what had Jesus been discussing when his parents found him in the templ

1. 60

   lizzieBooposted 12 years ago

   At age 12, Jesus disappeared for 3 days and his parents found him in the temple arguing with the scribes and pharisees.  What had he been debating I wonder? Was it the Flood? Adam and Eve? The Creation? Was he talking about reform or about his mission? Ever wondered?

   replyreport
   1. 80

      Hyphenbirdposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The Scripture does not say that He was debating. None of the 5 different translation I check use the word debate but say Jesus was asking questions and listening. He was learning.
      
      Luke 2:46 After three days they found him in the temple courts, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. 47 Everyone who heard him was amazed at his understanding and his answers. 48 When his parents saw him, they were astonished. His mother said to him, “Son, why have you treated us like this? Your father and I have been anxiously searching for you.” 49 “Why were you searching for me?” he asked. “Didn’t you know I had to be in my Father’s house?” 50 But they did not understand what he was saying to them.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         lizzieBooposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Surely he was teaching them, rather than learning, since he knew who he was. I wonder what was talking about for three days. Did he have new insights? I wonder what he was most interested in. It's just a thought.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            lizzieBooposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            I don't expect anyone to actually know, by the way. I just thought it might be worth imagining.

            replyreport
         2. 80

            Hyphenbirdposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Jesus was still a human child and had much to learn just as He had to learn to walk and talk. The following two Scriptures mention this. His being born a man and having that human experience was important to the plan of God. Any way I look at Him, I am humbled and grateful. Jesus is Lord.
            Luke 2: 51 Then he went down to Nazareth with them and was obedient to them. But his mother treasured all these things in her heart. 52 And Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               lizzieBooposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Yes true. Well summed up.

               replyreport
            2. 0

               brotheryochananposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Romans 8:4   That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
               Galatians 5:16   This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh.
               
               We like to think of Jesus as being a normal boy when in fact i do not consider this the case at all. Jesus had a sinless life, even growing up, so his relationship to God was intense all through his lifetime. Did he kill birds and raise them again as one apocrypha book claims - no i doubt very much he did this. He walked in the grace of God, having Gods spirit in him from the womb (as did john the baptist)
               Now as parents you all know that we do not give our children teachings that are too tough for them to handle or understand. Did Jesus know all about the creation of the universe at age 6, i doubt it. Did he know Adam like a brother - i doubt it. What i am trying to say that the wisdom Jesus progressed (as say the original translation) into was a wisdom befitting his age, whether this be earthly wisdom (puberty was close at hand) or spiritual wisdom, which is evident he already had much of that to be speaking in the temple.
               The stature in vs 52 translates maturity... barmitzvah is just around the corner for Jesus and that would indeed, literally, progress Jesus in his cultures societal standings. Again puberty, and God would need to be with Jesus in a different way than prior to the bodies biological needs.
               And so speaks the last quality.. favor with God... which no other than the grace of God, even and also, Gods approval.
               I quoted the scriptures at the beginning, to which i would love to add, that those of us who have periodically experienced intense walking in the Spirit times, know full well that ``being above the lusts of the flesh` is completely easy, effortless and lovely to do. Since Jesus walked in the Spirit i will impart this scenario.. the woman at the well could have been ugly or incredibly beautiful, but did Jesus hesitate to speak the words of the kingdom to her.... In the large crowds of people there must have been some knockouts babes in the crowd, do we think Jesus was even remotely distracted - no. The spirit of God is so very powerful that His ways are totally possible. When Jesus was reviled on the cross, did he mock his accusers - no. When the pharisees said, `you have a devil`did he throw out cheesy one liners and ridicule them - no. The woman caught in adultery, Jesus took time to write something in the sand.
               I do not believe that Jesus needed to learn to walk and talk as a son of God these elementary principles would have been quickly overcome as God himself invented the language and caused man to be upright. As for Jesus also having much to learn, no i don`t think so, much to experience perhaps, but as is said in the bible;
               That which i see the father do, do i.

               replyreport
   2. 60

      www.lookseenowposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      According to the account, he was not argumentive, rather he was sitting in the midst of the teachers and listening to them and questioning them.  His comments, and his answers to their questions is what impressed them.  The account doe not reveal what subject they were discussing, but it does comment favorably on Jesus’ demeanor—all those listening to him were in constant amazement at his answers.  (Luke 2:46-47) 
      
      http://setnewgoal.blogspot.com/2009/04/ … acher.html

      replyreport
      1. 60

         lizzieBooposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         No I didn't mean argument in that sense. I know he was having discussions with them, and I thought it would be interesting to guess what it was about. Is it not fascinating to think what Jesus thought of the OT?

         replyreport
   3. 61

      kessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      He was filling their gaps of ignorance with knowledge...
      
