A Savior Is Born! - Part 1

PDF

Well, I reserve the right to change my mind, and I’ve done so this week. In your bulletin, you have printed that we’re going to continue our study in Romans 12. But I’m not going to do that. I’d actually finished, almost completed, my message for this morning from Romans 12 when I decided I want to take a different path. And the reason I want to do so, is for my own soul as well as for yours. We are preparing to celebrate the Christmas season. And we are bombarded with the busyness of life, we’re bombarded with all the traditions of the season in a way that, frankly, it’s very easy for us to lose focus on what it is we’re really preparing to celebrate. And so, I want us in the weeks before us, between now and Christmas, to step back and really take a fresh look at what it is we commemorate when we celebrate Christmas.

As we enter the season in which most of the world celebrates the Christmas story, it’s surprising I think, even shocking, to see the varied responses to the birth of Jesus Christ. The most common responses to Him and His birth, I would say, are these.

First of all, there is settled antagonism. There are some in our culture, and a growing number, who are openly antagonistic to anything having to do with Jesus. And, by the way, the reason is always the same. Just as was true of Herod in the first century, people who are antagonistic to Christ are so because they resent anyone who challenges their own sovereignty and their own autonomy. They do so because they want to be king, and they want no one to challenge their position.

There’s a second response to Jesus, and that is scholarly skepticism. You see this in the religious leaders of Jesus’ time. They gave every appearance of being genuinely spiritual, yet by Jesus’ own diagnosis, their hearts were far from God. And what was their response to the birth of Jesus, to the birth of the Messiah? It was skepticism. Really? Can any good thing come out of Galilee and especially out of Nazareth? Do we even know who this man’s father is? And what hubris for Him to elevate Himself as a rabbi when he hasn’t been taught in any of our schools. Sadly, prepare yourself, because this time of year, liberal pulpits, college classrooms, and TV documentaries are filled with scholarly skepticism: “Who really was the historical Jesus? Surely, you don’t think in your simplistic way that you can trust the biblical record about His birth and His life. Don’t you understand that all of that was just the stuff of myth and legend fabricated by his followers?”

A third response that’s so common to Jesus and His birth is distracted indifference. This is maybe the largest response. Most people, like the people in Bethlehem and in nearby Jerusalem at the first Christmas, most people around us are simply too busy to really even give much thought to this. They’re busy with their lives and, in our case, they’re even busy with the trappings of their own sort of traditional Christmas celebrations, to ever stop and really think about the birth of Jesus Christ.

A fourth response is shallow acceptance. This is an extremely typical response here in North Texas and I think across the US. These are people who say all the right things and, at some level, believe them. I suspect there are people in this category, unfortunately a number this morning, here in this room. They have warm thoughts about Christmas and the birth of Jesus, but it’s primarily sentimental. And when you begin to ask the hard questions, you discover their relationship to Jesus is really no different than that of the demons. They believe the facts about the record of Jesus’ birth and much of Jesus’ life. They believe them to be true, at least at some level, but, like the demons, they continue to deny the lordship of Jesus Christ.

A fifth response, and I hope is represented largely here this morning, is sincere worship. Scattered throughout the gospel records of the birth of Jesus, you find men and women who truly worship Jesus as Lord. From Mary and Joseph, his parents, to the shepherds, to Anna and Simeon that they met at the temple, to the Magi - early in Jesus’ human life, He was surrounded by those who understood who He really was and who responded in sincere worship.

So, understand and don’t be surprised by the fact that responses to the birth of Jesus Christ in our day will fall on this spectrum. You’ll find everything from angry rants on the Internet to polished attacks of so-called scholars, television documentaries, from the misguided worship of the cults, the general indifference of most people to the genuine biblical worship of Jesus’ true followers. You’ll find it all.

But as we begin this Christmas season, what I want us to consider is how should we, as the genuine, real followers of Jesus Christ, how should we think about and respond to the birth of Jesus our Lord? Lord willing, over the next four Sunday mornings, I want us to examine together one of the most well-known passages in all of Scripture. It is the simple, unvarnished, and yet remarkable record of the birth of Jesus Christ and, of course, it’s found in Luke 2, where I invite you to turn with me this morning. Luke 2.

