The Gospel of Luke: Prepare Him Room

Transcript

JRNT 70
11/10/2024
The Gospel of Luke: Prepare Him Room
Luke 2:6-7
Jesse Randolph

One of the most popular Christmas carols that we sing in the in the English-speaking world, though many think its origins are German, would be “Away in a Manger.” You know the lyrics:

Away in a manger, no crib for a bed,
The little Lord Jesus laid down his sweet head.
The stars in the sky looked down where he lay,
The little Lord Jesus asleep on the hay.

The cattle are lowing, the baby awakes,
But little Lord Jesus, no crying he makes.
I love thee, Lord Jesus! Look down from the sky,
And stay by my cradle till morning is nigh.

Be near me, Lord Jesus; I ask thee to stay
Close by me forever, and love me I pray.
Bless all the dear children in thy tender care,
And take us to heaven to live with thee there.

It’s a wonderful song. It’s a beautiful song. It’s made up of these three well-balanced stanzas. Each made up of two perfectly-rhyming doublets. It has this sing-songy nursery-rhyme simplicity to it. Allowing even the youngest children, those who can’t yet pronounce their “r”s and are still lisping their way through their “s”s, to sing it with ease. It nimbly mixes together the historical “away in a manger” with the present-day, “be near me, Lord Jesus.”

And at the heart of its lyrics, what “Away in a Manger” seeks to do, is poetically depict that scene surrounding Jesus’ birth, the nativity scene. And where it draws its inspiration, so to speak, is from the text we’ll be in today, Luke 2:6-7. If you’re not there already, please turn with me, in your bibles, to Luke 2:6-7. God’s word reads: “Now it happened that while they were there, the days were fulfilled for her to give birth. And she gave birth to her firstborn son; and she wrapped Him in cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the guest room.”

Now, typically when we engage with these verses right around this time very year, as we find ourselves frantically looking for that right bible verse to put on the back of our Christmas card so that we don’t sound like all of the rest of the pagans in the world who like to send out secular holiday greetings, as we scurry off to our kids’ or grandkids’ Christmas performances, we’ll see these two verses depicted on stage. With the girl in the blue robe, (its always the blue robe) who is supposed to be Mary. And then, right behind her, lingering awkwardly, is this young boy with his hand on the small of her back, in the brown robe, that’s Joseph. And somewhere near them, there’s a doll laying on some straw in a box, that’s the baby Jesus. And then there are various other parties on the scene, a donkey, the sheep, and the shepherds and the angels.

And we’re not going to look at the role of the shepherds or the angels in this scene just yet, that comes later over the next two Sunday mornings. But today, as we work through this section of Luke’s gospel, we’re going to be right in the middle of the birth scene. Meaning that very moment that the Lord Jesus Christ entered this world through His virgin mother’s womb. The scene we’ll be zeroing in on today took place before the shepherds arrived. And before the angels heralded. And before the heavenly host proclaimed. And before those who heard of these events marveled. And before Mary treasured all of these things and pondered them in her heart.

And to properly set the scene and set the stage and to keep ourselves focused on what is happening here in this text, let’s go ahead and do some high-level background review. Just to get a running start up to our text. Recall there were, back in Luke 1, these angelic visitations.
First, Gabriel appeared, the angel Gabriel appeared to Zechariah. Whose wife, Elizabeth, was told that she would ultimately and miraculously conceive and bear a son, who would later become John the Baptist. Then, Gabriel appeared to Mary, who though a virgin, was told that she would conceive as the Holy Spirit would come upon her. And the fruit of her womb would be Jesus, the anticipated Messiah. Then there was this visitation between Elizabeth and Mary where they each and mutually marveled at all the Lord was doing through them and in them.
Then there was Mary’s Magnificat. That beautiful hymn of praise where, after she learned that she would be carrying the Messiah in her womb, her soul praised and magnified the Lord. She even referred to God as her Savior in Luke 1:47. Then there was the birth of John the Baptist, to his elderly, formerly-barren mother, Elizabeth and his elderly, priestly father, Zechariah. Then there was Zechariah’s prophecy over his newborn son, John, in Luke 1:68, where he said: “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.”

That was all in Luke 1. Then a couple of weeks ago, we finally got to Luke 2. And what we’ve seen so far was this decree from Caesar Augustus, the Roman emperor. And this census that he decreed, which would result in a census being taken of “all the inhabited earth”, Luke 2:1 says, meaning the Roman Empire. And this census, we saw, was for the purpose of identifying Caesar’s subjects, that he could tax them all. And this census, we saw was taken while a man named Quirinius was the governor in Syria. And this census, we saw was decreed in 8 B.C. But not conducted until sometime between 6 and 4 B.C. Meaning that Jesus wasn’t born in 1 A.D. the way that we commonly think of the idea. But rather, was born between 6 B.C. and 4 B.C. And this census is what led Joseph along with Mary to go from their homeland of Galilee, and specifically the town of Nazareth, to Judea, and specifically the town of Bethlehem.
And Joseph and Mary were headed to Bethlehem to register for the census there. Since Bethlehem, the city of David, was the ancestral home of Joseph. We saw that last week in Luke 2:4, that Joseph was “of the house and family of David.”

