The following "Question" was asked by a member of the congregation at Grace Community Church in Panorama City, California, and "Answered" by their pastor, John MacArthur Jr. It was transcribed from the tape, GC 70-16, titled "Bible Questions and Answers."  A copy of the tape can be obtained by writing, Word of Grace, P.O. Box 4000, Panorama City, CA 91412 or by dialing toll free 1-800-55-GRACE.  Copyright John MacArthur Jr., All Rights Reserved.

Question

Did Jesus, at age 12, disrespectfully disobey His parents, by not informing and not returning with them when it was time to leave?  Some Bible commentators have said that, "At this particular time, that no longer was Jesus technically under parental authority."

Answer

In Luke 2:41-52, you will remember, that Jesus' family had gone down to Jerusalem for the feast, and they obviously went with a whole entourage of people, probably friends and relatives, who had come down from Nazareth.  Jesus was 12 years of age, and they came down for the feast, and then they started back home.  When they started back home it became apparent to them, somewhere along the road, and it must have been a large group or they would have known immediately that Jesus wasn't there, but as this whole entourage moved back towards Nazareth it became apparent that Jesus was not there.  So His parents had to return back to Jerusalem and they found Him.  And where was He?  He was in the temple.

Now, it is traditional at age 12, that Jewish boys are "bar mitzvah," that means that they are made a "son of the Law."  What that means is that they become responsible, at that age, for their own obedience to the Law of God.  It doesn't mean they are kicked out of the house; it doesn't mean they are on their own, they would, certainly in most cases, continue to live with their parents.  But it does mean that they take on personal responsibility for the Law.  So we will not conclude that Jesus was exercising His right to live on His own, or to be on His own, or to conduct His life apart from His parents, or to be non-submissive to them in any way.  Nor should we conclude that He had sinned in doing what He did, because He couldn't sin--right?  

Jesus answers the question.  To say, that, "At this particular time that no longer was Jesus technically under parental authority,"--I don't think that's true.  I think that He was still under some parental authority, and certainly would have exercised perfect parental respect.  But the correct understanding of that whole issue comes right from the mouth of Jesus.  You remember when they found Him, He was in the temple--right?  And what was He doing?  It's very important to note that He was asking questions--He was not teaching, He was not ursurping a role of authority in the temple with the learned men.  He was simply asking questions.  He had come under the Law.  He was now responsible to keep the Law Himself.  He had reached, what we could call, that general time of accountability where He was personally accountable to the Law of God, and He was simply in the temple doing everything He could to comprehend what that responsibility really meant.  In His humanness He was asking the questions that pertained to the matters that were at hand in His own life, because that same text says that, "Jesus Himself grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men."  There was development in Jesus.  There was actual development: physical development, spiritual development--He didn't go from imperfection to perfection, He didn't go from sin to righteousness--He just had an expanding spiritual awareness, and this was part of it.  At the age of 12, He was asking the questions that pertained to His own living, righteous life. 

When His parents said, "Why have you done this?"  He gave the right answer, He didn't say, "You're not important," but He said this, "I must be about my Father's business."  They had to recognize that from then on, the claim on His life had to do with that which was from God, and that their authority would not be ignored by Him, but it would always be under the authority of His Father, and that's all He was saying.  I think in a general sense He was saying, "Look, I have been made a 'son of the Law' and I must understand the fullness of what this means."  There was no rebellion there, it was just a priority--the ultimate priority. 

Added to Bible Bulletin Board's "MacArthur’s Questions and Answers" by:

Tony Capoccia
Bible Bulletin Board
Box 119
Columbus, New Jersey, USA, 08022
Websites: www.biblebb.com and www.gospelgems.com
Email: tony@biblebb.com
Online since 1986