The Finding in the Temple: Interpretation/Insights?

[anon90438963]

I’m looking for some insights into the episode of the Finding of Jesus in the Temple by Mary and Joseph. I say a daily Rosary, and it is the one mystery that keeps eluding me–I just don’t know what to make of it or what spiritual lesson to derive from it when I meditate on it. Perhaps someone can offer some solid biblical interpretation of this passage.

Here’s the extent of what I “get” out of it (pretty simplistic stuff):
Jesus knew his mission while yet a teenager; he was already well versed in the matters of God’s House
Mary always searches for her children–eg. us, as much as Jesus
Mary and Joseph didn’t know everything in their earthly lives:“they did not understand a word he said to them,” but they trusted anyway. Even though they were the best of parents, they may have made mistakes.
If you can’t find Jesus, just go to the Temple (eg. Church) and you’ll find him there

 

[Kei]

Imagine Mary knowing that the Messiah would undergo so much pain. Had it already come? She must have been worried sick! The Scripture tells us that she says this made her and Joseph so anxious.
Imagine the relief at Jesus being there, always, Divine and being the Word.

 

[NotThatHarvey]

The story appears in the gospel of Luke. Luke admits to using many different sources. There is a high likelihood that this story was originally about the young Flavius Josephus, found in his autobiography.

There is little indication that Jesus could read or write, and in John it is inferred that he could not " (you) do not know letters."

 

[patrick457]

Actually, it’s:

About the middle of the festival Jesus went up into the temple and began to teach. The Jews were astonished at it, saying, “How does this man know letters, when he has never been taught?” Then Jesus answered them, “My teaching is not mine but his who sent me. Anyone who resolves to do the will of God will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own. Those who speak on their own seek their own glory; but the one who seeks the glory of him who sent him is true, and there is nothing false in him. Did not Moses give you the law? Yet none of you keeps the law. Why are you looking for an opportunity to kill me?”

The thing is, it’s not really a prooftext for or against Jesus’ literacy. That would be missing the sense of this passage: the people who hear Jesus are surprised that He could teach so well since they assume that He might not have gotten a formal education (as a teacher).

 

[shom-bms]

1 - Sometimes God withdraws from us for the purpose of testing to see if we will seek after Him diligently, just as Mary and Joseph did:

Upon my bed by night I sought him whom my soul loves; I sought him, but found him not; I called him, but he gave no answer. “I will rise now and go about the city, in the streets and in the squares; I will seek him whom my soul loves.” I sought him, but found him not. The watchmen found me, as they went about in the city. “Have you seen him whom my soul loves?” (Sg 3:1-3)

2 - Because God also sometimes withdraws as a result of a person’s sin, it’s usually uncertain what is the cause of the withdrawal. But either way, nothing should prevent us from seeking after God:

Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? (Rom 8:35)

3 - Jesus, at age 12, amazed the doctors of the law in the temple with his knowledge and wisdom. Yet, despite his extraordinary gifting, when He returned to Nazareth He submitted himself in obedience to Mary and Joseph. Jesus teaches that no matter what our talents we must always stay properly submitted to the superiors God has placed in our lives.

 

[Mintaka]

Re: Flavius Josephus –

Dude, I managed to escape from my parents for long periods of time in a single store, when I was a kid. You don’t think there weren’t tons of smart Jewish kids sneaking away from their parents to question the rabbis? At the one time of the year when they could bug the famous old guys or get neat things to think about?

This stuff always cracks me up. A lot of similar motifs show up in the lives of different famous people, because they show up in the actual lives of lots and lots of people, period.

The Finding in the Temple is probably the most normal thing Jesus ever got up to. There’s a reason why a lot of parents get that nervous look when the reading comes up, and there’s a reason why a lot of kids secretly feel really impressed when they hear about Him pulling it off for three whole days. Without lying or public transportation. While hiding in plain sight.