So, Jospeh heads down to the city of David, Bethlehem, to register for the census, as was the custom and practice at the time. But why did he take Mary with him? Well, as we saw last time. He took her with him because she was not only his betrothed at this time, rather it would seem that somehow in the interim they had become legally married. Though they had not yet consummated the marriage because Matthew 1:25 tells us that Joseph “kept her a virgin” until the birth of Jesus.
So, Joseph took Mary as his wife along with him to Bethlehem. He did so while she, Luke 2:5, “was with child.” And he did so, we saw last time, so that according to God’s perfect design she could give birth to the Messiah, the promised One from David’s line in the town of Bethlehem in direct fulfillment of the prophecy of Micah 5:2 which says: “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, that brings us all the way back to the front porch of our text for this morning, Luke 2:6-7. And the way that I’ve outlined it is this way: in verse 6, we’re going to see “The Fulfillment,” the beginning of verse 7 we’re going to see “The First Born,” and then in the second part of verse 7 we’re going to see “The Familiar.” “The Fulfillment.” “The First Born.” And then “The Familiar.”

Let’s start with “The Fulfillment.” Luke starts this way in verse 6, he says, “Now it happened that while they were there, the days were fulfilled for her to give birth.” If you do not have a Legacy Standard Bible translation, you’re wondering where I got those words, “now it happened” from. That word is in the Greek manuscript. “Ginomai” is the verb, and it does actually mean “now it happened”. So, it’s missing from many different modern-day translations, but it’s there. “Now it happened.”

And those words, “now it happened,” are commonly used by Luke. Look back to Luke 2:1: “Now it happened that in those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus.” Or look down the page at Luke 2:15, which said: “And it happened,” same verb, “that when the angels had gone away from them into heaven the shepherds began saying to one another, ‘Let us go to Bethlehem then, and see this thing that has happened which the Lord has made known to us.’”
Down in verse 46, much later in the narrative: “And it happened that after three days they found Him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the teachers, both listening to them and asking them questions.”

The fact is we’re going to see those words, either “and it happened” or “now it happened” throughout the Gospel of Luke. You can jot down references like Luke 3:21, Luke 5:17, Luke 9:18, Luke 11:1. As I’ve mentioned before, these are all throughout the Gospel of Luke. And also, when we see these words, “and it happened” or “now it happened,” in the Gospel of Luke. Luke is never speaking in terms of chance or happenstance. It’s not like he’s saying, “It just so happened that so-and-so was going here.” Or “it just so happened that such-and-such happened there.” No, not at all. Rather, for the benefit of his original recipient of this Gospel, this man named Theophilus, Luke uses these “now it happened” or “and it happened” statements, to keep the narrative flowing. Remember, Luke is this masterful storyteller. But also to highlight for Theophilus, that what he’s reporting, wherever he’s reporting it, is not fiction. It’s not fable. It’s not mythology. Rather, what Luke is reporting as the Holy Spirit moves him to write his very words, is fact. These words, as we see them here in Luke’s Gospel, actually happened. That’s what those words mean, “now it happened.”

And then, note what comes next. It says: “Now it happened that while they were there.” Where? Well, back to verse 4, the “there” mentioned there is Bethlehem. Luke 2:4: “Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem.”

Now, it is commonly assumed and popularly imagined, that Jesus was born the very night that Joseph and Mary arrived there in Bethlehem. That donkey-led caravan clip-clopped its way into the little town of Bethlehem and within hours, if not minutes, the Savior was born. Where do we get that idea? Well, the history of this idea of Him being born, the Lord being born, that first instance, when they first got to Bethlehem -- like the history of any ideas that we hold on to is actually fascinating. This idea comes from a non-canonical book, called the Gospel of James. So, we have the letter of James in our bibles. That letter is sandwiched between Hebrews and 1 Peter. Well, some 80 or 90 years after the letter of James was written, that means some 30 to 40 years after we got our 66 canonical books of the bible closed. A new work called the Gospel of James started circulating and floating around. And this Gospel of James was making all sorts of wild claims.
First of all it said that it was written by James, Jesus’ half-brother. Which is interesting, because he was martyred decades and decades before this letter to which his name is attached.
And then there’s this, this letter, the Gospel of James. Its traditional name is actually the “Protoevangelium of James,” meaning the proto-gospel of James. Meaning it purports to be a precursor to the gospel account of life of our Lord. And how so? Well, this Gospel of James, claims to be telling the story of Mary leading up to the inspired Gospel accounts that we have in the four Gospels. It’s a prequel you could say, although the focus here is on Mary. It’s in the Gospel of James that we learn about Mary’s supposed immaculate conception. Which undergirds the Roman Catholic Church’s teaching today. That it was not only Jesus who was immaculately conceived, but his mother as well. It’s in this Gospel of James that we learn of Mary’s supposed perpetual virginity. Which, again, is a long-held teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. But which, we’re going to see in a few minutes, is directly refuted by the bible. And then getting back to our text for this morning, it’s in the Gospel of James, that we get this whole notion that Jesus was born on the very night that Joseph and Mary arrived in Bethlehem.

