Q: In Matthew 2:13-14, it looks like Joseph took Mary and baby Jesus to Egypt soon after Jesus birth. But in Luke 2:39, it says that When they had performed all things according to the Law of the Lord, they returned to Galilee. Which one is right? Isnt this a contradiction?
This is one of many differences between Matthew and Luke which reflect the differences in their sources and/or the goals they had for their compositions (i.e., the ideas they wanted to get across to their readers). But a difference is not a contradiction. It may be helpful to start by describe the itinerary of the Holy Family, combining the two accounts:
1. Mary and Joseph travel from Nazareth in Galilee to Bethlehem. There, Mary gives birth to Jesus.
2. Forty days later, in Jerusalem, they appear at the temple in Jerusalem to offer Marys purification-offering.
3. Shortly after this, at a house, the wise men -- who have left Jerusalem to go to Bethlehem -- visit, and present their gifts of gold, myrrh, and frankincense to Jesus.
4. That same night, an angel warns Joseph to take the Child and His mother and go to Jesus. Joseph does so.
5. Some time later, the Holy Family arrives in Egypt, where they stay until the death of Herod the Great.
6. Joseph returns from Egypt, and goes to Nazareth.
Matthew does not mention that Joseph and Mary traveled to Bethlehem from Nazareth; when he mentions Nazareth, it is a fresh introduction, as if Nazareth might as well be a new place to Mary and Joseph. But while this indicates the limits of Matthews literary sources -- i.e., it shows that Matthew did not know that Joseph and Mary had previously lived in Nazareth -- it does not pose a historical contradiction with Luke, who agrees that they settled down in Nazareth. The problem is that Luke does not mention the trip into Egypt. Specifically, in 2:39, Luke writes: "So when they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord, they returned to Galilee, to their own city, Nazareth." Meanwhile, in Matthew 2:14-15 and 2:21-23, the Holy Family makes a trip to Egypt before going to Nazareth.
How long did they stay in Egypt? Not very long. If the wise men arrived in Jerusalem shortly before the death of Herod, then it would have been a matter of a few weeks between the visit of the wise men, the trip to Egypt, the death of Herod, and the following trip to Nazareth. In that case, we can see what Matthew and Luke have done here: Matthew, wishing to make a thematic connection between the history of the nation of Israel (Gods National Servant) and Jesus (Gods Personal Servant), mentioned the otherwise trivial side-trip into Egypt, using Hosea 11:1 to illustrate that Israel and Jesus were both called out of Egypt (more on that shortly, God willing). Luke, whose thematic priorities were different (since his audience, it seems, was not Jewish), did not mention the side-trip.
One objection remains: does Luke /deny/ the side-trip in 2:39, by saying that the Holy Family returned to Galilee When they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord? If Luke had written, Immediately after they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord, they went straight to Nazareth without any side-trips or delays, that would be one thing. But thats not what Luke wrote. He just summed up the journey. The term he used here for when is the Greek word oun, a coordinating conjunction. Does oun always mean right away or without any intervening events? No. It basically means then, and does not imply special immediacy. Luke did not use the word euthus (immediately) here, although he used it frequently elsewhere.
The little word "oun" was the subject of the doctoral thesis of a great Greek scholar, J.R. Mantey. The Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament which he co-wrote with H.E. Dana is still a valuable resource. Therein, the authors sum up Dr. Manteys findings on pages 252-258. Among their statements are the following:
It should be translated as inferential only about two hundred times, by such words as therefore, so, consequently, then (cf. Jn. 3:23; 4:5, 12, 33, 40). /Oun/ should be translated as /then/ and /now/ about one hundred and seventy times. This usage is variously termed as transitional, or continuative, or resumptive. It predominates in Johns gospel. The word /then/ indicates a succession of either time or events under this classification, but it may also be used in stating a conclusion, so it properly belongs also under the classification terned inferential. The word /now/ indicates the continuation of a subject from one thought to another, the introduction of a new phase of thought, or of an explanation. Under this classification /oun/ is a synonym for words such as /gar/, /de/, /kai/, and even /tote/.
The Dana-Mantey Grammar-book proceeds to cite several non-Biblical documents to demonstrate first-century usage of /oun/. In the interest of brevity I will cite just their first example. In a letter written in A.D. 41 is the statement, I sent you two letters, one by Nedymus and one by Cronius, the swordbearer. Then [/oun/] at last I received the letter from the Arab and I read it and was grieved. No particular urgency is implied or inferred by the use of /oun/, just sequence. Thus, Luke 2:39 does not imply that the Holy Family went directly and delaylessly to Nazareth, and thus there is no contradiction of Matthews account.
Extra Note: in an earlier discussion about this, I mentioned a theory/suspicion about the Holy Familys itinerary. I suspect that when Joseph left Bethlehem, his intention was to leave Nazareth permanently, and make a new home for himself and Mary in Bethlehem (thus moving away from the stigma that they might have had in Nazareth), and the census was as good a time as any to make the move. The house which Matthew mentions in 2:11 might not be an inn-house; it might be Josephs recently-purchased or at least recently-rented house, in which he was planning on staying indefinitely. So, after the side-trip into Egypt, Joseph planned to return to Bethlehem, but as Matthew 2:21-22 relates, Joseph realized that Archelaus might be keeping an eye on Bethlehem, and so he decided to abandon his initial plans, and return to Nazareth.
Btw, if you really, really, want to read more about Greek coordinating conjunctions, here are two relevant links:
www.middletownbiblechurch...reek10.htm
www.conservativeonline.or...8_id07.htm .