It’s my prayer and hope, by the time we have finished working our way over the next four Sundays through these 20 verses that begin chapter 2, that you will see them in a much deeper, more profound way than you’ve ever seen them before. Rather than just the simple cursory reading most of us have at Christmas time, I’m praying for my own soul and for yours that they will come alive and bear fruit in our lives. Let’s read together; you follow along. I just want to begin with the first seven verses of Luke 2. Here is the inspired and infallible account of the birth of Jesus Christ.

“Now in those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus, that a census be taken of all the inhabited earth. This was the first census taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. And everyone was on his way to register for the census, each to his own city. Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and family of David, in order to register along with Mary, who was engaged to him, and was with child. While they were there, the days were completed for her to give birth. And she gave birth to her firstborn son; and she wrapped Him in cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn.”

Two other gospels refer to the birth of Jesus Christ in passing, but only Luke, the historian, sets the context of Jesus’ birth and describes in detail its unique circumstances. I think the theme of those 7 verses, we just read together, perhaps is best captured in Paul’s famous words to the Galatians in Galatians 4:4, where he says, “But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman...” What we have here in these first 7 verses is the simple, historical record of the birth of Christ. The historical record of the birth of Christ. Let’s look at it together. As Luke describes the details surrounding Jesus’ birth, he does so with a specific intentionality. He constructs it in such a way as to stress that Jesus’ birth perfectly fit the divine plans laid out in the prophecies of the Old Testament. And so, I want us to look at it in that way.

He begins by making the point that Jesus was born at the right time. He was born at the right time (verses 1-3). If you were to ask the average person on the street when Jesus was born, what would they say? Most of them would say, “Well it’s the year 0, the year between BC (before Christ) and AD (anno domini), that is, in the year of our Lord.” Of course, there is no such zero year. And in addition to that, the reckoning of the calendar, based on the birth of Christ, didn’t begin until the year 525 AD. It was the work of Dionysius Exiguous. In preparing the Easter tables that year, this is what he wrote, “We have chosen to note the years from the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ”. And so, the idea of BC and AD of the birth of Jesus being ground zero and moving backward and forward from that event, began in the year 525 AD. Before that, and frankly for him, Dionysius, as he tried to reconstruct that date of Jesus’ birth, it’s very difficult. It’s not easy to attach dates to the life of our Lord, in part, because there were several different methods of calculating years, including the Greek and the Roman calendars, and others that began at different starting points, based on key events in their own cultures.

But in spite of those numerous difficulties, we can be relatively certain about the timeframe in which our Lord was born, and for that we are especially indebted to Luke. Luke intentionally establishes the birth of Jesus Christ in its historical context. So, let’s consider the year that Jesus was born.

Notice verse 1: “Now in those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus...” “In those days” is a general reference, probably refers back to the previous timestamp, back in chapter 1:5: “In the days of Herod, king of Judea...” when Zacharias received his prophecy about the birth of John the Baptist, the forerunner of the Messiah. So, “those days” points to the fact that Jesus was born toward the end of Herod the Great’s long reign as king over Palestine under Rome. But here in our text, specifically we’re told it was during the reign of the great Roman Emperor, Caesar Augustus, because it was in conjunction with his decree that Jesus was born in Bethlehem.

So, we need to think for a moment about Caesar Augustus to give us this historical context. He was born Gaius Octavius on September 23rd, 63 BC. He was the grandnephew of Julius Caesar. In other words, his mother was the daughter of Julia, the sister of Julius Caesar. Julius Caesar held Octavian in very high esteem. In fact, he was constantly lavishing him with honors and gifts. After Julius Caesar’s murder in 44 BC, Octavian learned that in Caesar’s will he had been named as his son and his heir. In response to that, Octavian changed his name to Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianus. But he’s usually simply referred to as Octavian.

Now, Octavian’s sister… Stay with me. This matters. Octavian’s sister married Antony. As you know, Antony, or Anthony, eventually left his wife and became infatuated with Cleopatra. In addition, Anthony declared Cleopatra’s son, from her affair with Julius Caesar, to be Caesar’s only legitimate heir. This was a direct contradiction and attack on Octavian as the rightful heir to the throne, as granted in the will of Julius Caesar. So, war broke out, war between the two rivals, but it was eventually settled in the great naval battle at Actium on the year 31 BC. Octavian soundly defeated Anthony and his forces.