In fact, I’m going to go ahead and read for you an excerpt from the Gospel of James. So that you can get a sense of where we got this idea of Jesus being born the night his parents arrive in Bethlehem. And as I read this remember this is not scripture. This is an ancient writing. It’s interesting to read, in some respects, from a historical standpoint. But this is not inspired. It’s not given to us by God. In fact, a few summers ago, I did this summer evening study in bibliology. Where we saw why we have 66 books of the bible and why certain books are not in the cannon and certain are. If you’re interested in why we don’t have the Gospel of James in the cannon, I’d invite you to go back and find that message.

But for now, here’s what the Gospel of James says. And this apparently is Mary speaking, and she’s saying this to Joseph. She starts with . . . and this is Old English, so forgive the expression. She says: “Take me down from off the ass,” Old English word for donkey. She says: “for that which is in me presses to come forth. And he took her down from off the ass, and said to her: Whither shall I lead you, and cover your disgrace? For the place is desert. And he found a cave there, and led her into it; and . . . he went out to seek a midwife in the district of Bethlehem”

And now it changes to the first person, and this is now Joseph speaking directly apparently, and he says: “And I saw a woman coming down from the hill-country, and she said to me: O man, whither are you going? And I said: I am seeking a Hebrew midwife. And she answered and said to me: Are you of Israel? And I said to her: Yes. And she said: And who is it that is bringing forth in the cave? And I said: A woman betrothed to me. And she . . . has conceived of the Holy Spirit.” Continuing on: “The midwife to him: Is this true? And Joseph said to her: Come and see. And the midwife went away with him. And they stood in the place of the cave, and behold a luminous cloud overshadowed the cave. And the midwife said: My soul has been magnified this day because my eyes have seen strange things – because salvation has been brought forth to Israel. And immediately the cloud disappeared out of the cave, and a great light shone in the cave, so that the eyes could not bear it. And in a little that light gradually decreased, until the infant appeared, and went and took the breast from His mother Mary.”

So, if you’re tracking, the story that’s being told there, is that this young couple arrives in Bethlehem. She’s very much ready to give birth. Joseph finds a cave for Mary. He goes to find this Hebrew midwife. The midwife heads back to the cave with Joseph, where Mary is laboring. The child is born. And the midwife rejoices over the fact that “salvation has been brought forth to Israel.” It’s fascinating.

But now, let’s get back to our text. Let’s get back to the actual text of scripture. Luke 2:6-7 again:
“Now it happened that while they were there, the days were fulfilled for her to give birth. And she gave birth to her firstborn son.” No mention of a donkey. No mention of Joseph running off to find a midwife. No mention of a midwife assisting with the birth. Or this midwife later praising God the way Mary did back in her Magnificat. No. The text of scripture, the actual words of God, simply tell us that Jesus was born in a specific town, Bethlehem, in fulfillment of Micah’s prophecy. And at a specific time, namely, verse 6 says: “while they were there, the days were fulfilled to give birth.”

And note, by the way, that the actual inspired words here, in verses 6-7 from Luke, through the Spirit, actually seem to refute what the Gospel of James says. About Jesus being born the night that they arrived in Bethlehem. Note, that verse 6 here doesn’t say, “as they were arriving there.” Or “immediately upon arriving there.” It just says, “while they were there.” And that language is signaling that Joseph and Mary had been in Bethlehem for some period of time. Perhaps a day. Perhaps a couple of days. Perhaps a few days before Jesus was born. We don’t know the precise time reference.

Now, speaking of our Lord’s birth, Luke here says, at the end of verse 6, that “the days were fulfilled for her to give birth.” Those words mirror the same words Luke uses to give the account of Elizabeth’s delivery of John over in Luke 1:57. You see it there, it says: “Now the time was fulfilled for Elizabeth to give birth, and she gave birth to a son.” Same language. And both of these accounts actually harken back to the Old Testament account of Rebekah giving birth to her twins, Jacob and Esau. Genesis 25:24 says: “And her days to give birth were fulfilled, and behold, there were twins in her womb.”

Well, back to our passage here, in Luke 2:6. There’s this double meaning and significance to the words he uses here when he speaks of fulfillment.
On the one hand, he’s using fulfillment language, Luke is, to point out that what the angel Gabriel had announced to Mary back before in Luke 1, was now coming to fruition. Recall Luke 1:31, the angel says to her: “And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name Him Jesus.” So, what Gabriel was announcing to Mary back in Luke 1, is now being fulfilled in Luke 2, through the birth of Jesus.

On the other hand, though, Luke -- Dr. Luke, recall we believe he was a medical doctor -- in saying that “the days were fulfilled for her to give birth,” he’s also pointing out the fact that very simply her pregnancy had reached full term. Her nine months of gestation were up. It was time for this baby now to be born.

So, on the one hand, there’s this transcendent reality, highlighting these miraculous events surrounding the birth of our Lord, happening exactly according to God’s eternal plan.
Galatians 4:4: “But when the fulness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law.” But at the same time these events were happening according to this very ordinary, you could say, biological process. As a real woman’s real pregnancy really comes to its conclusion after nine or so months. “The days were fulfilled,” it says, “for her to give birth.”

