1. Luke 1:1-4. Who was Theophilus?

No one knows who he was, or even if this is a man’s name. The term means “lover of God” and may thus be addressed to all of us.

2. Matthew 1:1-17, Luke 3:23-38. How do the two genealogies of Jesus differ?

Matthew traces the line from David through his son Solomon, the royal and legal heir. Luke goes from David also, but through son Nathan, presumably to Mary, thus giving a tracing of the genetic line.

3. Matthew 2:2. These were pagan astrologers, but they were sure that a King was being pointed out by a particular star. Is there truth to astrology?

Commentators suggest that there was a general expectation in that era, gained from the prophets, that a King was to arise from the Jews. But how that translated to a particular phenomenon in the sky, we are, alas, not able to ascertain.

Astronomers tell us that it was probably not a “natural” occurrence, as a particular star or conjunction of planets or the like. Our faith tells us it could have been a supernatural light as was available to the Jews in the wilderness. Could have been. But the record is not complete and only leads to speculation.

Once we decide what it was, we must figure out how the seeing of it, communicated to non-Jewish star gazers, led anyone to believe that this was a light that would lead them to Jesus. We have seen “His Star”. How did they know Who “He” was to begin with? How could something so high in the sky lead them a little at a time to Jerusalem? How could anything so low not be noticed by every curious person along the way, producing a crowd that would have tripled the population of Bethlehem, even in its present crowded situation?

I don’t know. But I ask questions like this to stir up your own thinking process. Perhaps you will do research on the question yourself and report back to the Church. Or perhaps we shall all just have to let it go and take it by faith.

4. Matthew 2:22. Herod is dead. He was the one murdering children. Why is Joseph afraid of Herod’s son, who now reigns?

Evidently he kept abreast of the news of his homeland while he was in Egypt. If so, he learned that Archelaus was even worse than his dad had been! A cruel murderer, this tyrant was eventually thrown out by the Romans. Joseph opted for his home province of Galilee where ruled the lesser of the evils that were plaguing the Israel of the first century, a son named Herod Antipas.

5. Matthew 2:23. Which prophet said that the Messiah would be called a “Nazarene”?

There is no written prophecy in your Old Testament that makes this claim. Possibilities:

• Was Matthew talking about verbal traditions from prophets, that had been passed down orally but never written? Note he does not mention a particular prophet but speaks of the class generally.
• Was he speaking of Isaiah 11:1? The word there for “branch” [ naytzer] sounds a lot like the name of this city where Jesus grew up.
• Was he speaking of the general contempt people had for Nazareth, “Can anything good come out of Nazareth?” being the proverb of the day. So, any passage of the Old Testament that showed scorn for the coming Messiah could identify Him with the base town of his childhood.

It seems certain to me that Matthew’s first readers knew exactly what he was talking about, even though that bit of information has been lost through the ages.

6. Matthew 3:6. Where did baptism in water originate? How did John know to do this?

Water was actually a symbol of cleansing as far back as Moses. Leviticus talks of leprosy being cleansed by bathing in running water. Priests were to wash hands and feet in the bronze laver of the tabernacle. Washing was a part of Judaism. And Macarthur adds that by John’s day the Jews had been immersing Gentile converts into the Jewish faith. John just took it a step further and connected it to repentance from sin, which connection was carried over into the Christian church by Jesus and his apostles.

7. Luke 3:16. Will Jesus baptize everyone in the Spirit? In fire?

Note that it was not an apostolic audience to which John preached. But also note that there is not an inclusiveness suggested in this promise. There is no question, from other passages, that the Holy Spirit is meant for all believers. There is no such assurance from other passages about fire. Nevertheless His prediction came true on Pentecost, when tongues of fire appeared and sat on every apostle. Has that fire been ingested into the life of the church and brought about the preaching of the Gospel in every land, the call to martyrdom, the aching for souls whether saved or unsaved? Is this the fire that burns in every cleansed heart, desiring perfectly that the righteousness and holiness of God be established in God’s people?

Don’t know. But that physical, visible fire, as at Pentecost, was meant, we can probably rule out.

8. Mark 1:11. Is there any indication here that Jesus was not the Son of God before this declaration, as some would have it?

Absolutely none. This was the public declaration of the Father concerning the Sonship of Jesus. But the Son had been born the Son 30 years earlier, as described in the “Christmas” story we have already read.

Jesus is “fulfilling all righteousness,” and in the process showing us the pattern He desires for our own life. First there is birth into the Kingdom. Jesus had this at His supernatural/natural birth, and we, when we are born again. Then there is water baptism. Then the filling of the Holy Ghost.

9. Luke 4:6. What of Satan’s claim that the kingdoms of this world have been given to him? True?