Now, shortly after that, you remember that Anthony and Cleopatra committed suicide. And with Anthony’s death, Octavian became the de facto ruler of Rome. Now, here’s a key date. In the year 29 BC, the Roman Senate declared him the first emperor of Rome. The Republic was over. He becomes emperor. Two years later, in 27 BC, the Senate gave Octavian, or Gaius Julius Caesar, as he’d become known, the title “Augustus” meaning “the majestic, the highly revered one”. It had emperor worship overtones.

Now, Augustus gained his power by being a ruthless man, but he eventually became one of the best of the Roman emperors for several reasons. He was a gifted administrator and organizer. He was an effective general and discerner of men. He was gracious to the countries he conquered, in fact, granting them a great deal of self-rule. One author puts it this way, “He respected their customs, religious convictions, and even their laws to the extent to which they did not interfere with Rome’s.” He was also an accomplished builder. On his deathbed, Octavian said, “I found Rome of brick and I leave it to you of marble.” He was a patron of the arts. He even encouraged cleaner, more noble literature. He befriended the great Roman writers such as Ovid and Horace, Virgil, and Livy. But far and away, the greatest contribution of Octavian, or of Augustus as he became known, was the famous Pax Romana or the Roman peace. Through his military conquests, through his wise leadership, he brought peace to the entire Mediterranean world for more than 200 years. He was, without question, the most important man in the history of the Roman empire and its greatest leader.

Caesar Augustus reigned as emperor from 29 BC to 14 AD. That’s key. Keep that in mind - from 29 BC to August 19th, 14 AD. Now, during that long reign, Augustus issued countless royal decrees but, ultimately, only one of them was truly important. Look at verse 1: “Now in those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus, that a census be taken of all the inhabited earth.” Now, because Augustus was an effective leader and a good administrator, and because he inherited the empire, remember, in such a state of upheaval from all of the civil wars, he issued a decree that a census be taken of his entire realm.

That expression, “all the inhabited earth”, refers to the entire world ruled by Rome. In other words, the Roman Empire. Although there is no specific secular record of this unique census, there are many historical records of countless censuses carried out throughout this time. Now, normally, a census was used for two reasons. It was used to determine who was eligible for military service and for taxation. And the Jews, of course, were exempt from military service so for them, this ultimately came down to how much taxes they would owe you. You remember, eventually, even during the ministry of Jesus, He’s being asked about paying taxes to Rome, paying poll taxes. That came out of this census.

Now, the verb in Greek may imply that the decree was not merely a single census, but a cycle of recurring censuses. In fact, that’s exactly what happened. Archaeological evidence from Egypt proves that that’s exactly the reality. Under Augustus, a census of the empire occurred every 14 years - every 14 years, a census. Now, what did they collect in a census? Well, typically in a census in the Roman Empire, they collected these pieces of data: name, address, occupation, marital status, income, and property. And you can understand why those last items were important as they thought about taxation. So, there were these recurring cycles of censuses - occurred every 14 years.

Josephus tells us that one of those 14-year intervals... Now, stay with me. Okay? You’re going to have to do a little math but stay with me. We’re trying to get to the year our Lord was born. Josephus tells us that one of those 14-year intervals fell on the year 6 AD. 6 AD. That’s the census that Luke mentions in Acts 5:37, but it’s not this one. However, if we subtract 14 years from 6 AD, we discover that this census, the one in our text, was ordered by Augustus in 8 BC. And then, for several reasons, the census was not actually carried out until about 5 BC. Why is that?

Well, there’s several reasons. I mean, communication in the first century was slow and difficult, and for word to spread to and then through the province took time. Also, we’re in the final years of Herod the Great’s reign and Herod the Great, the last years of his reign were filled with instability and political intrigue. He was very ill, but he had also lost the confidence of the Emperor Octavian. In addition to that, there had begun to be infighting, a struggle among his sons regarding who would succeed him. In fact, during the years all of this unfolds, he had three of his sons executed and changed his will three times. Combine all of that with the inherent Jewish resistance to Roman occupation and taxation, and you can understand why there was a delay between the decree being given in 8 BC and its execution in Israel closer to 5 BC.