Now, verse 6, where we’ve been camped out so far, is really from Luke’s vantage point. All introduction leading into what he’s going to say here in the beginning of verse 7. If you’re taking notes, that takes us to our second point, which is “The Firstborn.” So, we’ve seen “The Fulfillment.” Now, we have “The Firstborn.”
Now, there are a few things that we’re going to unpack here, as we consider the firstborn. But first of all, I just want to highlight here what Luke is describing here at the beginning of verse 7. In frankly very understated language, what he’s describing is absolutely staggering. This is his divinely inspired account of Jesus’ birth. This is the moment that the Creator of the universe -- John 1:3, “All things came into being through Him” -- entered into His creation. This is the very moment of the One who Himself had declared, “Let there be light,” comes into the world as the Light of the World. This is the very moment that the One who, since He created it, has been upholding the universe by the word of His power, comes into this world as a baby. This is the very moment that the One who formed Mary while she was in her mother’s womb, is now entering the world through hers. Charles Spurgeon captured the significance of this moment, beautifully, when he said: “He that made man was made man. Infinite, and an infant. Eternal, and yet born of a woman. Almighty, and yet hanging on a woman’s breast. Supporting a universe, and yet needing to be carried in a mother’s arms.” These are completely astonishing realities. And Luke here communicates them through this simple, inconspicuous language.

In fact, his language is so toned down that we can blow right past it, if we’re not being careful. And we really, really shouldn’t. To think that the eternal Son of God would leave the eternal glories of heaven and be born in some dusty village in Bethlehem. And that He would do so, knowing that His mission here on earth in His abbreviated life here was ultimately to die. And that He would do so, knowing that He would be rejected and ridiculed and mocked at and spit upon by His own countrymen. And to do so, knowing that He would ultimately shed His own blood for generations and generations and generations of fist-shaking, rebellious, ungodly sinners like you and me. And that He did so, knowing that His name would be used as a curse word in a world He came to die for.

It is truly impossible for a mere man, a mere creature like me, to explain to mere creatures like you, the love, and the sacrifice, and the self-emptying involved, in the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. And thank the Lord, the pressure’s not on me, because it’s given to us, right here in the Word. God has already told us what happened in Philippians 2, what we read from in our scripture reading this morning. Philippians 2:5-7, He has already spoken to us on this matter. He says: “Have this way of thinking in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although existing in the form of God, 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.” Did you catch that? Jesus emptied Himself. He took the form of a slave. He was made in the likeness of men. And it starts right here at the incarnation, at His birth.

Now, indulge me, if you would, for a moment. Thought Experiment Time. Imagine if Christ hadn’t done what the scriptures say that He did. Imagine if the incarnation hadn’t occurred. Imagine if the virgin birth of Christ hadn’t occurred. Or imagine if rather than Christ emptying Himself, he chose immediately to pour His wrath. Or rather than taking the form of a humble slave, He took on the form eternally of a condemning judge. Or rather than being made in the likeness of men, He just remained in His transcendent position in the heavenlies, waiting for the day that each of us would die, so that He could consign our souls to eternal hell. As God, He had every right to do just that. Psalm 115:3 says: “our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases.” He was under no obligation to offer us a way out. He didn’t have to enter into His creation as our sympathetic and merciful Savior. But He did. And for that, and a whole host of other reasons, we ought to praise Him.

And not only that. But with the Spirit’s help, we ought to seek to model our life after His.
“Well, she’s a nag.” “He’s inconsiderate.” “She doesn’t respect me.” “He won’t talk to me.” “She thinks she’s too good for me.” Could you imagine how many sentences like those, thoughts like those, sinful approaches like those, would ultimately be done away with. Healing marriages. Healing homes. Healing church relationships. If we spent a lot less time focusing on what so-and-so did. And spending a lot more time at marveling at what Christ did, in His incarnation, when He entered into the world, when He entered His creation.

The next thing we need to work through here in verse 7 is Luke’s use of this word “firstborn.” The Greek word “firstborn” is “prototokos.” And what is Luke driving at here with that word? Well, to start, there’s a literary purpose to this word. And by that, I simply mean, Luke, as he writes that word and uses that word in Luke 2:7, he’s actually setting the stage for what he’ll say down the page in Luke 2:21. In fact, go ahead and turn there to Luke 2:21. Now, he’s in the temple presentation phase of Jesus’ life. It says: “And when eight days were fulfilled so that they could circumcise Him, His name was called Jesus, the name given by the angel before He was conceived in the womb. And when the days for their cleansing according to the Law of Moses were fulfilled, they brought Him up to Jerusalem to present Him to the Lord (as it is written in the Law of the Lord, ‘Every firstborn male that opens the womb shall be called holy to the Lord’), and to offer a sacrifice according to what was said in the Law of the Lord, ‘A pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons.’”

In other words, as Luke wrote out this entire narrative… You know, he wasn’t writing this in two verse installments, the way that we handle it and preach it and hear it. He likely wrote some of this in large chunks, in single sittings, Luke did. So, as he’s writing out this entire narrative, what we know of as the Gospel of Luke, what he wrote in our passage, Luke 2:7, was already anticipating that later scene in Luke 2:21, where in fulfillment of the Law, Jesus is presented in the temple as the firstborn male of His family. So, there’s a literary side of things. It fits the whole literary flow of what Luke is saying here.

