The Son of God in Luke 1-4

Listening to: The Creation (Haydn - no really I am)

The first four chapters of Luke seem to constantly be asking the question "whose son is Jesus?" There is barely an episode involving Jesus where that question isn't asked.

Luke 1:32-35: The angel declares to Mary that she will bare a son who will be called the "Son of God"

Luke 2:41-52: The family visits the Temple and they lose Jesus. When they find him Mary tells Jesus "Son...your father and I have been searching for you". He responds by explaining that he must be in his "Father's house". They don't realise whose Son he really is. But he doesn't grasp at his sonship to the Father but is "submissive" to them. Perhaps you could say that although he is the Son of God, he is willing to count himself "Son of Man" (although that title has Daniel-vision-of-glory-connections it is also regularly linked to suffering in the Gospel).

Luke 3:22: The Father declares from heaven that Jesus is his "beloved Son".

Luke 3:23: The very next verse Luke begins his backwards genealogy by noting that many people "supposed" Jesus to be the Son of Joseph.

Luke 3:37: After running back through the line of sons Luke concludes that Adam was "the son of God".

Luke 4:3, 9: The very next episode after this declaration is the the temptation of Jesus where Satan says "If you are the Son of God, command this stone to become bread." With his third and final temptation Satan again challenges Jesus "if you are the Son of God..." Unlike Adam, Jesus resists the temptation.

Luke 4:22: The next episode in the Gospel recounts Jesus preaching the good news of his coming, and people question "Is not this Joseph's son?" and drive him out of time. They don't think he is the Son of God.

Luke 4:41: Jesus heals casts out some demons the first of whom confesses him to be "the Holy One of God" and the other "demons also came out of many, crying, 'You are the Son of God!'"

A few refections:

• It now makes perfect sense that Luke's genealogy is not at the beginning of the book as in Matthew. If you ignore the section headings and chapter numbers it is crystal clear that in functions as a link between the Father's declaration of Jesus' Sonship with him being the perfect Son of God that Adam never was when tempted by Satan.
• No humans confess Jesus to be the Son of God. Angels do, the Father does, and demons do. Impliedly even the devil does. Why can humans not see it? (perhaps 9:35 + 10:22 provide a hint)
• Perhaps Luke's genealogy is not meant to be Jesus' genealogy at all, except as he takes it upon himself. This would solve the problem of harmonising it with Matthew's geneology. He assumes the inheritance of death that comes from Adam, even though he is a new Adam who obeys his Father in heaven.

This post is prompted by a facebook comment from Chris and is the fruit of barely any thought on my part. Please contribute any reflections you may have, particularly about the temptation (although in the other Gospels I see it more as a "new Israel" than a "new Adam" episode, it is clear that Luke sees the link primarily with Adam).