Now, Luke adds another piece to the historical context in verse 2. Notice: “This was the first census taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria.” Now, I have to admit something to you. When I was a little younger, reading the Christmas story out loud to, you know, in family settings, I always thought, you know, it’d be nice if you could just skip this verse. It just breaks up the sort of poetry and beauty of the story, and why is that there? Well, let’s see if we can understand it.

We know that Quirinius was the governor of Syria. Syria keeps popping up. Quirinius was governor of Syria from 6-7 AD. And he was in charge of that census in 6 AD. So, what about before that, because we’re talking about a different timeframe? Well, it’s possible that Quirinius served two terms, including a term in the years before Christ’s birth. There has been an archaeological discovery which lists - it doesn’t list the name of the person but lists a man who served as governor over Syria for two separate terms, and when you look at the description of what he accomplished, it really leads you to Quirinius.

But, regardless, the Greek word translated “governor” here is actually a non-technical word for anyone who’s in authority. Well, we learn from archaeology - there’s a man in biblical archaeology by the name of Sir William Ramsay, who writes, “At the time of the census back in 8 BC...” Remember, the one we’re talking about? The census in 8 BC. He writes this: “Varus was controlling the internal affairs of Syria, while Quirinius was commanding its armies and controlling its foreign policy.” So, during the time of that census in 8-5 BC, Quirinius was in a position of authority and would likely have been tasked with overseeing the census.

What’s happening here? Why does Luke include this? For his first century audience, Luke was providing a tight window of time in which Jesus was born. The problem for us, particularly with Quirinius, is we don’t know for certain the exact timing of when that first census actually took place in Israel. So, we need to add one additional piece of evidence to narrow down the year of Jesus birth more specifically, and it has to do with the death of Herod the Great. For us today, this is the most helpful evidence in fixing the year of the birth of Christ, because we know that Herod was alive when Jesus was born, right? Herod the Great was alive when Jesus was born. He’s the one who killed the infants in Bethlehem. Well, the New Testament tells us about his response to the arrival of the Magi, so he had to be alive when Jesus was born. So, we know from secular history that Herod died between March 29 and April 4th in the year 4 BC.

So, what does all that mean? It means that Jesus was born no later than the winter, the February-March of 4 BC and no earlier than 6 BC. Why? Because remember, Herod killed the babies who were how old? Two years and younger. That means he learned from the Magi, when the star had appeared, he knew that the child was younger than two years of age. So, that means the birth of Jesus has to fall between 4 BC and the death of Herod in 6 BC, within two years.

Now, that raises another question people often ask, and that is, what time of year was Jesus born? We can’t know absolutely for certain, but the evidence points toward the winter. How do we know that? Well, it has to do with the rotation of the priests. The priests served in the temple in rotations based on families. You remember Zacharias, John the Baptist’s father, heard about John’s birth while he was serving at the temple, actually was in the holy place. You can figure Jesus’ birth and John’s birth from that. How do we know, though, how the priests served - what rotation they served?

Several of us got the opportunity, about 160 from our church, to be in Israel recently. We visited Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered. Among the Dead Sea Scrolls, there was unearthed a six-year almanac that tells us the annual rotation of the priests began on Tishrei 1, one of the Jewish months. When you put… I’m not going to take you through all the arguments; let me just summarize it for you. When you put all the evidence together, it leads to an annunciation to Mary in the spring, with Jesus’ birth around the time of the winter solstice.

As far as the exact day of Jesus’ birth, well on that we can’t be certain either. There is, of course, an ancient tradition in the western church of December 25th. There are those who think that that’s just a pagan date, kind of a new celebration of a pagan festival or something. The truth is the evidence for this predates the sort of Christians under Constantine absorbing the culture. Let me give you a quote from Hippolytus, Hippolytus of Rome, who wrote between 202 and 211 BC or, I’m sorry, AD, I should say, between 202 and 211 AD, in his commentary on Daniel, wrote this: “The first advent of our Lord in the flesh when he was born in Bethlehem, was December 25th.” So, once things changed and the Roman Empire, under Constantine, Christianity became accepted, Christians began to widely celebrate that date as the day of Jesus’ birth.