And, if youd like to start learning basic New Testament Greek today:
www.bibletruths.net/Greek%20Course.htm
Yours in Christ,
Waterrock
This is one of many differences between Matthew and Luke which reflect the differences in their sources and/or the goals they had for their compositions (i.e., the ideas they wanted to get across to their readers). But a difference is not a contradiction. It may be helpful to start by describe the itinerary of the Holy Family, combining the two accounts:
1. Mary and Joseph travel from Nazareth in Galilee to Bethlehem. There, Mary gives birth to Jesus.
2. Forty days later, in Jerusalem, they appear at the temple in Jerusalem to offer Marys purification-offering.
3. Shortly after this, at a house, the wise men -- who have left Jerusalem to go to Bethlehem -- visit, and present their gifts of gold, myrrh, and frankincense to Jesus.
4. That same night, an angel warns Joseph to take the Child and His mother and go to Jesus. Joseph does so.
5. Some time later, the Holy Family arrives in Egypt, where they stay until the death of Herod the Great.
6. Joseph returns from Egypt, and goes to Nazareth.
Matthew does not mention that Joseph and Mary traveled to Bethlehem from Nazareth; when he mentions Nazareth, it is a fresh introduction, as if Nazareth might as well be a new place to Mary and Joseph. But while this indicates the limits of Matthews literary sources -- i.e., it shows that Matthew did not know that Joseph and Mary had previously lived in Nazareth -- it does not pose a historical contradiction with Luke, who agrees that they settled down in Nazareth. The problem is that Luke does not mention the trip into Egypt. Specifically, in 2:39, Luke writes: "So when they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord, they returned to Galilee, to their own city, Nazareth." Meanwhile, in Matthew 2:14-15 and 2:21-23, the Holy Family makes a trip to Egypt before going to Nazareth.
How long did they stay in Egypt? Not very long. If the wise men arrived in Jerusalem shortly before the death of Herod, then it would have been a matter of a few weeks between the visit of the wise men, the trip to Egypt, the death of Herod, and the following trip to Nazareth. In that case, we can see what Matthew and Luke have done here: Matthew, wishing to make a thematic connection between the history of the nation of Israel (Gods National Servant) and Jesus (Gods Personal Servant), mentioned the otherwise trivial side-trip into Egypt, using Hosea 11:1 to illustrate that Israel and Jesus were both called out of Egypt (more on that shortly, God willing). Luke, whose thematic priorities were different (since his audience, it seems, was not Jewish), did not mention the side-trip.
One objection remains: does Luke /deny/ the side-trip in 2:39, by saying that the Holy Family returned to Galilee When they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord? If Luke had written, Immediately after they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord, they went straight to Nazareth without any side-trips or delays, that would be one thing. But thats not what Luke wrote. He just summed up the journey. The term he used here for when is the Greek word oun, a coordinating conjunction. Does oun always mean right away or without any intervening events? No. It basically means then, and does not imply special immediacy. Luke did not use the word euthus (immediately) here, although he used it frequently elsewhere.
The little word "oun" was the subject of the doctoral thesis of a great Greek scholar, J.R. Mantey. The Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament which he co-wrote with H.E. Dana is still a valuable resource. Therein, the authors sum up Dr. Manteys findings on pages 252-258. Among their statements are the following:
It should be translated as inferential only about two hundred times, by such words as therefore, so, consequently, then (cf. Jn. 3:23; 4:5, 12, 33, 40). /Oun/ should be translated as /then/ and /now/ about one hundred and seventy times. This usage is variously termed as transitional, or continuative, or resumptive. It predominates in Johns gospel. The word /then/ indicates a succession of either time or events under this classification, but it may also be used in stating a conclusion, so it properly belongs also under the classification terned inferential. The word /now/ indicates the continuation of a subject from one thought to another, the introduction of a new phase of thought, or of an explanation. Under this classification /oun/ is a synonym for words such as /gar/, /de/, /kai/, and even /tote/.
The Dana-Mantey Grammar-book proceeds to cite several non-Biblical documents to demonstrate first-century usage of /oun/. In the interest of brevity I will cite just their first example. In a letter written in A.D. 41 is the statement, I sent you two letters, one by Nedymus and one by Cronius, the swordbearer. Then [/oun/] at last I received the letter from the Arab and I read it and was grieved. No particular urgency is implied or inferred by the use of /oun/, just sequence. Thus, Luke 2:39 does not imply that the Holy Family went directly and delaylessly to Nazareth, and thus there is no contradiction of Matthews account.
Extra Note: in an earlier discussion about this, I mentioned a theory/suspicion about the Holy Familys itinerary. I suspect that when Joseph left Bethlehem, his intention was to leave Nazareth permanently, and make a new home for himself and Mary in Bethlehem (thus moving away from the stigma that they might have had in Nazareth), and the census was as good a time as any to make the move. The house which Matthew mentions in 2:11 might not be an inn-house; it might be Josephs recently-purchased or at least recently-rented house, in which he was planning on staying indefinitely. So, after the side-trip into Egypt, Joseph planned to return to Bethlehem, but as Matthew 2:21-22 relates, Joseph realized that Archelaus might be keeping an eye on Bethlehem, and so he decided to abandon his initial plans, and return to Nazareth.
Btw, if you really, really, want to read more about Greek coordinating conjunctions, here are two relevant links:
www.middletownbiblechurch...reek10.htm
www.conservativeonline.or...8_id07.htm .
And, if youd like to start learning basic New Testament Greek today:
www.bibletruths.net/Greek%20Course.htm
Yours in Christ,
Waterrock