It’s an exhibition of total skill at ditching the parentals. The only thing that makes it a sad story is that Mary and Joseph figured it out before He got back home. But of course, Jesus had to do something to keep millions of Christian kids from hitting the road… and a guilt trip from Mary probably is all that would do it.

 

[omgriley]

It’s held by some theologians that the pain Mary endured when she lost Jesus was, in a certain sense, the worst of her seven sorrows. The reason is because during all of her other sorrows, she at least had Christ with her for support. Here, he was absent. He was not with her for this ordeal, and that must have been almost unbearable for a Woman who by all accounts had already attained the Mystical Marriage.

 

[Mintaka]

Re: Flavius Josephus –

Well, thanks for letting me know that he wrote an Autobiography… but there isn’t any similar ditching story there. I am disappointed.

All Josephus says is:

"I made mighty proficiency in the improvements of my learning, and appeared to have both a great memory and understanding. Moreover, when I was a child, and about fourteen years of age, I was commended by all for the love I had to learning; on which account the high priests and principal men of the city came then frequently to me together, in order to know my opinion about the accurate understanding of points of the law. "

Seeing as he also said that his dad was a prominent man, it’s not surprising that the high priests and rabbis would come by his dad’s house and ask him questions. They thought well of the kid, and a learned Jew taught kids by questioning them. It was an enrichment activity, for kids who had already done the memorization and were ready to start thinking about being somebody’s disciple or taking up a job.

Heck, Jewish rabbis and learned people still do that!

The fun bit is that he says he spent the next few years trying out different Jewish sects. I cracked up so hard at that.

 

[Gorgias]

The story appears in the gospel of Luke. Luke admits to using many different sources.

True, but you’re accusing him of fabricating stories! Big difference, there!

There is a high likelihood that this story was originally about the young Flavius Josephus, found in his autobiography.

Umm… Josephus’ autobiography is an appendix to his Antiquities, which he completed in 93 A.D. Are you really claiming that late of a date for the Gospel of Luke? Scripture scholars tend to date that Gospel at somewhere between 60 and 80 A.D.

There is little indication that Jesus could read or write, and in John it is inferred that he could not " (you) do not know letters."

You’re talking about John 7:15? The quote is actually “How does this one know [the] writings, having not studied [them]?”

They’re marveling at Jesus’ grasp of the Scriptures, given that he’s not a Scripture scholar… not saying “he’s illiterate!”

(In any case, even if they are talking about literacy, the claim is not that “he does not know letters”, but that he does know how to read; their question is how he knows how to read!)

Edited to add:
Your case for an illiterate Jesus has to account for the claims of Luke 4 – “[Jesus] came to Nazareth, where he had grown up, and went according to his custom into the synagogue on the sabbath day. He stood up to read… [and] he said to them, ‘Today this scripture passage is fulfilled in your hearing.’”

Not only did he stand in order to read (‘ἀναγνῶναι’), but his claim was that they had heard (‘ὠσὶν’, or “in [your] ears”) what he had read to them.

Kinda difficult to refute, short of saying “Luke tells lies.”

 

[Todd_Easton]

The three days the child Jesus was lost to the Virgin Mary seems to me to be God’s way of strengthening her faith through trial, in preparation for the three days he would be lost to her after his death, before his resurrection, and in preparation for the extended period of time he would be lost to her after his ascension until her assumption. When God seems lost to us, we should remember the Virgin Mary and, like her, persevere in faith.

That the child Jesus would speak to the Jewish teachers shows God’s faithfulness to his promises to the Jews, including the prophecies that he would come to his temple (Malachi 3:1) and that they would all be taught by the Lord. (Isaiah 54:13) Of course, a further fulfillment of those and other prophecies would take place during Jesus’ years of ministry as an adult.

 

[NotThatHarvey]

Josephus is a great read, and the only way to understand those times. The Jewish Wars is amazing. Hagan has a couple of books out on it that I recommend.