So, I’ve taken you through a lot of history. Let me pull it together. Based on the census sorted by Caesar Augustus, the governorship of Quirinius, and the death of Herod the Great, we can construct a tight window of time for Jesus’ birth. I would summarize it like this. Jesus was likely born in winter, probably either December of 5 or 6 BC, and very possibly on December 25th. I personally prefer the year 5 BC for a number of reasons, and I’m not going to get into them here. If you’re interested, you can listen to the survey I did of the New Testament, where I got into that a little more. So, that’s the historical background.

Now, look at verse 3. Because of the census ordered by Caesar Augustus in 8 BC, that was finally executed in the land of Israel around 5 BC, verse 3 says, “And everyone was on his way to register for the census, each to his own city.” In much of the empire, people were registered in the city where they were currently residing because you didn’t move around as much in the ancient world. But for the Jews it was different, because their census was according, not to where they lived currently, but to the original allotment of the land in the time of Joshua which had been by family and region. That was their land.

Now, if you lived in Judea, it was relatively convenient because you probably lived near your tribal allotment, and you didn’t have to travel very far. But for most of those who lived in Galilee, they belonged to tribes in the south, in Judea - Benjamin. And so, for them, this decree meant a three-day journey, at least, south to Judea. That’s the historical context of the birth of Jesus Christ.

But I want to back up from those three extraordinary verses and ask a question. Why? Why does Luke include this historical timeline? Why have I taken so much time on a Sunday morning dealing with history? I want you to notice something in the text of your Scripture there. Look at chapter 2 again. Notice that Luke devotes three verses, verses 1-3, to the historical background of the birth of Jesus Christ, but only a single verse to the actual birth of Jesus Christ. Why? Why does he give it so much space?

Well, there are three crucial implications of the time and space that Luke devotes to the historical background of the birth of Jesus Christ. Don’t miss this. This is what will prepare you to celebrate Christmas. It’s not the sentimentality, but it’s what will really prepare your heart to celebrate this Christmas season - three crucial implications of why he spends three verses setting it up.

Implication number one: Jesus was a real person who lived at a particular time and place in human history. Folks, the birth of Jesus Christ is a fact of history. Luke wants us to understand that Jesus was, in fact, an historical figure. Sadly, we who live here in North Texas, are so far removed in time (2000 years) and in space (it’s the other side of the planet where these events took place), that it’s easy for us, unwittingly, to think about Jesus in the same way we think about Santa Claus - part of a fun tradition. There’s some historical basis there, but there’s a whole lot of historical fiction added in. That’s kind of the mindset of many people. Luke doesn’t allow us to think like that. He makes it crystal clear that Jesus’ birth is, in fact, the stuff of history. It is not myth. It is not legend. Because more than any of the other Gospel writers, Luke is an historian. That’s his intention.

Go back to chapter 1:1. Here he explains why he writes his gospel and how - how he goes about it. Notice verse 1: “Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us...” He alludes here to written records of the life of Jesus. I suspect most of those were uninspired records - people who witnessed and saw, who wanted to record it. Perhaps he’s also alluding to Matthew and Mark as well.

Verse 2: [They’ve written about these things that were accomplished among us] just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word...” Luke says we have received information about Jesus and His life from the apostles and the eyewitnesses of those accounts, of those things that happened. He said, from that, records have been written, accounts have been written.

Verse 3: “it seemed fitting for me as well...” Why fitting for Luke? Well, Luke was able to investigate, as we’ll see in a moment and how he was able to investigate. In addition, he was a traveling companion of the apostle Paul. He wrote under the auspices of Paul himself. Notice how he approached his work, verse 3: “it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning...” Luke says, “[I was a historical investigator. I am a historian and, therefore], to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; so that you may know the exact truth [the certainty, literally] about the things...” Again, the Greek text says “you have been catechized in, the things you’ve been orally instructed in, I want you to have the certainty of knowing what happened. And to help you, I have carefully, thoroughly investigated these things.”

How did Luke do that? Well, the book of Acts tells us that for two years, the apostle Paul was imprisoned at Caesarea, on the coast of Israel. Caesarea Maritima - we had a chance to visit there. I actually had a meeting there a couple of weeks ago. Paul was imprisoned there for two years. Certainly, during that time Luke, by the way who we’re told in the book of Acts, was with Paul during that imprisonment. Luke could have traveled the very short distance from Caesarea on the coast into Jerusalem, into Bethlehem, up to Galilee, and could have interviewed eyewitnesses of all of these events. Mary and many others who witnessed these events were still alive during the two years Paul was in prison in Caesarea and Luke was with him.

