocks on the door. And it’s ‘deck the halls’ right away.
But Christmas is here. And we have to just be reminded, it’s a simple statement, but Christmas isn’t about Santa. It’s not about elves. And it’s not about gingerbread houses and eggnog.
Christmas is about the incarnation of our Lord. That incredible, miraculous event. By which the eternal Son of God conceived in His mother’s womb came into human existence, entered into this realm. And these words here at the end of verse 5, that she, Mary, “was with child,” are written here by Luke to bring to Theophilus, in his context, this sense of awe and wonder over the reality of the incarnation. And it did.

Not only for Luke here, for not only for Theophilus. But we know, as we read through the New Testament, it brought a sense of wonder and awe to various different New Testament authors.
The Apostle John, it was in our scripture reading this morning, John 1:14 said, “The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory.” Paul said to Timothy, in 2 Timothy 3:16, “great is the mystery of godliness: He who was manifested in the flesh.” Or consider passages like these, all of which touch upon, or speak in some sense, to the wonder and the glory of the incarnation. 1 John 3:5, “And you know that He was manifested in order to take away sins,” manifested, He appeared. Philippians 2:6-7, says that Christ “did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, by taking the form of a slave, by being made in the likeness of men.” Galatians 4:4, “But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law.” Romans 1:3, He “was born of the seed of David according to the flesh.” Hebrews 2:14, “since the children share in flesh and blood, He himself likewise also partook of the same.”

As I read those, you can hear it. You can hear, sense, the human authors of scripture, they’re not in lockstep as they describe the incarnation. It’s such a wonder, such a glory, that they come up with different words for this miraculous appearance of God in human flesh. But it’s there. There was no doubt for those human authors, that the incarnation brought them a sense of wonder and awe. And now I need to ask everybody here. If the incarnation similarly brings that sense of wonder and awe to you? Does it bring you a sense of wonder and awe to remember that God created you and He created me. And He created this planet that we live on. He didn’t have to do any of it. But He did. God was perfectly content and happy within His own being, going back to eternity past. He didn’t need to make any of this, create any of this. But He did.
But does it bring you a sense of wonder and awe? To remember that simply by being born, you were and you are a recipient of God’s great mercy. In your sin you rejected Him. For some, you openly rejected Him, even cursed Him. For all of us, we rejected Him with the way we lived. As we rejected His holy calling on our lives to be holy as He is holy.

Does it bring you a sense of wonder and awe? That God could have wrapped this whole thing up a long, long time ago. He could have wrapped it up after the Garden of Eden. Or after the Flood. Or after the Tower of Bable. Or after the Israelites’ continual rejection of Him. But He didn’t. He was patient.
Does it bring you a sense of wonder and awe? That, instead, at just the right time, and recall from Luke’s gospel after 400 years of silence, He sent His Son, God the Son, the Messiah, through the virgin Mary’s womb. Offering the kingdom to Israel. At the same time calling on them to repent.

Does it bring you a sense of wonder and awe? That after Israel’s rejection of Him, which, of course, culminated in His crucifixion, His death, His resurrection, and His ascension, that the message of His saving gospel would eventually be extended to Gentiles, people like you and me.

Does it bring you a sense of wonder and awe? That though He was certainly under no obligation to do so, God has offered forgiveness for sin and salvation from judgment. And the hope of eternal life, to all sin-cursed God-haters like we once were, undeserving, black-hearted rebels like we once were, He offers it to all who would believe upon the name of His Son, Jesus Christ, to all who would trust upon His finished work on the cross as the means by which we would be saved.

So, if you’re in the family of God, if you are saved, if you are a Christian, if you’ve been washed by the blood of the Lamb as we were singing this morning, those truths ought to leave you with the sense of wonderment and awe. And not at just one time of year. Not just in November if that’s how you define Christmas. And not just in November and December if that’s how you define Christmas. But all year.

But friend, if you don’t know Jesus Christ. I want you to hear me when I say this, you don’t have anything to celebrate this year, there’s nothing to celebrate this year. Yeah, you’ll have tinsel to look at. You’ll have hot cocoa to drink. You’ll have Christmas parties to attend. And family and friends to embrace. But that gnawing sense of emptiness and hopelessness and despair that you’re going through, even if right now you can’t quite pinpoint what that is -- what that is, is your conscience convicting you. And the Spirit of God drawing you. And there’s a reason that you’re here right now. At this church. In your chair. On this morning. Hearing this message.
So, heed the call of God right now. Who is calling on you to put your faith in His Son, in Jesus Christ. Trust in Jesus Christ. Believe in Him. Believe that He died for your sins. Believe that He rose from the dead. And then, you’ll be saved. Then, you’ll have something truly to celebrate.

Let’s pray. Father, thank You for this time together spent this morning in Your word. Thank You for Luke’s Gospel. Thank You for putting on his heart and in him to write what he wrote. Thank You for the complexity of the text, the beauty of the text, the beauty with which he wrote. And all of these events, I pray we are not losing sight of where this leads. To the birth of our Lord. To His incarnation. To His humiliation. To His later exaltation. God, we praise You, for sending Your Son, the Lord Jesus into the world. We praise You, for the message of Christmas. Of the incarnation. We pray that we would come away from this place this morning, with a renewed sense of awe and wonder, at what You did in sending Jesus into the world. We are undeserving. We were hopeless. We were dead in our sin. But You provided a way. You provided hope. You provided life. It began with the sending of Your Son into the world. So, God, over the next many weeks, as we continue to work through Luke chapter 2, as we prepare for the Christmas season, I do pray that we would have a sense of awe and wonder. And at the same time a sense of urgency, as we seek to share the message of the Gospel. The message of Jesus, who has come, who died, who rose, and who reigns. That we would be untiring as we share that message. So, God, thank You for this time. Pray You be glorified in our lives this week and every day. In Christ’s name. Amen.