A little word association. I say "the Christmas story". What comes to mind? Most people would rattle off the ingredients of the Nativity scene down the street: Baby Jesus, a star, shepherds, three wise men, a manger, Mary & Joseph, innkeeper.
No matter what religious journey you’re on, if any, you’re surrounded by this imagery this time of year. Trouble is, much of it is wrong, Biblically speaking. Many progressives I know are fascinated to learn how the stories – yes, that’s plural - of Christmas came to be. If you’re one of them, let’s explore it, after the jump.
So if you want to learn about the life of Jesus, you have four commonly accepted Gospels in the New Testament: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. It’s interesting to track how the story of Jesus begins in each.
MARK
Biblical scholars agree the first gospel to be written was Mark—sometime just before the destruction of the temple and the Roman occupation of Jerusalem in 70 AD. That means, for roughly 40 years, the story of Jesus was not written down, but passed along by oral tradition. It would be as though we just now began writing about man landing on the moon. So what does the writer of Mark say about the birth of Jesus? Nothing. For him, the story begins with the baptism of Jesus. To the writer of Mark, that’s when Jesus became divine. Anything before that wasn’t worth mentioning.
MATTHEW & LUKE
10-20 years later, the writers of Matthew and Luke began writing their versions of the Jesus story. It’s clear both had a copy of Mark’s book in front of them. But apparently, there were now questions about the birth of Jesus, because both felt compelled to begin the story earlier than Mark’s writer did. These are the only two gospels with nativity stories—and they don’t match. If the writers of Matthew and Luke were to see a modern nativity scene, they’d be confused. Matthew would wonder why they’re in a barn, and Luke would wonder who those guys with crowns are. More on that in a moment.
JOHN
The gospel of John is the last to be written—perhaps as late as 110 AD, and the writer of John moves the origin of Jesus all the way back to creation:
"In the beginning was the Word".
So as time goes on, the Jesus narrative is begun earlier and earlier, from baptism, to birth, to the origin of time.
Now about those conflicting birth stories...
While Matthew and Luke tell different stories of the birth of Jesus, both needed certain ingredients to comply with what the prophets had written about the expected Messiah.
- The birth needed to happen in Bethlehem.
- It needed to be a virgin birth.
Why Bethlehem? Because of Isaiah 11:1:
A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse;
from his roots a Branch will bear fruit.
Jesse was the father of David (later King David) who was born in Bethlehem. That meant the Messiah they were expecting had to come from Bethlehem too.
Why a virgin birth? Isaiah again. Chapter 7, verse 14:
Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.
You’ll be interested to know the word translated here as "virgin" can also mean "young woman". It’s a case where translation makes a big impact on the story we’ve been given.
MATTHEW’S NATIVITY STORY
Matthew’s story is a tale of royalty. This is the story with the Magi (the root for our word Magician). It interesting that very conservative Christians view astrology as Satanic, when the Magi themselves were astrologers, and astrology is used to confirm that there is something special about the birth of Jesus.
Despite the "We Three Kings" Christmas carol, Matthew doesn’t say how many "wise men" there were. We say "three wise men" because they brought three gifts: gold, frankincense and myrrh. Those three gifts are symbolic. Gold: royalty. Frankincense: the connection between this world and God, since offerings were burned and carried in smoke to God. Finally, myrrh: a spice used in to prepare a body for burial, so it foreshadows the death of Jesus.
There’s no manger in Matthew. Despite what you see in nativity scenes that combine and confuse the two stories, the Magi go to a house in Bethlehem where Mary and Joseph live. Because of a threat from Herod the king, Joseph and Mary escape to Egypt, then move to Nazareth after Herod dies. More symbolism there. Like Moses, Jesus comes out of Eygpt. Since Matthew was written for a Jewish audience, that imagery would strike a chord. But it does raise the question, if he was born in Bethlehem and moved later to Nazareth, why wasn’t he called "Jesus of Bethlehem"?
LUKE’S NATIVITY STORY
This is the story Linus tells in a Charlie Brown Christmas. Here, Mary and Joseph don’t live in Bethlehem. They live in Nazareth. They only go to Bethlehem to enroll in a census because Joseph is of the lineage of David. Curious, though, that choice Joseph is said to have made. This was some 1500 years after David. Think of where your family was 1500 years ago. Would you feel compelled to return there for a census? But, it gets Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem, even if it does mean schlepping through a dessert with a hugely pregnant woman. Here’s the story with the innkeeper, the manger, and shepherds. No star. No wise guys.
Despite the license taken to get the family to Bethlehem, there is a sweetness to the Luke story. It is as humble a beginning as can be. A baby in a stable, surrounded by the lowest rung of the socio-economic ladder- shepherds. Hardly a royal story. But Luke is just the first book of a two book set. The story finishes with Acts. Viewed in its totality, Christianity begins in a manger, and ends up in Rome—the heart of power for the Western world. This is the message the writer of Luke wanted us to know.
And as Linus would say, "That’s what Christmas is all about, Charlie Brown."