Flight to Egypt?

[Maranatha]

Here are some things we know for sure:

1. 
   *]The Holy Family stayed in the Bethlehmen/Jersulem area for at least 8 days.
   *]The shepards were eyewitnesses and told many people what they saw.
   *]John was not killed in Herod’s persecution.
   *]The magi eventually found Jesus.
   *]The Holy Family went to Eygpt and were not told it was safe to return until Herod’s Death.

 

[Angelos]

Luke has Zachery and Elizabeth living in the hill country in “a city of Juda”. So John the Baptist would probably have been nowhere near Bethlehem at the time of the massacre.

John’s lineage has him descended from Aaron but says nothing about being of the House of David.

Bethlehem was the town founded for the descendents of David and the census brought together those who had gone to live elsewhere. This would have been an ideal time for Herod to kill off a large number of those who claimed David’s ancestry in one blow.

I so far agree with everything you say
John the Baptist was safe & did not have to be taken to Egypt or another place by his parents unlike infant Jesus

 

[Angelos]

Here are some things we know for sure:

1. 
   *]The Holy Family stayed in the Bethlehmen/Jersulem area for at least 8 days.
   *]The shepards were eyewitnesses and told many people what they saw.
   *]John was not killed in Herod’s persecution.
   *]The magi eventually found Jesus.
   *]The Holy Family went to Eygpt and were not told it was safe to return until Herod’s Death.

1. 
   well done Maranatha!
   
   What about the reasons underlying the Holy Family’s flight to Egypt? Why is St Joseph missing from the account of the Magi’s visit? Maybe you can find answers to these questions as well. Good luck
   
   ANgelos N.

 

[Fidelis]

Hi axolotl P.S. I am still waiting for a response to my previous question (why is Joseph missing from the account of Magi’s visit?). If no one can answer this question, I’ll have to resort to Matthew Himself very soon!

Catholic apologist, in his book To Know Christ Jesus, opines that, as it appears the Holy Family stayed in that area for some time, Joseph, being a working man, would have found it necessary to go out and find a little work (even though he was a carpenter, there was no Carpenters Union in that day to secure a paid vacation. No workee, no eatee). It is unmaly to sponge off your relatives for an extended period of time, and since it was his ancestral home, other relatives may have pointed him toward some odd jogs to do.

 

[Angelos]

Catholic apologist, in his book To Know Christ Jesus, opines that, as it appears the Holy Family stayed in that area for some time, Joseph, being a working man, would have found it necessary to go out and find a little work (even though he was a carpenter, there was no Carpenters Union in that day to secure a paid vacation. No workee, no eatee). It is unmaly to sponge off your relatives for an extended period of time, and since it was his ancestral home, other relatives may have pointed him toward some odd jogs to do.

Thanks Fidelis.
This explanation approaches the issue from a social-cultural perspective with no theological implications. The answer I have been looking for is purely theological, most probably embedded in the infancy narrative.

 

[Eileen_T]

Catholic apologist, in his book To Know Christ Jesus, opines that, as it appears the Holy Family stayed in that area for some time, Joseph, being a working man, would have found it necessary to go out and find a little work (even though he was a carpenter, there was no Carpenters Union in that day to secure a paid vacation. No workee, no eatee). It is unmaly to sponge off your relatives for an extended period of time, and since it was his ancestral home, other relatives may have pointed him toward some odd jogs to do.

Thank you Fidelis, the Catholic apologist was Frank Sheed. I haven’t read that book for many years but will put it on my reading list for this year.

 

[Fidelis]

Thank you Fidelis, the Catholic apologist was Frank Sheed. I haven’t read that book for many years but will put it on my reading list for this year.

Actually I mean to type in Frank Sheed, but my fingers got ahead of my brain, again.

Yes, Sheed’s book is one of my favorites, and my own copy is just about worn out.

 

[Eileen_T]

Mine, too. Maybe I should put it online, to save it for others. Is the copyright still in force?

 

[Fidelis]

Mine, too. Maybe I should put it online, to save it for others. Is the copyright still in force?

I believe so, since the book is now being published by Ignatius Press and is still easily obtainable:

ignatius.com/ViewProduct.aspx?SID=1&Product_ID=651&AFID=12&

 

[Fidelis]

Thanks Fidelis.
This explanation approaches the issue from a social-cultural perspective with no theological implications. The answer I have been looking for is purely theological, most probably embedded in the infancy narrative.

i’ve looked at a ton of Bible commentary on this, but haven’t seen it directly addressed from a theological or even spiritual perspective. There *may not be *a specific meaning attached to this, as the absence of Joseph is not pointed out; it is only that he is not mentioned. In other words, it doesn’t say something like, “But Joseph was not there.”

As Sigmund Freud famously said, “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.”

 

[Angelos]

i’ve looked at a ton of Bible commentary on this, but haven’t seen it directly addressed from a theological or even spiritual perspective. There *may not be *a specific meaning attached to this, as the absence of Joseph is not pointed out; it is only that he is not mentioned. In other words, it doesn’t say something like, “But Joseph was not there.”

As Sigmund Freud famously said, “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.”