In fact, have you ever wondered why this verse is here? Look at Luke 2:19: “But Mary treasured all these things, pondering them in her heart.” What’s that about? It’s a reminder that she kept careful consideration and memory, recycling what had happened? Why is that important? Because Luke interviewed her and found out from her the details of the birth of Christ. We’re getting these details, an inspired record from Luke, under the auspices of Paul, but who interviewed Mary and other eyewitnesses. So, Luke then, thoroughly investigated the facts, interviewed the eyewitnesses, and he says, “Here is what I have discovered in my investigation.”

Listen, don’t believe the lie that says, “Oh, we just can’t be sure if Jesus ever lived at all, and we can’t be sure if He was a real person. And if He was a real person, we certainly can’t be sure about what He did or said.” Listen, I just returned from the land of Israel with 160 from our congregation, and I will tell you, and they will tell you, that the people there don’t doubt the historical reality of the people and events in the Bible. They don’t doubt that Jesus really lived, that He said what He said. They may not believe in Him, but they don’t doubt the historical nature of His existence. I walked where Jesus walked. I have sat on the temple steps, the actual steps that Jesus throughout His life, from the time He was 12 till the time He was killed, walked up into the temple multiple times every year. I have stood on the Temple Mount where Jesus taught His people. I have stood on the floor of synagogues in which Jesus taught. Don’t you believe, for a moment, that He wasn’t a real historical person.

Jesus really lived. Why does that matter? Because if He really lived and He really made the claims that He made, you have to deal with those claims. And by the way, you are, every person here - you have either bowed to His claims and accepted Him as Lord, or you are rejecting Him. Those are the only two options. But you are responding to the claims of Jesus Christ, and He is a real person who demands that you resolve who He is and what you’re going to do with Him. Has it ever sunk into your mind? Whether you’re a believer or unbeliever, has it ever sunk into your mind that Jesus Christ was a real person, a person who lived just as truly as you live, just as truly as I live, just as truly as Caesar Augustus lived? There’s far more evidence about the life and ministry of Jesus Christ than any other ancient historical figure. He was a real person. That’s why Luke includes this. Look, you can be as sentimental as you want, but don’t miss the history, because the history matters. Our faith is not myth and legend. It’s real.

Number two, a second implication: Jesus was born at exactly the right time in history. It was the divine plan to have the Messiah come at a specific moment in human history when everything was perfectly aligned for the spread of His message. Remember Galatians 4:4: “But when the fullness of the time came [when everything was just right], God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law [that is, under the responsibility to keep the Law which He did perfectly], so that He might redeem [that is, He might by paying the ransom with His own life, redeem] those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.” The time was right.

It was right biblically. You see, the time of Jesus’ birth perfectly fits the biblical prophecy of when the Messiah would come. You understand the Old Testament tells us, it points to Jesus, it tells us who it’s going to be? I mean the prophecies start in the time of Adam, in Genesis 3:15. It says a unique person is going to come who will deal with sin and Satan. And then as the Old Testament continues, the focus gets more and more narrow. You come to Genesis 12, and you discover he’ll not only be human, but you discover His ethnicity. He will be a descendant of Abraham. And then as Genesis continues to unfold, you discover He’ll be a descendant of Isaac, and then of Jacob. And then by the time you get to the end of Genesis, you discover He’ll be the descendant of one of Jacob’s sons, Judah. And then you come to 2 Samuel 7, and you discover He will belong to one family in Judah, the tribe of Judah, and that is the family of David. He must be a descendant of David. And then the Old Testament tells us where He would be born. Micah 5:2: He would be born in Bethlehem.

You know all of that. But maybe you didn’t know this. Do you know the Old Testament tells us when Messiah would live? It does. In the book of Daniel, Daniel 9. It was written more than 500 years before Christ came, but it predicted when Messiah would live and die. And Daniel 9 and the prophecy of when Messiah would be here on this planet, lines up perfectly with the life of Jesus of Nazareth. Come back next Sunday night when, in God’s providence, we’ll be studying that prophecy in Daniel 9, and you’ll see that it is a perfect hand-in-glove fit with the life of Jesus Christ. It was the right time. It had to be because 500 years earlier, through Daniel, God had said this is when Messiah will live and when He will die.

