Quick Question

[MbiaJc]

A quick look at the Scriptures shows us that the age of 30 was considered an age of maturity for teaching, leadership, and respect. No less than seven times in Numbers chapter four (vv. 3, 23, 30, 35, 39, 43, 47) the Law states:

" ... from thirty years and upward even to fifty years old, everyone who entered the service for work in the tent of meeting."

The wording varies only by tense in each of those verses in chapter four. It is reiterated in I Chronicles 23:3 when a census of the Levites age 30 and above was conducted. It is further noted in II Chronicles 31:16 that the portions of the offerings allotted the priests and Levites were distributed through the heads of families aged 30 and above. Obviously, a significance of maturity, accountability, and a level of trust was placed on Israeli men once they achieved the age of 30. It is of further significance, I believe, that recent studies of male psychological and emotional development place true maturity among men at age 26-28. God knew that long before man figured it out.

Additionally, Joseph, who was a type for Christ, King David, and even King Saul all "came of age" at 30. Joseph " ... was thirty years old when he stood before Pharaoh, king of Egypt. And Joseph went out from the presence of Pharaoh and went through all the land of Egypt ..." as prime minister. Saul and David both began their reigns at age 30 (I Samuel 13:1, 2 Samuel 5:4). Clearly, from abject adherence to the Law and the Writings by Jewish society, had Jesus attempted to minister before age 30, He would have been rejected as immature and unqualified.

I believe that is your answer.

Bingo, Great work, thanks MbiaJc and

 

[MbiaJc]

History and Scripture and Logic? He wont know what to do.

Aparently you don't know what to do with the first question I asked you and surley not the last. You sure have not maide an effort to answer either.

 

[JacobHall86]

what was the first question you asked?

 

[PrincetonGuy]

A quick look at the Scriptures shows us that the age of 30 was considered an age of maturity for teaching, leadership, and respect. No less than seven times in Numbers chapter four (vv. 3, 23, 30, 35, 39, 43, 47) the Law states:

" ... from thirty years and upward even to fifty years old, everyone who entered the service for work in the tent of meeting."

The wording varies only by tense in each of those verses in chapter four. It is reiterated in I Chronicles 23:3 when a census of the Levites age 30 and above was conducted. It is further noted in II Chronicles 31:16 that the portions of the offerings allotted the priests and Levites were distributed through the heads of families aged 30 and above. Obviously, a significance of maturity, accountability, and a level of trust was placed on Israeli men once they achieved the age of 30. It is of further significance, I believe, that recent studies of male psychological and emotional development place true maturity among men at age 26-28. God knew that long before man figured it out.

Additionally, Joseph, who was a type for Christ, King David, and even King Saul all "came of age" at 30. Joseph " ... was thirty years old when he stood before Pharaoh, king of Egypt. And Joseph went out from the presence of Pharaoh and went through all the land of Egypt ..." as prime minister. Saul and David both began their reigns at age 30 (I Samuel 13:1, 2 Samuel 5:4). Clearly, from abject adherence to the Law and the Writings by Jewish society, had Jesus attempted to minister before age 30, He would have been rejected as immature and unqualified.

I believe that is your answer.

“A quick look” can result large mistakes. Dionysius Exiguus did “a quick look” into the chronology of Christ and missed the year of His birth by at least 4 years! And that was only one of his mistakes—including the wrong conclusion that Jesus was born on December 25th.

As is always the case in interpreting the New Testament, we must base our interpretation, not on translations of the New Testament, but the New Testament itself in Greek. When we look at the Greek texts of Luke’s gospel, we find a few variant readings for Luke 3:23, including the variant ἐρχόμενος‘(he was) coming (for baptism, vv. 22-22)’ in the place of ἀρχόμενος ‘(he was) beginning,’ a variant supported in part by some Old Latin and Old Syriac manuscripts. But perhaps more important to the question before us is the fact that none of these manuscripts tells us what Jesus was beginning to do. Joseph A. Fitzmyer, in his exhaustive 1,642 page commentary on Luke’s gospel writes, “Luke’s use of the ptc. [participle] archomenos, “beginning, starting,” is somewhat cryptic, but it is understood once one recalls that Luke elsewhere uses the verb archein (or its cognates) to refer to the beginning of Jesus’ public ministry (23:5; Acts 1:1, and especially 1:22; 10:37, where it is closely linked to the baptism of Jesus).”