Then there’s a lexical purpose to Luke’s word “firstborn” there. “Lexical” is just a fancy way of saying the meaning of words or definition of words. And lexically, that word “firstborn” means (no surprise here) first born. As is in, Jesus was the first, the oldest of His siblings. Yes, Jesus had brothers and sisters. And of course, there are approximately 1.3 billion Romand Catholics on the planet today, who would disagree with what I just said. And that’s because for centuries now the Roman Catholic Church has fed its members the lie, not only that Mary was immaculately conceived and that she was sinless, but that she never had sexual relations with a man. That she was perpetually a virgin. Which, of course, would foreclose the whole notion of Jesus having brothers and sisters. The only problem, of course, is that scriptures say the complete opposite.

For instance, if you were to go to Matthew 13, you’d see some very specific statements about Jesus having siblings. Matthew 13:55: “Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers” -- “adelphoid,” that’s the word “brothers” -- “James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? And His sisters, are they not all with us?” Luke 6:19: “And His mother and brothers came to Him, and they were unable to get o Him because of the crowd.” So, there are statements where the fact that He had brothers and sisters is explicitly stated. Then there are other passages that come at the topic in a more indirect way. Like Matthew 1:24: “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.”
Implication, she was not perpetually a virgin. And then there’s our passage, of course, Luke 2:7, where Jesus is referred to as Mary’s firstborn. Not only, not exclusive -- firstborn. So, literarily, that statement “she gave birth to her firstborn” is setting up what Luke will say later in the Gospel about Jesus’ dedication at the temple. Lexically, that statement, that word, is pointing to the fact that Jesus was the first born of multiple children between Joseph and Mary. So, for obvious reasons, she was not perpetually a virgin.

That brings us to the next one. Which is that Luke’s word here, when he refers to Jesus at the firstborn, also carries significant theological weight. For instance, that word “firstborn” used elsewhere in scripture speaks of the preeminence of Christ. He’s preeminent with regard to humanity. We see that in Romans 8:29: “those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brothers.” So, He’s firstborn among humanity. He’s also firstborn vis-a-vis the created order.
Colossians 1:15: “He is firstborn of all creation.”

Not only that. That word “firstborn” here in verse 7, harkens back to the days of the Old Testament. Where the firstborn son in an Israelite Jewish family would have a first right of inheritance to whatever their father left. And there’s a clear parallel here to Jesus, who as the first born son to Joseph and Mary, the firstborn among men, the firstborn of all creation, is also the One who will one day inherit and establish the kingdom which His Father long ago promised to establish here on earth. That Kingdom is not now. The kingdom has not yet come in the Church Age. But it will one day come. As the One who entered through this womb so meekly and humbly is going to one day come on the clouds on a horse with a sword and meet justice out on His enemies as He sits on the throne of David in Jerusalem and rules physically over the entire earth.

All this to say, the words here in verse 7 that Jesus was Mary’s firstborn son are totally layered with complexity. They encompass that very simple and straightforward truth about where Jesus ranked in the birth order of His earthly family. But they also rise to the level of describing Jesus’ preeminence, His supremacy, and His one-day physical rule over the earth.

We’ve seen “The Fulfillment,” verse 6: “Now it happened that while they were there, the days were fulfilled for her to give birth.” We’ve seen “The Firstborn,” first part of verse 7: “And she gave birth to her firstborn son.” Now, we get to our third point, where we’ll spend the rest of our time this morning and that is “The Familiar.”

Point three is “The Familiar.” Look at the rest of verse 7: “and she wrapped Him in cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the guest room.”
Here we encounter the truly menial origins of the Majestic One, the Messiah.

Now, recall some of the things the angel Gabriel had said to Mary about this Child she would carry. The angel Gabriel said to her in Luke 1:28: “Greetings, favored one! The Lord is with you.”
But now what? Well, now she and Joseph had no place to go. There was no room for them. Gabriel had said to Mary in Luke 1:32, in speaking of the Son who would one day be born to her that “He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High.” But not what? All that same great One was now being laid in a manger. Everything that we’re seeing in the scene that we’re studying here in verses 6-7, is a reminder of the humiliation of Jesus Christ, the humiliation of our Lord. Not humiliation, in the sense of embarrassment. He had nothing to be ashamed of or embarrassed by. But humiliation in the sense of His humbling. His lowering of Himself. His stooping to the level of His creation as he came on this mission to seek and to save that which was lost.

Now, the way I’ll be handling this section of Luke’s narrative, which is so familiar to many of us, hence the heading, “The Familiar,” is first by noting what’s absent from this account. And then we’ll work our way through the actual words that Luke gives us.
Let’s start with what’s missing. For starters, there’s no mention of cattle lowing or sheep or oxen or any other animal being present. I mean, we know that shepherds will eventually join the scene. And shepherds, of course, tend sheep. But the reality is the text before us says nothing about this whole scene resembling a modern-day petting zoo. There’s no mention of a single animal being present.

