'And the grace of God was upon him.' God's favour was clearly upon Him, as had been foretold in Is IP- \ Men noticed (Jn 1") that He was full ot grace and truth. But we must remember that
• Jhe reading is doubtful. Treg. and WH prefer irofm, and gave it in his margin, supported by N=BL pi; and the more unusual construction, may be right. VOL. I. — 15
it was a gift to His human nature, and therefore words are used which are used of His brethren {e.g. Ac 6"* "Zricpavoi Si w\r)pvi xap'^os). At the end of the next section St. Luke (2°-) tells how He progressed in favour (xa/)is) also with men.
'And /lis parents locnt every year to Jerusalem at the feast of the Passover ' (Lk 2^'). From our Lord's own presence at other feasts, both of Divine and human appointment, and from the large crowds at them, we are led to reject the idea that pious Jews at this time went to Jerusalem only for the Passover. No doubt the greatest attendance was at that feast, and those who could attend only one probably chose it. Jews resident outside the Holy Land seem, probably on account of tlie more favourable season for travelling, to have pre- ferred Pentecost (Ac 2i-" 18-' 20'" 21=' 24'8, 1 Co 16"). We think it probable, therefore, that the emphatic words of the sentence are oi 7o>'ers. Joseph mat/ liave gone at other .seasons ; at this season Mary usually {iiropeijoi>To, imperfect of ' habit ') accompanied him. Women were not bound to attend any feast (Dt 16"^ ' all thy males '). Jn 7"- '*■'" show that the ' brethren of the Lord ' attended the feast of Tabernacles, which may be an indication of what Joseph's custom was. But if women went to any one feast, it would be, if jjossible, to the Passover, partly because it was the most esteemed, partly because the Supper (both sacrificial and social) was an essential element in it, and partly because of the examples of Peninnah and Hannah (1 S I''' '•=').
In Lk 2^- we are told of Christ going with them.
The mention of His age may be made only in order to mark at what period of His life the incident which follows occurred. The commentators, etc., lay great stress on His having become a ' son of the Law' or a 'son of the Precept,' and represent this Passover visit to Jerusalem as a sort of ' First Communion' after a sort of 'Confirmation.' The whole of the legislation about the bar-mizvah dates after the destruction of the Jewish polity in A.D. 70 (cf. Schurer, HJP 11. ii. 51 f.). There may have been earlier traces of it in Pharisaic Judoean circles. Besides, when a definite age for 'full membership' of the Jewish conununity was fixed, it was at thirteen, and not at twelve years of age. The current views would never have been brought forward, but for the assumption by the elder Lightfoot and others that in this Talmudic rule we find the explanation of the mention of our Lord's age.
Moreover, are there any Biblical grounds for supposing that a child of five, or ten, or any other age, miwht not be present at the Passover, and eat of the Paschal lamb ? E.\ 12^- ^ rather implies the contrary, for if all children under thirteen were excluded, few households would be large enough to consume a yearling lamb. If the custom of the present Samaritans is any guide, it is stated that even little girls eat of the lamb (cf. J. E. H. Thomson in PEFSt, 1902, p. 91).
But if it was our Lord's first Passover (which St. Luke does not say), we can find another reason than the ajje He had reached for the previous omission. Herod the Great had tried to kill the Child, Archelaus was considered by Joseph to be as dangerous, and therefore Jesus was kept out of his dominions. Now Archelaus was in exile; in 759 A.U.C. a Roman governor had been appointed over Judiea, and Roman law and justice, however defective at times, at least ensured safety for the Boy who had been sought for ten or eleven years before as an Infant. Of course, it is possible that the later Jewish rule prevailed in Christ's day, but it does not appear to us to be proved, either
226
BOYHOOD OF JESUS
BOYHOOD OF JESUS
from St. Luke's words, or from any contemporary or earlier source.
What did our Lord do at Jerusalem? The Biblical accounts of the Passover ritual are mainly conlined to the first or Egyptian Passover. This differed naturally from later ones in some respects, and in others a difference had been made by litur- gical regulations. For instance, tlie eating of the lamb in a recumbent instead of a standing posture was a change (Ex 12", 1 S 1^ 'rose up,' Lk22''- '^ etc. ). So were the psalms, the prayers, the bless- ings, the four cups of wine, and other well-known customs. One of the best popular accounts of the Jewish ritual is in Bickell's Messe und Pascha, of which an English version by Dr. Skene has appeared. He riglitly states tliat our oldest source is as late as the end of the 2nd cent. A.D., with large additions from the lltli to the 16th centuries (p. 112 f. Eng. tr.). Bickell also points out that ' the Paschal Lamb was an actual offering. It was slain in the Temijle, its blood was sprinkled by the priest on the altar, its flesh was consumed as a sacrificial meal. Therefore, after the destruction of Jerusalem, when the Temple service . . . came to an end, it could no longer be eaten.