Hence the NASB, 1995, gives us the following translation,

Luke 3:23. When He began His ministry, Jesus Himself was about thirty years of age, being, as was supposed, the son of Joseph, the son of Eli,

The ministry of Jesus was unique, and to compare it to the service of Levites and the reign of kings is more than stretching things. Jesus was not a Levite (He, like David, was of the tribe of Judah (Rev. 5:5), and the ordinances pertaining to the Levites did not apply to Him. And during his ministry years, he did not reign as a king; he served as a servant.

Further considering the Greek text of Luke 3:23 we see that Luke does NOT state that Jesus was 30 years old; Luke wrote that Jesus was about thirty years old (ὡσεὶ ἐτῶν τριάκοντ&#945, i.e., he may have been (according to this verse) a few years younger or a few years older.

As for your statement, “Saul and David both began their reigns at age 30 (I Samuel 13:1, 2 Samuel 5:4),” the Hebrew text of I Samuel 13:1 has a gap in the text and the age is not given. And, “since Saul already had a son, Jonathan, who commanded a division of the army in the very first years of his reign, and therefore must have been at least twenty years of age, if not older, Saul himself cannot have been less than forty years old when he began to reign.” (Keil and Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament). The age of David when he began to reign is of no significance to the question before us.

The Herod, king of Judea, referred to by both Luke and Matthew was Herod, the son of Idumean Antipater, who was given the title "King of Judea" by the Roman Senate in 40 B.C. and who established himself in his reign in 37 B.C. (see Flavius Josephus’ Antiquities of the Jews 15.8,1 § 191). He died in 4 B.C. Therefore Jesus was born no later than 4 B.C. (Dionysius Exiguus gave us the wrong year of the Birth of Jesus and hence 2007 is really no earlier than 2011).

The fifteenth year of the reign Tiberius Caesar was from August or September of 28 A.D. to August or September 29 A.D. (For the establishment of these dates see Jack Finegan’s Handbook of Biblical Chronology, pp. 259-280 and H. W. Hoehner’s Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ, pp. 29-44). Therefore John the Baptist began his ministry no earlier than August of 28 A.D. From 4 B.C. to 28 A.D. is 32 years. Therefore, assuming Luke and Matthew’s statements to have been correct, Jesus could not have been less than 32 years old when he began is public ministry.

Why did Jesus wait until he was at least 32 years old to begin His public ministry? Some contributors to this thread have given you their opinions and a whole lot of irrelevant baggage along with them, but Luke has given us the correct answer in his gospel, and Luke’s data is substantiated by Matthew. Jesus had to wait until John had begun his ministry, and John did not begin his ministry until Jesus was at least 32 years old. Further confirmation of these facts is found in John 1:19-36.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Bingo, Great work

I believe that it is a good idea to read a post before giving one’s endorsement to it and writing “Bingo, Great work.”

The ministry of Jesus was unique, and to compare it to the service of Levites and the reign of kings is more than stretching things. Jesus was not a Levite (He, like David, was of the tribe of Judah (Rev. 5:5), and the ordinances pertaining to the Levites did not apply to Him. And during his ministry years, he did not reign as a king; he served as a servant.

Further considering the Greek text of Luke 3:23 we see that Luke does NOT state that Jesus was 30 years old; Luke wrote that Jesus was about thirty years old (ὡσεὶ ἐτῶν τριάκοντ&#945, i.e., he may have been (according to this verse) a few years younger or a few years older.

As for IisJustMe's statement, “Saul and David both began their reigns at age 30 (I Samuel 13:1, 2 Samuel 5:4),” the Hebrew text of I Samuel 13:1 has a gap in the text and the age is not given. And, “since Saul already had a son, Jonathan, who commanded a division of the army in the very first years of his reign, and therefore must have been at least twenty years of age, if not older, Saul himself cannot have been less than forty years old when he began to reign.” (Keil and Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament). And, of course, the age of David when he began to reign is of no significance to the question before us.