Also, there’s no mention here of some sort of harsh, insensitive innkeeper who turns Joseph and Mary away. We’ve seen the innkeeper in every play we’ve ever seen at Christmas time. Right? We’ve heard this story. At least, we’ve assumed this is the story. That Mary, heavily-pregnant, laboring. She’s on the back of the donkey. Her legs are off to the side. Joseph is gently leading their traveling party into Bethlehem, towing Mary and the donkey behind. Joseph and Mary arrive at this inn. They ask for a room, a room where Mary can deliver the Christ Child in comfort. But the innkeeper doesn’t oblige. Instead, he points to the neon “no vacancy” sign (somehow they had neon “no vacancy” signs back then) and tells them that there are no rooms available in his inn. But then, perhaps seeing their desperation, he relents and says something like, “I tell you what, we do have a stable out back, you’ll just have to mind the smells and the sounds of the animals, the bleating sheep and such back there.” Joseph says, “Good enough.”
Joseph then hurries Mary over to the stable, gathers some hay, forms a makeshift birthing bed out of it, Mary gives birth to Jesus in the midst of bleating sheep and smells and the lowing of cattle, and voila, it’s a Christmas miracle. That’s the story that we hear about. That’s the story we see visually in books and plays and the like.

The only problem is none of that is mentioned anywhere in the text! Look again at verse 7:
“And she gave birth to her firstborn son; and she wrapped Him in cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the guest room.” Or “inn”, if you’re reading from the NASB, or any other translation. No mention of animals. No mention of an innkeeper.

Here’s another one, another fact or feature that’s not in the text. And we covered this one a couple of Sundays ago, so, I will not belabor this. But there’s no mention of the time of year that all of this took place. There’s no mention of a chill in the air or people seeing the fog of their breath that would suggest a winter birth. There’s no mention of the hillsides turning green which would suggest a spring birth. There’s no mention of Mary and Joseph sweating under the linen garments they were wearing which would suggest a summer birth. There’s no mention of the days growing shorter which would suggest a fall birth. There’s nothing of the sort. Rather, as we saw a couple of Sundays ago. Luke’s focus in this account is not so much on laying out the specific time, as in time of year, season that Jesus was born. But instead his focus is on the place that Jesus was born. And that’s because the place that Jesus was born, it was and is directly relevant to whether He was the promised Messiah Who was expected to be born in Bethlehem in fulfillment of Micah 5:2. So, why do we celebrate Christmas on December 25? You’ll have to wait a few weeks for that one. Because I’m going to actually devote an entire message to studying some of the mythology and traditions surrounding Christmas when we get closer to the actual holiday.

But, for today’s purpose, the point is, that there are a number of details which we may have just assumed are in the text. Animals gathered around the manger, this insensitive but ultimately accommodating innkeeper, a winter birth, which actually are not in the text. So, if that’s what’s not in the text, those details aren’t actually in the text, what does our text actually tell us about the circumstances surrounding Jesus’ birth? What does the text tell us about this nativity scene?

Well, we’re told here in verse 7, that Mary covered the baby Jesus in a certain way, “she wrapped Him in cloths.” We’re told that she placed the baby in a certain place. She “laid Him in a manger.” And we’re told that she did this for a specific reason. You see it there, at the end of verse 7, “because there was no place for them in the guest room.” Now, I know when I read those last words, when I just mentioned those last words, “there was no place for them in the guest room,” those words just don’t sit right with some of you. There might be even a pitchfork on your floor that you’re ready to raise up. And that’s because you’re trusty NASB or ESV or KNJB says, “there was no place for them in the inn.” And you’ve heard that line so many times each and every Christmas that “there was no place for them in the inn,” that you are sure that I got it wrong when I said, “guest room.” And I get it. If doesn’t sound Christmassy enough, does it? To say there was no room for them in the guest room. But frankly, my goal isn’t, and your goal shouldn’t be, to sound Christmassy. My goal is and you goal should be to be biblical. So, let’s dig into this a bit.

And knowing that I’ve likely drawn the ire of many Christmas traditionalists in the room. And knowing that you will not be able to concentrate on anything else I say from this point forward for the next many minutes. Let’s iron out the guest room/inn question first. And then we’ll work our way backwards into things like the manger and the cloths that Jesus was wrapped in.
So, let’s start with this matter of the inn. As we’ve already seen, this text says nothing about an innkeeper. So, now we want to narrow that question down to what type of structure did Joseph and Mary come upon, as they arrived there in the town of Bethlehem. Was it an inn? Like a hotel? Or a motel? (I still don’t know the difference between those two) Or like a bed and breakfast? Or was it something else?

Let’s start with some basic grammar. The Greek word that Luke uses here in describing this place that Joseph and Mary came upon, this place which had no room for them is “kataluma.” That’s the Greek word. That means nothing, I know, to any of us right now. But let’s go over to Luke 22. Let’s do a little bit of a deep dive here into this “guest room” versus “inn” debate or idea. Go with me to Luke 22. Lord willing, we’ll be here in a few years. But the scene is Jesus is taking the Passover meal with His disciples. This is right before the Last Supper, before His prayer in Gethsemane, right before Judas’ betrayal, Jesus’ arrest. But look at Luke 22:7, it says: “Then came the first day of Unleavened Bread on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed. And Jesus sent Peter and John, saying, ‘Go and prepare the Passover for us, so that we may eat it.’ And they said to Him, ‘Where do You want us to prepare it?’ And He said to them, ‘Behold, after you have entered the city, a man will meet you carrying a pitcher of water; follow him into the house that he enters. And you shall say to the owner of the house, “The Teacher says to you, ‘Where is the guest room in which I may eat the Passover with My disciples?’” And he will show you a large, furnished upper room; prepare it there.”
Now note, verse 11, where Jesus says, “Where is the guest room in which I may eat the Passover with My disciple?” The word for guest room there is, you guessed it, “kataluma.” And the word here, at least in my bible, is not translated, “Where is the Inn.” “Where is the hotel in which I may go eat the Passover with My disciples.” No. The word is rightly translated guest room. Like a guest room in a private house. What we might, even in our day, call a spare bedroom, spare upstairs/downstairs bedroom.