 

[NotThatHarvey]

Luke doesn’t tell lies. He was divinely inspired. But his sources could have been mistaken and an original story about Josephus could have been garbled as it was passed along to become a story about Jesus, which Luke incorporated in his Gospel.
Josephus was a famous man and visited Rome in AD 63 or thereabouts- the exact time when Luke, Paul, and Peter were in Rome. A corrupted story about Josephus could have been written into Luke at that time.

 

[Gorgias]

Luke doesn’t tell lies. He was divinely inspired. But his sources could have been mistaken and an original story about Josephus could have been garbled as it was passed along to become a story about Jesus, which Luke incorporated in his Gospel.

That’s even worse! Your claim is that it’s not Luke’s fault, but nevertheless, God allowed untruths to be incorporated into historical narratives of the New Testament?!? Not good… and not good theology.

Josephus was a famous man and visited Rome in AD 63 or thereabouts- the exact time when Luke, Paul, and Peter were in Rome. A corrupted story about Josephus could have been written into Luke at that time.

At that point in time, he wasn’t writing the Antiquities or his Life; his The Jewish War wasn’t complete until 75 A.D.

Moreover, he didn’t surrender to the Roman forces (as a Jewish soldier) until 67 A.D.

Your dates are off… and your assertions that the story of Jesus’ life in the NT is an amalgam of other historical characters is scandalous.

 

[PJM]

Haydock’s Catholic Bible commentary
Ver. 49. I must be about the things that are my Father’s? By these words he shewed, that not St. Joseph, but only God, was his father. (Witham)

Ver. 50. They understood not, &c. That is, knew not when, or by what means, Christ designed to make himself known to the world. (Witham)

Ver. 51. Was subject to them. Astonishing humility! which the Son of God was pleased to teach by his example, as also obedience to parents. (Witham) — The evangelist relates nothing of our Saviour from the age of twelve till the age of thirty, except that he was subject to St. Joseph and the blessed Virgin. The divine Spirit shewing by this, that nothing is so great and amiable in Christians, as ready obedience to the directions of their superiors. (Barradius) — All children are hereby taught what subjection and obedience is due from them to their parents.

Ver. 52. Not that he was wiser at any future period of his life, than he was at the moment of his conception, but this is said, because he chose to manifest increasing signs of wisdom as he increased in years. — In the same manner also he increased in grace, by displaying, as he advanced in age, the gifts of grace with which he was endowed; and by this excited men to the praise of God, from the consideration of favours God had bestowed upon him; and thus he conduced to the honour of God, and the salvation of men. (St. Gregory) — The sun, always equally brilliant in itself, is said to increase in splendour, till it has reached its meridian brilliancy. END QUOTES

Hope this helps you,

God Bless,
PJM

 

[NotThatHarvey]

Well, it is not a religiously-grounded observation, I admit that.
But nothing wrong with my dates. In A.D. 63, the Jerusalem Priest we now know as Flavius Josephus WAS in Rome (after making his way there after surviving a shipwreck) and was socializing in the Royal court of Nero and Poppea. He was there to ransom imprisoned Jerusalem Priests held there. Josephus would have been a subject of a HUGE amount of speculation in the Jewish- and Christian-communities in Rome. And at that time Luke, Peter, and Paul were part of that community.
If I was given one choice of an ancient time and place to visit, it would be Rome in A.D. 63.

 

[Mintaka]

Um… helllllllo? Didn’t anybody read the excerpt from Josephus’ autobiography that I posted?

Josephus said the ancient Jewish equivalent of “My dad was a prominent citizen of the capitol city, and well known in religious circles. I got good grades in school, and my dad’s friends used to come help me with enrichment projects.”

Josephus didn’t do anything like Jesus there, except participate in enrichment activities. He lived right in Jerusalem, and it was normal for his dad to have famous rabbis in the house.

Jesus was poor and lived all the way out in Nazareth, so He only got to chat with the rabbis as an enrichment activity when His family came to town for religious festivals. (Of course, little did they know that it was a case of them getting to chat with Him…)

Pretty much all that Josephus does is reiterate what other Jewish sources also say: that rabbis ask questions of audience members whom they think are worthy to be taught one on one. Asking young kids questions is a sign that a rabbi thinks that that kid is a promising student.