 

[MbiaJc]

what was the first question you asked?

You really should be posting, because you know so much about what going on? Genius

But don't post unless you going to give proof of your convictions.

 

[JacobHall86]

You really should be posting, because you know so much about what going on? Genius

But don't post unless you going to give proof of your convictions.

So you aren't going to tell me what your first question was? BTW, you probably shouldn't make comments like calling people genius when your spelling and punctuation is borderline 3rd grade.

 

[MbiaJc]

Ok, I don't have time to read the whole thread, and I don't have time for a proper post, but I will say this much.... The Gospel of Luke is the only one to mention Jesus' Age and it says "Now Jesus was about 30 years of age when he begin his ministry" that about 30 means He could be anywhere from 27-35 while still being in that range of 30-something, tradition not the Scriptures say it was exactly 30, and if it was 32 as Princeton Guy says, or if it was 27 or even 33 when He Began is irrelevant compared to Who He was/is and what He Taught us and did. He showed us in the Sermon on the Mount how sinful we are, and condemns our sins, specifically the self-righteous religious zealots of the day.... and that He and He alone was the propitiation for our sins....

Some people like to get hung up on meaningless details, when they should focus on the bigger picture.... Focusing on Jesus age like this, is like looking at Da Vinci's Last Supper and analyzing only the Apostle John(supposedly a rival bishop) and Judas(supposedly Da Vinci) instead of seeing the whole picture for it's significance....

Exactly: Most of the books I have and people I know set His ministry starting at 30 which is about the middle of your range. There is no use in arguing about 2 years back there, because the dates change everytime the wind does.

 

[MbiaJc]

If Jesus was only 30 years old “in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar (Luke 3:1),” Herod, the King of Judea, died at least two years before Jesus was born. Should we believe Matthew, Mark, and Luke who explicitly write that he was still alive and reigning as the King of Judea, or should we believe you?

You know as I, that the dates back then change as the wind. I am not going to argue with you because you haven't proven anything. However your conclusion just likes 2 yr. being the same as mine. So brother you have your belief and I have mine.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

You know as I, that the dates back then change as the wind. I am not going to argue with you because you haven't proven anything. However your conclusion just likes 2 yr. being the same as mine. So brother you have your belief and I have mine.

Are you denying the fact that Herod, King of Judea, died in 4 B.C. and that the fifteenth year of the reign Tiberius Caesar was from August or September of 28 A.D. to August or September 29 A.D according to the calendar that we all use today? If so, which date is incorrect and what evidence do you have that the date is incorrect?

If both dates are correct, we don’t need post-doctoral theoretical mathematics to figure out the minimum age of Jesus when he was baptized by John and began his public ministry. All that we need is 1st grade arithmetic:

4 + 28 = 32.

Or perhaps, you believe that 4 + 28 = 30.

 

[TwistTim]

Does your math include a year 0? or is it year 1 to 1 no 0? That would throw your math up a year..... and Jesus starting his Ministry at 33.... of course, that's the whole math thingy, and I admit I don't do good at that....so I could be confused.... again, still not a big deal, and still in the "about 30" range

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Does your math include a year 0? or is it year 1 to 1 no 0? That would throw your math up a year..... and Jesus starting his Ministry at 33.... of course, that's the whole math thingy, and I admit I don't do good at that....so I could be confused.... again, still not a big deal, and still in the "about 30" range

The first century B.C. ended at midnight on 12/31/0001 B.C. and the date became 01/01/0001 A.D. There is, therefore, no year “0.”

 

[TwistTim]

I knew that, it was called Sarcasm.... of course, if someone was really bad at math and history, and thought the calendar went B.C. 1 year 0 A.D. 1, then they'd have an extra year.....

 

[MbiaJc]

I believe that it is a good idea to read a post before giving one’s endorsement to it and writing “Bingo, Great work.”