Now, someone even here might push back and say, “Well, Jesse, you always tell us that Greek words have this wider range of meaning. And you always tell us that context is king. So, yeah maybe the word “kataluma” can mean guest room. But who’s to say that Luke didn’t intentionally use that same word here to refer to an inn?” And I get why some of you might have that argument. But the reason I don’t think that argument ‘has legs’ is that there is an entirely different Greek word for inn, like a commercial, for-profit inn. The way that we would think of an inn, like Super 8, Motel 6, wherever you stay. And not only does a different word for inn exist, but Luke actually uses that word in a different part of his Gospel.
Look with me at Luke 10. Go back from Luke 22 to Luke 10. And the scene here is Luke’s account of Jesus’ encounter with the lawyer. Who asks him that question: “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” And Jesus gives him those two great commandments. Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength. Love your neighbor as yourself. The Lawyer asks Him the question, verse 29, “And who is my neighbor?” And look how Luke captures Jesus’ reply in verse 30 of Luke 10. It says: “Jesus replied and said, ‘A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among robbers, and they stripped him and beat him, and went away leaving him half dead. And a priest happened to be going down on that road, and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. Likewise a Levite also, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, who was on a journey, came upon him, and when he saw him, he felt compassion. And he came to him and bandaged up his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them, and he put him on his own animal, and brought him to an inn and took care of him.”

So, those last few words, verse 34, he “brought him to an inn.” The word Luke uses there, for inn is not kataluma. It’s an entirely different word, “pandocheion,” which according to a standard Greek lexicon refers to a place “where a traveler might find a night’s lodging.” And what do we call that place? An inn. In other words, Luke, precise grammarian that he was, able wordsmith that he was, deep vocabulary that he had, he showed his familiarity with that word “inn” in Luke 10:34. So, why then did he not use that word “inn”, in our text, Luke 2:7? Answer? Because the structure, the building that Joseph and Mary were seeking access to in Bethlehem, as Mary was prepared to give birth to our Lord, wasn’t an inn! Instead, it was a guest room, a kataluma, in a private residence of some sort.

That interpretation makes sense, not only in terms of the strict grammar of this passage, but also, when we consider the overall context of our text here. First of all, remember Bethlehem was this small little village at time of Jesus’ birth. Likely just a few hundred people living here. We even remember the words of Micah 5:2, the great prophecy. It says: “But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, too little to be among the clans of Judah.” Bethlehem was small and forgettable. It was little. It was a one-stoplight sort of town. It wasn’t the type of place that would have a commercial inn, the way that we think of an inn.

And also, what Bethlehem was known for, we’ve seen this the last couple of messages, was its Davidic roots. We saw it last time, it was called the city of David. And so Joseph being of the house and family of David was back in the city of David for this census, his ancestral home to register for Caesar’s census. And what Bethlehem may have had was a private residence of some sort which housed some of Joseph’s kin, distant though they might have been. And this private residence could have been large enough, as some private residences were large enough in this time, to have an additional room or two for guests that came through. And what very well could have happened here is that Joseph took Mary to this house of one of his distant relatives living there in Bethlehem. But there was no room for them, since it was either occupied by some of Joseph’s other distant relatives, or perhaps by Roman soldiers who just camped out in the place. We don’t know.

What we do know is that Joseph and Mary had to go find some new accommodations, some alternate accommodations, with no spot for them in the guest room. They needed to find a different place for Mary to give birth. And that brings us back to verse 7 which tells us that after “she gave birth to her firstborn son,” Mary “laid Him in a manger.” We have to do two things with that word “manger.” First, we have to figure out what this manger was. What is a manger? And then we need to determine where this manger would have been located. That’s the question people want to know the answer to.
First, what is a manger? What would Luke have been thinking of, as he wrote that word, directed by the Spirit, “manger?” Well, the word “manger” literally means feeding trough. It’s a place where pigs and sheep would have been burying their wet snouts and poking out their scratchy tongues to grab onto whatever grain or feed their owner had put in that trough. And while many have leapt to the conclusion that his feeding trough was located inside a stable or what we would think of as a barn, there’s no indication of that from the text. All the text tells us is that our Lord was laid down by His mother in a feeding trough, a manger. A manger in these days could have been in a few different places. You’d find a manger in some cases in a hollowed-out cave carved into the hillside. You’d find mangers in open courtyards where animals had been tied down for the night. You’d find mangers in some sort of attached enclosure or pen that was adjacent to someone’s residence.

Here in the Gospel of Luke, we’re not told exactly where this manger was located. We’re not told if it was in a cave. That was the view of many early church fathers, like Justin Martyr and Origen. That is the understanding of those who look at the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, that it’s a cave in which Jesus was born. There are others who say it could have been in an open or enclosed area. Again, adjacent to somebody’s residence, somebody’s private home. We’re not told. We’re given no clear indication. Rather, all that we’re told is that sometime soon after His birth, Mary, the mother of our Lord Jesus, placed her Spirit-conceived, newborn Child in a filthy feeding trough. That’s what we’re told.