So, the timing of Jesus’ birth was right biblically, based on the prophecy of Daniel 9, but it was also right historically. It was perfect historically. Think about the time in which Jesus was born. It was a time of unparalleled peace under the Pax Romana. It was a time of extensive travel. There was only one great empire with no national boundaries and an extensive network of roads. There was one commonly understood language, Greek, which was perfectly suited in its precision for the great doctrines of the salvation in the New Testament. You understand what Luke is saying here? God providentially raised up the Roman empire and Caesar Augustus, and then He directed Augustus to initiate an empire-wide census. And all of that was ultimately to accomplish His great plan of redemption. Unwittingly, Caesar Augustus contributed to that plan and the timing of his decree - that’s what God used to ensure that the prophecy Micah had given hundreds of years before would actually be fulfilled, and that the Messiah would be born, not in Nazareth, but in Bethlehem.

There’s a third interesting implication of what Luke writes in verses 1-3, and it’s that the birth of God’s Son is the center of human history. Again, listen to Galatians 4:4: “But when the fullness of the time came [when everything was exactly right], God sent forth His Son, born of a woman...” You know what that passage tells us? It tells us that in the mind of God, the center of human history was the birth of His Son. Caesar Augustus and the Roman empire - they were merely the supporting cast for the main character on the stage of human history.

The people that mattered to God in the first century, the people that were the object of His primary focus - it wasn’t the center of power. It wasn’t Caesar Augustus. It wasn’t Rome. Instead, it was a poor, obscure, newly married couple from Nazareth. Why? Because they were true believers, first of all, and God always has believers as the focus and object of His care. But also, because in the womb of that young virgin was God’s eternal Son, who had taken on flesh as an infant to bring redemption and forgiveness to His people.

You understand it is perfectly appropriate that our calendars center on Jesus’ birth. Oh, and by the way, that’s why so many today are opposed to that, are doing everything they can to throw that off. And so, instead of BC (before Christ), we have BCE (before the common era) and instead of AD (anno domini, in the year of our Lord), we have ACE (after the common era). Why do they do that? Because they don’t want to acknowledge that Jesus Christ is the center of human history. But by God’s reckoning, He is.

But the center of human history should also be the center of every human life. Let me just ask you, and I really want you to ask your heart this question right now. I want you to think about this: is Jesus Christ the center of your world and of your life? Do you reckon your life based on the day He became your Lord? Is Jesus Christ and His gospel the center of everything in your life? That is one of the lessons that Christmas should teach us. It was when the fullness of time had come in the mind of God, when everything was just right, that the central event of human history occurred. He sent forth His Son. Is His Son at the very center of your life and soul? He deserves it. And someday, even for those who don’t give it to Him here, He will have it, because every knee will bow, and every tongue confess that He is Lord to the glory of God His Father. May we give it willingly now.

Let’s pray together.

Father, thank You for this magnificent chapter. Thank You for what we’ve already learned. Father, forgive us for being lost in sentimentality when You want to root our faith ultimately in Your Word but, through Your Word, in the facts of history. Father, thank You that Jesus of Nazareth is a real man who really existed, who lived in a place and time, and who was at the very center of human history, by Your reckoning. Father, help us who know Him and love Him, to love Him more profoundly as a result of our study of this passage over these next few weeks. May our celebration of Christmas be richer than ever before as our understanding of Your Word goes deeper. And may we love Him. May we follow Him. May we adore Him. May we worship Him. Thank You that You sent Him, Your Son, born of a woman, born under the law as we are but, unlike us, instead of breaking it, He kept it. And then He offered His life as a ransom so that we could receive forgiveness and the adoption of sons. We thank You, Oh God.

Father, I pray for those who may be here this morning who are not in Christ. Help them to see that if they’re guilty of shallow acceptance, demon faith, that believes the facts but never submits to the lordship of Jesus Christ, I pray that this Christmas season, and even today, they would bow the knee to Jesus as Lord, that they would accept Him as Savior and Lord today, repenting, believing in Him unto life eternal. Lord, only You can do that. They’ve likely heard the gospel many times before but never come to genuine faith. I pray that You would do what only You can do and open their hearts and minds to receive that message even now. We pray in Jesus’ name, Amen!