The ministry of Jesus was unique, and to compare it to the service of Levites and the reign of kings is more than stretching things. Jesus was not a Levite (He, like David, was of the tribe of Judah (Rev. 5:5), and the ordinances pertaining to the Levites did not apply to Him. And during his ministry years, he did not reign as a king; he served as a servant.

Further considering the Greek text of Luke 3:23 we see that Luke does NOT state that Jesus was 30 years old; Luke wrote that Jesus was about thirty years old (ὡσεὶ ἐτῶν τριάκοντ&#945, i.e., he may have been (according to this verse) a few years younger or a few years older.

As for IisJustMe's statement, “Saul and David both began their reigns at age 30 (I Samuel 13:1, 2 Samuel 5:4),” the Hebrew text of I Samuel 13:1 has a gap in the text and the age is not given. And, “since Saul already had a son, Jonathan, who commanded a division of the army in the very first years of his reign, and therefore must have been at least twenty years of age, if not older, Saul himself cannot have been less than forty years old when he began to reign.” (Keil and Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament). And, of course, the age of David when he began to reign is of no significance to the question before us.

You don't get it and probably never will. The word of God is hid from the proud and prudent, by way of its simplicity. The Church is patterned after the Leviticus priesthood and even if it wasn't Jesus would have had to be at least 30 Yr. old to be accepted as a prophet by the Jews.
I am perfectly happy with Luke’s about 30 yr. old, as already been stated that could mean from about 27-33. I take it as He being 30 yrs. old. You are trying to prove something that is improvable, except by what Luke says, as far as I am concerned.
You would be a lot better off trying to understand why He needed to be at least 30 yr. old.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

You don't get it and probably never will. The word of God is hid from the proud and prudent, by way of its simplicity. The Church is patterned after the Leviticus priesthood and even if it wasn't Jesus would have had to be at least 30 Yr. old to be accepted as a prophet by the Jews.
I am perfectly happy with Luke’s about 30 yr. old, as already been stated that could mean from about 27-33. I take it as He being 30 yrs. old. You are trying to prove something that is improvable, except by what Luke says, as far as I am concerned.
You would be a lot better off trying to understand why He needed to be at least 30 yr. old.

If Luke had believed that Jesus was 30 years old when he began his ministry and that this fact was of Biblical importance, he most certainly would not have casually written, “αὐτὸςἦν᾿Ιησοῦςὡσεὶ ἐτῶντριάκονταἀρχόμενος” (When he began His ministry, Jesus Himself was about thirty years of age, NASB, 1995).

And, by the way, Jesus was NOT accepted as a true prophet by the Jewish people. Indeed, Luke record’s them as crying out, “"Crucify, crucify Him!"”

It is a well-documented established fact that, if the relevant information given to us in the synoptic gospels is correct, Jesus was at least 32 years old when he was baptized by John the Baptist. The significance of this fact can be debated, but the fact itself cannot be debated. 28 + 4 CANNOT be less than 32. The date of 28 A.D. is absolutely certain; the date of 4 B.C. could possibly be 5 or 6 B.C., making Jesus at his Baptism 33 or 34 years old.

 

[JacobHall86]

You don't get it and probably never will. The word of God is hid from the proud and prudent, by way of its simplicity. The Church is patterned after the Leviticus priesthood and even if it wasn't Jesus would have had to be at least 30 Yr. old to be accepted as a prophet by the Jews.
I am perfectly happy with Luke’s about 30 yr. old, as already been stated that could mean from about 27-33. I take it as He being 30 yrs. old. You are trying to prove something that is improvable, except by what Luke says, as far as I am concerned.
You would be a lot better off trying to understand why He needed to be at least 30 yr. old.

Wow, so you agree he could be younger or older than 30, but cling to him being 30 for the sake of clinging to him being 30? And just a little Side not, Jesus was rejected by the jews, so him being 30 isnt a big thing. And the Church is not patterned after the Levitcal Priesthood. Not the early church.