      
      They were surprised at his understanding to even to present his arguments and his knowledge covered each and every single area of learning....not just religious.
      
      
      Nevertheless most could not accept nor believe the things that was being said, especially so when each and every one of their counter arguments were easily undermined by simple everyday real life understanding.

      replyreport
   4. 57

      Jeramiposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Very thoughtul question  ...
      
         My bible says that Jesus was reading out of the ancient scriptures ....  at least when his parents ound him.
      
         And when he finished ...  he closed the bood and said ..
      Something like " This day are these prophesy fulfilled ...
      
      Ssooo   I always that he was revealing fulfillment of prophesy.
      
         At the very least. This is the only clue that I have seen concerning your question.
      
         I think Jesus stayed on this topic for much of his ministry.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         kessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         you got your text mixed up jerami

         replyreport
         1. 0

            brotheryochananposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            yah.. that was at the beginning of Jesus ministry about 16yrs later

            replyreport
   5. 87

      Ms Deeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Intriguing question . My thought is that he was studying with the temple teachers as Jewish boys normally do, but like it implies in Luke 2:47, he was also showing his knowledge as meeting the expected requirements for students his age MUCH more above and beyond the norm. He was like cementing his standing as having met the traditional requirements for students his age there in Jerusalem, in addition to his home town synagogue.  Maybe in preparation for him to eventually be seen throughout the area as teacher?

      replyreport
   6. 79

      earnestshubposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I'd be more concerned with asking his parents what the hell they were thinking if a 12 year old went missing for three days.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         brotheryochananposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         At this age, jesus was considered almost an adult, so he probably didn`t spend a lot of time with his parents during the festival. Those who attended these festivals often traveled in caravan for protection from robbers along the palestine roads. The women and children usually would travel at the front of the caravan, with the men at the rear. A 12 yr old boy could have been in either group, so both mary and joseph probably assumed that Jesus was with the other one or somewhere along the caravans length. Jesus was most likely a very dependable and responsible person, i suspect they had little reason to second guess him at any time, But when the caravan left jerusalem (after the festival) jesus stayed behind. The reason for this was his Heavenly fathers business - a good excuse.
         A dayish journey by caravan one way.

         replyreport
   7. 61

      DragonSlayer007posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Scripture does not tell us what Jesus was talking about with the temple priests, but it does say that they were amazed with the things He was saying. All we can do for now is speculate and guess, but one day we shall have the exact answer.

      replyreport
   8. 78

      DoubleScorpionposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      As I am sure you are already aware...There are many other documents that cover the life of "Jesus" besides just the bible. Although most do not look on them to highly, because they aren't part of the bible.

      replyreport
2. 0

   Emile Rposted 12 years ago

   You know. I never considered debate, in conjunction with his name. I assumed it was a deep spiritual discussion, not an argument.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      lizzieBooposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Yes well I never considered it either, although when I say 'argument' I mean presenting arguments to understand something, discussing points etc. I wouldn't expect he was having it out with them. But I just wondered recently, what was he discussing.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I would think a rabbi might have a good idea. It was the Jewish faith they were discussing.
         
         It must have had to do with Jewish law since, if I remember, they were sitting outside of the courts; it probably had to do with his understanding of God's intent when the law was given.  I know he had a tendency later in life to chastise the religious leaders for using the law against people, which was never the original intent, according to him.
         
         If I had to guess, that would be it.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            lizzieBooposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            That sounds very likely. It is in Jewish tradition to be in frequent discussion about what all the Bible means.

            replyreport
   2. 72

      lone77starposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      What better way to debate than to ask probing questions which illuminate? Sometimes, by asking a question, one can get the listener or reader to look in an area they had previously never explored.
      
      Could this be what Jesus was doing?

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Of course. My problem was with the terminology, but I have come to understand that when lizzieboo uses the words debate and argument it doesn't conjure the same  negative images in her mind that it does in mine.
         
         The figure I saw that emerged from the gospels was a man completely at peace with his understanding and one who gently shared it with those genuinely searching for answers. I see no reason not to believe that was in his nature, even as a child.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            lizzieBooposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Yes I agree Emile. He was Gentle Jesus. Although he did loose his temper when the traders used the synagogue as a market place. He was angry and he let rip.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               You are correct, by my memory.  But, I am going to point something out and I don't want you to take offense.  Reading and responding on this forum has led me to believe that those of you that are Catholic appear to have a broader and more even tempered approach to your religion; but I'm getting the impression every time I open my mouth I offend the Christians so I can only ask you not to take offense. 
               