And that’s really fitting. Because the real point that Luke is driving at here is not location. Luke’s primary concern in writing what he wrote here was not to help us determine whether Jesus was born in a cave or in a sheepfold. And it certainly wasn’t Luke’s intent to fuel the modern-day tourism industry, to give modern-day Bethlehemites a profit on curious souvenir-hungry Americans and Europeans. No. His primary concern in writing what he wrote here was to highlight the depths to which our Lord lowered Himself in that humiliation of His incarnation. Though our Lord was worthy of a king’s welcome, as He arrived here on earth, that’s not at all what He received.

Well, last, there’s this, the cloths, the cloths mentioned in verse 7, the cloths our Lord was wrapped in as Mary laid Him down in the manger. What were those, the cloths? Well, those would have been strips of cloth likely taken from old clothes which had been torn up. And they were used to wrap up or swaddle a baby tightly. Keep them warm in the wintertime, especially. To keep them from scratching themselves with their little sharp fingernails. To strengthen, to straighten their limbs. That was the thought, that as you swaddle them, their otherwise malleable little bones would grow straight if you wrap them, if you swaddle them. And that’s what Mary did. This young mother, she wrapped the infant, Jesus, she swaddled Him in these cloths, for any one of those reasons.

But, also in her doing so, as Luke reports here, she did so as a sign. It was going to be a sign for the shepherds who would soon visit Him. Look down the page at Luke 2:10, it says:
“But the angel said to them, ‘Do not be afraid,” speaking to the shepherds, “for behold, I bring you good news of great joy which will be for all the people. For today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. And this will be the sign for you: you will find a baby wrapped in cloths and lying in a manger.”

Well, we have spent another near hour on just two verses. Probably wondering when we’re going to pick up the pace and gain some speed. The answer is, I don’t know. But as we’ve worked through all of this information about the guest room and the manger and the cloths. What I want to make sure we don’t get too far away from here, is the why. For what purpose? The application, you could say. Often times, you go to a church and you’ll kind of ignore what the preacher says. You’ll ignore what the text is that he is sort of dabbling in. And you’ll just want to get to the end of the sermon, where he tells you something like this is what you need to do with this message. Here are my seven points of application for you. And then people scribble that on the note that goes on the fridge. That’s what they live in light of that coming week. That’s not what I mean by application. There are natural, built-in applications to God’s sufficient word. And I think there’s a real simple one here.

And that is simply to remember. As we come upon this text and all these details about, again, the manger, the wrapping of the child, guest room versus inn. The application for us is to remember, to remember the humble beginnings of our Lord’s earthly mission. Right? At His first coming there was no parade or blare of trumpets. There was no royal majesty or pomp. There was no triumphant procession. We know shepherds and wisemen will come later. But as it relates to Joseph and Mary coming into Bethlehem and Mary giving birth to the Messiah, there was none of that. That all comes later. The majesty, the triumph, the procession. That all comes later, when our Lord comes again.

There’s an old Puritan named Thomas Adams, and you read the Puritans, you have a lot of great stuff. A lot of great devotional content. They get a lot of things wrong, too. Don’t get me wrong. But there’s a Puritan named Thomas Adams. And I appreciate this quote about the Lord’s incarnation and as it relates to His one day Second Coming. He says, “He that rose from the clods, we expect from the clouds.” I think that’s pretty profound. He came in humiliation, He’s coming again in glory. But again, at His birth, at His incarnation, He came into this world, a world He Himself had made, in the most humble of circumstances. The very lowliest of the lowly.
2 Corinthians 8:9 says: “For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though being rich, yet for your sake He became poor, so that you through His poverty might become rich.”
What grace.

Let’s pray. Lord, thank You for the reminders this morning from Your word. About the circumstances in which You sent Your Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, into this world. In humble circumstances. Emptying of Himself. Taking on the form of a servant. And it even goes all the way back to the scene there in Bethlehem. Though the Creator, though God, our Lord, came into this world in such meager circumstances, in the dirt as it were, as that quote we just read said. Unannounced, unheralded in various ways. But we know that He is coming again. And in between, we know that many important things happened. We know that our Lord lived a perfect life. And we know that our Lord would go on to die a sacrificial death. We know that He would announce His coming and offer the kingdom to the Jewish people around Him. And then after His death and after His resurrection and after His ascension, that very message of reconciliation to God through Him was proclaimed to the Gentiles. And we are now the beneficiaries of that same hope. So, God, I pray that as we continue to go through this story of our Lord’s wonderful, glorious incarnation, we wouldn’t lose sight of the Gospel truths that are attached to this event. And the hope that we have through them. God, I pray that we would marvel and wonder, if we have been saved, at the salvation we’ve received through Christ. And if we’ve not put our faith in Jesus, if there’s anyone here who has not yet bent the knee to Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord, I do pray that this would be the day. Or this would be the season as we celebrate His advent, His first coming. This would be the day in which somebody is given new life. But we thank You. We thank You for the perfect word You’ve given us. We thank You for this account from Luke’s Gospel. I pray that, as we just mentioned, we remember these truths and revel in these truths and wonder at these truths. And proclaim these truths to people around us. We love You. And thank You for this time. In Christ’s name. Amen.