 

[MbiaJc]

It's a great question. A leader is one that has followers. A leader is not one that has only knowledge, the basic bottom line; a leader has followers. Even Jesus example is one that rejects the "lone ranger" Christian concept that is so present today. Jesus bagan his ministry with: "Follow me". In the culture of Jesus time, age 30 was the earilest possible time to start His ministry.

and

 

[MbiaJc]

Wow, so you agree he could be younger or older than 30, but cling to him being 30 for the sake of clinging to him being 30? And just a little Side not, Jesus was rejected by the jews, so him being 30 isnt a big thing. And the Church is not patterned after the Levitcal Priesthood. Not the early church.

Man you sure do have a wild imigination, in no way was I agreeing he could be younger.

The two questions I have asked is
#1 Why did Jeses start His ministery at age 30?

#2 Just give a scripture that even hints of a one man pastoral authority in the Church, just a hint will do? And don't come back with Timothy, because he was an apostle.

You seminary boys are teaching a doctrine that is totally man made, because there is not even a hint of it in the bible. The closest thing to it is in the OT, I forget exactly where right now. But this heathen woman built her a temple to her false god and hired a Levite to come and be priest in her false god temple. Knowing that I don't see how anyone claming to be a Christian could hire out to a Church to preach for money?

BTW I do not get in debates about dates in the bible or bible times. When the so called experts change them every time the wind changes, they are just not reliable.
Its like a expert witness in a court case, each side has their on so called experts.

 

[MbiaJc]

If Luke had believed that Jesus was 30 years old when he began his ministry and that this fact was of Biblical importance, he most certainly would not have casually written, “αὐτὸςἦν᾿Ιησοῦςὡσεὶ ἐτῶντριάκονταἀρχόμενος” (When he began His ministry, Jesus Himself was about thirty years of age, NASB, 1995).

And, by the way, Jesus was NOT accepted as a true prophet by the Jewish people. Indeed, Luke record’s them as crying out, “"Crucify, crucify Him!"”

It is a well-documented established fact that, if the relevant information given to us in the synoptic gospels is correct, Jesus was at least 32 years old when he was baptized by John the Baptist. The significance of this fact can be debated, but the fact itself cannot be debated. 28 + 4 CANNOT be less than 32. The date of 28 A.D. is absolutely certain; the date of 4 B.C. could possibly be 5 or 6 B.C., making Jesus at his Baptism 33 or 34 years old.

No one can say for sure a date back then is wrote in stone. When the experts(people that know a lot more about that time than you or I) can't even agree on the dates. The only thing that I stand on about anything is the Bible. And Luke says about 30, that close enough to 30 for me.
BTW I learnt a long time ago not to get in a debate about dates, and I stick to that as close as I can.

There was at least a 120 that believed that Jesus was the The ONly Begotten Son of God, that wouldn't have if he hadn't kept the law and Jewish customs of His time.

If you are so smart, put your mind to good use, give me one scripture where God called One man to be a pastor of a Church? And don't come back with Timothy because he was an apostle.

This one man pastoral authority we have today, is man made doctrine from the get go.

 

[MbiaJc]

If Luke had believed that Jesus was 30 years old when he began his ministry and that this fact was of Biblical importance, he most certainly would not have casually written, “αὐτὸςἦν᾿Ιησοῦςὡσεὶ ἐτῶντριάκονταἀρχόμενος” (When he began His ministry, Jesus Himself was about thirty years of age, NASB, 1995).

And, by the way, Jesus was NOT accepted as a true prophet by the Jewish people. Indeed, Luke record’s them as crying out, “"Crucify, crucify Him!"”

It is a well-documented established fact that, if the relevant information given to us in the synoptic gospels is correct, Jesus was at least 32 years old when he was baptized by John the Baptist. The significance of this fact can be debated, but the fact itself cannot be debated. 28 + 4 CANNOT be less than 32. The date of 28 A.D. is absolutely certain; the date of 4 B.C. could possibly be 5 or 6 B.C., making Jesus at his Baptism 33 or 34 years old.

Not so! Your presumed facts are not written in stone facts. I will refer to what I already said. You can have your experts on history claiming one date, while I have another, claiming the date in entirely different. If you don't know that yet, you are going to have a hard row to hoe.

You haven't answered the other question yet. Just show one scripture where a one man pastoral authority is mentioned in the Bible.