               What the religious appear to refuse to see is that it was the religious themselves that raised the ire of your savior, no one else.  Many of the things that he appeared quite upset about are the same things we see today within the church and acted out in society.  It constantly fascinates me how interpretations have bogged down so heavily back the way it appears to have been before the time of the gospels, but the majority of Christians lumber on refusing to acknowledge this.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  lizzieBooposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  You are absolutely right and I'm not offended. Religious people of all kinds are prone to falling into the trap of thinking 'I'm right, so now I can get on with doing what I like.' Catholic lay people are probably the worst offenders. The Anglicans, for all their political correctness, don't tend to be hypocrites. They like to practice what they preach and that's why you don't tend to get practicing Anglicans, or other denominations for that matter, drinking their body-weight of a weekend,  the way Catholics do. The reason Catholic 'guilt' is such a characteristic is because Catholics so often do things they know are wrong, whereas other Christians just don't do them. You may be amused to know that it's my Anglican husband who reminds me of my Christian duty.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Well, I'm not sure what your christian duty is. Other than trying to emulate the manner and spirituality of Jesus. That's the problem I have with the religious. Not that they are imperfect. Who isn't? It's the tendency to want to be the pharisees and the saudicees. (probably didn't spell that right)
                     
                     A lot of pomp. A lot of preaching. A whole lot of pointing out the transgressions of us heathens. But no acts that show a level of spirituality commensurate with their words.
                     
                     My statement was not pointed toward Catholics. To be honest, the few I've known personally live their faith more clearly than the outspoken protestants.

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        lizzieBooposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        Yes, that is our Christian duty. To live in the 'Imitation of Christ' as Thomas A'Kempis puts it. It means to not be judgemental, except of ourselves, which is where the finger is usually pointing. Tub-thumping Christianity will only take you so far in my view. Oh, to be better people. We're a sinful bunch us Cafflics, but as St Augustine said, 'the day we stop trying to be good, is the day we stop being good'.

                        replyreport
                        1. 0

                           Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           I'm not sure the cafflics are more sinful than the next person. But sin is a whole other can of worms of a conversation. It's all a matter of perception.

                           replyreport
      2. 60

         lizzieBooposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         yes indeed lone77star

         replyreport
3. 45

   4sommposted 12 years ago

   Actually the Bible says He was teaching the people the scripture, which amazed the elders and the teachers of law around there.

   replyreport
4. 0

   brotheryochananposted 12 years ago

   The verses are like this:
   Luke 2:46   And it came to pass, that after 3 days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions.
   << doctor G1320 an instructor, master, teacher - not a hospital type of doctor>>
   
   Luke 2:47   And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers.
   <<Notice how Jesus did not go in all puffed up, but he heard what they said and asked questions. This might be a nice template for forum discussions lol>>
   
   Luke 2:48   And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have SOUGHT thee SORROWING.
   <<I find this verse here, REFUTES claims that Jesus was off in India and other places, learning about other forms of religion. He was gone just 3 days and mom was already broken up over it>>
   
   Luke 2:49   And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?
   <<What would be his fathers business? Christ had not died yet so the Gospel was not on the table yet. Repentance was john the baptists job,  Jesus was (often) in the Jewish Temple, so my calculation is that Jesus was discussing the Torah (law and prophets) and a lot of messianic passages>>

   replyreport
   1. 60

      lizzieBooposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      That's a good point about it being evidence that Jesus remained in the same area and in the same religion for his education.

      replyreport
5. 58

   nomaDicVenturesposted 12 years ago

   He was saying then what he is saying today-:
   
   "Arent you people reading the same book as me??"
   
   All religious mythology is a metaphor for an inner transformation- not that it didnt historically happen, but it happened as a metaphor-
   
   We are supposed to ressurect The Christ, which the Bible says is within us all along-
   if we arent seeing religion as a method for the cultivation of the soul, we are missing the point
   
   And if you aint walkin on water... theres work to be done

   replyreport
   1. 0

      brotheryochananposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      an inner transformation yes, but not by our own power or strength but by Gods power. All change, in christianity, manifests as we yield ourselves to Him and let Him do the work
      Ephesians 2:9   Not of (our own) works, lest any man should boast.
      So i do not understand how you think it is all metaphor since we rely on God to change us. This is even our daily prayer.
      And as far as resurrecting The Christ, well he is already resurrected, his work is done and through Christ we are changed by Gods power and grace.

      replyreport
6. 0

   klarawieckposted 12 years ago

   He was having an open discussion about which came first... the chicken or the egg!

   replyreport