Posted by Rational [RW] on April 09, 1999 at 08:18:35 {qzNMJDwJ.2YgCUWv3.1cZ7Lyyl6zQk}:
Last night's book study in the Greatest Man book covered the account in Luke chapter two, concluding with Simeon and Anna seeing the baby Jesus when Mary made her required "purification" at the temple in Jerusalem. The cited verses in the GM book concluded with Luke 2:38.
Next week's study examines the rest of Jesus' early life, as given in the gospels, including the account of the astrologers' visit to the child and Herod's attempt to kill him, followed by the family's flight to and from Egypt. But I notice that the lesson resumes Luke's narrative at Luke 2:40. This means that one verse has been omitted in the study of the Gospel accounts of Jesus' life: Luke 2:39.
Why is this verse omitted from the book? The verse reads:
So when they had carried out all the things according to the law of Jehovah, they went back into Galilee to their own city Nazareth.Luke 2:39 says that, having fulfilled the obligation of purification, Mary and Joseph and Jesus "went back into Galilee to their own city Nazareth." Nothing about staying in Bethlehem or the Jerusalem environs for astrologers to visit, for Herod to issue an edict for all the boys aged two and under to be killed, no flight to Egypt, etc. Simply, 'having finished what they had to do, they then returned to Nazareth.'
Rather than deal with this evident discrepancy in the gospel accounts, the Society simply omits it from the life of Jesus, thus avoiding having it brought up in the book study. What kind of courageous defense of Scriptural infallibility is this? Have they no confidence in the book study conductors to address this question with those attending the study?
Rational