Dear Fidelis,

I know that Matthew does not emphatically state Joseph’s absence from the scene although it is easy for us to infer that Joseph was not there at that significant moment if we compare the accounts in Matthew & Luke’s Gospel:

Matthew 2:11. And entering into the house, they found the child with Mary his mother, and falling down they adored him: and opening their treasures, they offered him gifts; gold, frankincense, and myrrh.

Luke 2:16. And they came with haste: and they found Mary and Joseph, and the infant lying in the manger.

This means I’ll have to ask Evangelist Matthew for a reasonable answer

Peace,
Angelos N.

 

[Angelos]

I’ll write the answer to my own question tomorrow morning, hopefully!

Until then, blessings to you all!

 

[az_4_faith]

Catholic apologist, in his book To Know Christ Jesus, opines that, as it appears the Holy Family stayed in that area for some time, Joseph, being a working man, would have found it necessary to go out and find a little work (even though he was a carpenter, there was no Carpenters Union in that day to secure a paid vacation. No workee, no eatee). It is unmaly to sponge off your relatives for an extended period of time, and since it was his ancestral home, other relatives may have pointed him toward some odd jogs to do.

So, whatever happened to the gifts of Gold, Frankincense and Myrrh? Did the Holy Family keep them for always, or perhaps were they sold so that the Family could get by during their time of uncertainty?

I’m sure each would have fetched a pretty good sum and taken care of a small family for quite awhile.

 

[LilyM]

So, whatever happened to the gifts of Gold, Frankincense and Myrrh? Did the Holy Family keep them for always, or perhaps were they sold so that the Family could get by during their time of uncertainty?

I’m sure each would have fetched a pretty good sum and taken care of a small family for quite awhile.

A poor young family travelling with quantities of gold and precious spices in their luggage probably would’ve been noticed. It’s most likely they would have sold or disposed of the gifts.

Interesting point about the return to Nazareth mentioned in Luke. Luke in fact goes on to say that ‘Jesus’ parents’ went EVERY YEAR to Jerusalem for the Passover. This certainly doesn’t sound consistent with the flight to Egypt unless their stay there was less than a year (which I suppose is possible). Or unless the term ‘parents’ meant relatives in general (like ‘cousins’).

Two possible explanations for the discrepancy occur to me though - Firstly does anyone know the geography of the region? Would Nazareth have been on the Holy Family’s way to Egypt?? Possibly it was a fairly brief stop on their way.

The second is that if Mary and Joseph were leaving the country for an indefinite period they may have had to sell up and shut up shop in Nazareth first, not to mention letting their families know that they were leaving the country for goodness only knew how long. No telegrams or telephones in those days!

 

[Eileen_T]

Since it doesn’t give quantities, maybe it was enough to cover the Flight to Egypt.

Maybe Joseph worked in the “family” business. He would have carried his tools with them as it was his means of earning a living.

 

[Angelos]

Hi everyone

Here I am to answer my question: Why is Joseph missing from the second chapter of Matthew’s Gospel?

First, I must say that my answer is a highly hypothetical one, being based on linguistic analysis of the infancy narrative. I’ll try to bind my analysis to a theological implication.

The second chapter in Matthew’s Gospel functions as the bridge between the events prior to and after Jesus’ nativity. To make an outline of the infancy narrative in Matthew:

1: 1-17 presents Jesus’ genealogy going back to Abraham through Joseph’s lineage.Thus, we have all the members of the Holy Family here: Joseph, Mary, and Jesus.
1: 18-25 relates the angelic manifestation to Joseph in a dream & the announcement of Mary’s pregnancy. At this point, we realize that this announciation is delivered only to Joseph since Jesus is bound to his genealogy through His virgin mother by God’s plan & commandment. This annunciation is the only event taking place before Jesus’ nativity, and this is the first significant event through which Matthew introduces a pattern that systematically recurs in the events after Jesus’ nativity. The process is as follows:

**1)**An angel appears to Joseph in a dream & calls him to action concerning the baby and His mother.
**2)**Joseph obeys the commandment a soon as he wakes up.
**3)**As a consequence of Joseph’s instant obedience, an Old Testament prophecy finds fulfillment.

Although Joseph continues receiving commandments from the angel of the Lord in a dream & obeying them promptly so that some of the prophecies in the Old Testament can be fulfilled throughout verses 2: 13-23, there’s only one single part in the second chapter when Joseph gets no divine revelations from God through an angel in his dream 2: 1-12
The manifestation of Jesus’ nativity is made to magi from the east by the help of a star. As a result, Magi take Joseph’s place on the basis of receiving divine revelation from God. More, the elders & scribes refer to an Old Testament prophecy only in this section of the story although it is Matthew the Evangelist who makes such references in all the other parts. Finally, the wise men from the east do not see King Herod since they are warned *in a dream *not to do so, which implies another similarity between them and Joseph in terms of obeying God’s message to protect baby Jesus & His mother.

To sum, Joseph is missing from the account of wise men’s visit because temporarily Magi take over his role. Above all, neither Jesus’ nativity in Bethlehem nor the prophecy about it is linked to Joseph’s acts of obedience to the angel’s message.

Peace & blessings,
Angelos N. B.