Maybe it's worth asking what the point of this passage is. Is it just reporting what happened or is there a point to Jesus' message about not being welcome in his home town - isn't this the carpenter's son who used to play with the other kids (or maybe he didn't). Is there an allusion to Jesus' message not being welcome to the Jews more generally, or at least the Jewish authorities who eventually did arrange for his execution.
I think one thing to note is that they were filled with wrath upon hearing the following:
Luke 4:25-27 "But I tell you of a truth, many widows were in Israel in the days of Elias, when the heaven was shut up three years and six months, when great famine was throughout all the land; But unto none of them was Elias sent, save unto Sarepta,
a city of Sidon, unto a woman
that was a widow. And many lepers were in Israel in the time of Eliseus the prophet; and none of them was cleansed, saving Naaman the Syrian.
They took offense that Elias was sent to none except a widow of Sidon -- a gentile; and none were cleansed except Naaman the Syrian -- also a gentile. The Jews were xenophobic and prejudice and Christ said that those who received miracles and blessings were Gentiles--not Israelites.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible
Filled with wrath - They were enraged, probably, for the following reasons:
1. They saw that the cases applied to themselves, because they would not receive the miraculous evidences of his mission.
2. That he would direct his attention to others, and not to them.
3. That the "Gentiles" were objects of compassion with God, and that God often showed more favor to a "single" Gentile than to multitudes of Jews in the same circumstances.
4. That they might be "worse" than the Gentiles. And,
5. That it was a part of his design to preach the gospel to the Gentiles, and not confine his labors to them only.
On these accounts their favor was soon turned to wrath, and the whole transaction shows us:
1. That popular applause is of little value.
2. That the slightest circumstances may soon turn the warmest professed friendship to hatred. And,
3. That people are exceedingly unreasonable in being unwilling to hear the truth and profit by it.
The "physician heal yourself" - it would be great to know the origin pf the saying. The relevance seems tenuous since for a physician it's his own body he is being expected to heal. Healing the bodies of the people in his home town would be his normal occupation.
I'm not sure of the origin of the Jewish proverb, though it is fun to point out that it is Luke--as physician--who recorded the proverb. It seems to be an affront to Christ though for him to prove himself and do miracles in front of them. Christ of course remarked in various places 'evil and adulterous generation who seeks after a sign, but no sign will be given. . . ."
So they were testing him, and we know that we are not to 'tempt the Lord our God'; so they were acting in faithlessness (hence the adultery).
Wouldn't the people be guilty of murder if they had killed Jesus then? Not liking someone's message in the synagogue isn't a good reason for murder is it?
Although I can't say for sure, I almost think their wrath was based in nationalism. Here is someone they knew and grew up with and was speaking better of the gentiles than he was of his own people. (For we know there is not partiality with God) They may have viewed him as a traitor to the nation. We see the High Priest saying:
John 11:48-50 "If we let him thus alone, all
men will believe on him: and
the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation. And one of them,
named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and
that the whole nation perish not."
The Jews were waiting for the Messiah to come and
redeem Israel: (see Acts 1:6) and here is a man who they considered
could be the Messiah, and yet here he speaks of redeeming Gentiles:
there were many widows in Israel, but only to the widow of Sidon was Elias sent. . . . And since the Jews were being oppressed by Romans during that time such a message didn't bode well with them. The Messiah was suppose to redeem them
from the gentiles, not go to them and save them.
Such talk I think was considered treasonous and we know that most government consider treason to be punishable by death. So in their minds they probably felt justified over leading him to a cliff.
Maybe Jesus' calm demeanour and their growing sense of guilt meant they let him walk through them? For me a message of the passage is that God through Jesus was in control of the where and when of Jesus' death.
Not sure if they felt guilt or not. We know nothing can happen unless God allows it, so Christ was never in danger. I find the reaction of the people particularly interesting myself.