Questions and answers are an important part of Jewish teaching methods. Think about the whole structure of the Passover haggadah. The youngest kid is instructed to ask the father, “Why is this night not like other nights?” And the father answers, as God instructed in the Bible. (And of course, the entire Exultet at the Easter Vigil is the Catholic version of answering the same question.)

 

[NotThatHarvey]

From Josephus’ Life:

"[7] Now, my father Matthias was not only eminent on account of is nobility, but had a higher commendation on account of his righteousness, and was in great reputation in Jerusalem, the greatest city we have. I was myself brought up with my brother, whose name was Matthias, for he was my own brother, by both father and mother; and I made mighty proficiency in the improvements of my learning, and appeared to have both a great memory and understanding. Moreover, when I was a child, and about fourteen years of age, I was commended by all for the love I had to learning; on which account the high priests and principal men of the city came then frequently to me together, in order to know my opinion about the accurate understanding of points of the law. "

 

[Gorgias]

From Josephus’ Life:

"when I was a child, and about fourteen years of age, I was commended by all for the love I had to learning; on which account the high priests and principal men of the city came then frequently to me together, in order to know my opinion about the accurate understanding of points of the law. "

Two thoughts:

• First, you realize that Josephus was hated by the Jews for his treachery, right? So, Josephus really needed to sell his story of being a favored son in order to preserve his position in Roman circles.
• Second, there’s a culturally significant difference between what a 12-year-old does and what 14-year-old does. At 12, a male is a child; at 14, he’s an adult. So, the Scriptural account of Jesus presents him as a child who possesses knowledge that cannot be accounted for. On the other hand, the account Josephus offers presents him as an adult – albeit a young adult – who has the respect of his elders. That’s a significant difference!

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Here’s the extent of what I “get” out of it (pretty simplistic stuff):

Jesus knew his mission while yet a teenager; he was already well versed in the matters of God’s House

Mary always searches for her children–eg. us, as much as Jesus

Mary and Joseph didn’t know everything in their earthly lives:“they did not understand a word he said to them,” but they trusted anyway. Even though they were the best of parents, they may have made mistakes.

If you can’t find Jesus, just go to the Temple (eg. Church) and you’ll find him there

This is actually pretty good. “Simple” is often good. Remember, we’re supposed to become like little children before the Lord. I hadn’t thought of your last point about “If you can’t find Jesus, just go to the Temple and you’ll find him there.”

Mary and Joseph probably weren’t in the best mental condition to be understanding what Jesus said after they had just spent three days looking for him. Your average loving parents in that situation probably wouldn’t have comprehended two sentences put together. I’ve read that Mary was aware that she was going to suffer sorrow and lose Jesus at some point, and she thought maybe the time had come, which given that he wasn’t even an adult yet must have been awful.

To me, the mystery also underscores how awful it is when we “lose” Jesus by straying away from God or the Church. If you’ve ever experienced not knowing where a family member you love is at, and are worried that something bad may have happened to them or that you might not see them again, that’s how awful it is.

I also agree with the interpretation that Mary losing Jesus for three days in Jerusalem is a foreshadowing of her losing him for three days when he was in the tomb. But in both cases she “finds” him again and is overjoyed.

 

[De_Maria]

The point I’ve always gotten from it is searching for Jesus, high and low.

It’s kind of like the Song of Songs, where the lover hides from the beloved.

Song of Songs 3New American Bible (Revised Edition) (NABRE)

Chapter 3
Loss and Discovery
1 W On my bed at night I sought him[a]
whom my soul loves—
I sought him but I did not find him.
2 “Let me rise then and go about the city,
through the streets and squares;
Let me seek him whom my soul loves.”
I sought him but I did not find him.
3 The watchmen found me,
as they made their rounds in the city:
“Him whom my soul loves—have you seen him?”
4 Hardly had I left them
when I found him whom my soul loves.