The rest of this month I want to focus on the birth narrative — because honestly — it’s a story that seems to continue unraveling and yet as I read it more and more it becomes more beautiful.
Lately when I pick it up I’m finding myself seeing deep applications for life right here and now.
So— let’s dig in!
First off— when you consider the birth narrative you have many different camps of people who view this differently.
Some take this story as literal history — others as ridiculous myth. Some a little in between and others just simply don’t care exchanging this narrative for one revolving around a jolly fellow in red pajamas.
Today I want to start by moving past the literalism of this piece
When you view this story you’ll find it in two places — Matthew and Luke.
And what’s always been interesting to me is how the two don’t agree in their telling. Again— it is twas literal history you’d think the two would have the details somewhat down right? But truthfully— they don’t agree on a lot of their stories.
If you look at the Luke narrative and read it first you’ll notice Luke has the family travel to Bethlehem and Jesus is born in a stable outside an inn. The family resides there temporarily until the circumcision of Jesus and the purification of Mary is accomplished. Both of these would have required about 40 days. So in Luke Jesus is about 40 days old when the family heads back to Nazareth. There is no visit of the wise men, only shepherds, no persecution by Herod and no flight into Egypt to escape Herod as Matthew has.
Matthew has them living in a house in Bethlehem. And Jesus is two years old when the wise men visit him at their house. Remember, Herod in Matthew’s account was going to kill every male child two years old and under in Bethlehem because that is the age he ascertained from the wise men that Jesus would be.
There are no shepherds in Matthew’s account and the nativity is described differently with a Davidic star to guide the wise men who seem to get lost on the way — meet Herod— accidentally tip him off— and find their way to the small wagon town of Bethlehem — a town that would have had less than 150 people which would make one ask “How many babies were there to find anyways? Why would Herod make a huge proclamation and search when all they had to do was go there and ask anyone — they’d have heard of a birth in such a tiny town.
Luke has Caesar Augustus demand a census taken which we know to be inconstant with hostly as there was never actually a census decree taken — they actually have very sound historical documents of his reign — either way— Luke omits anything of Herod.
Lastly— they both incorporate genealogies — lists of names of relatives Jesus came from— but apparently these two lists don’t agree either
See— if you’re going to take this as literal history then you’re going to have to choose one of them as the “real” story and the other as false—BUT— I think there’s a better way of viewing this.
Rather than assume this is literal history being written lets take a moment again to remember that these two birth stories are being written 30-50 years after the death of Jesus — just after a time when their temple was destroyed and many of their people brutally murdered in Jerusalem watching as their temple was destroyed brick by brick.
The question they’re asking is not when can they get a good historically accurate piece written about the first century rabbi Jesus — no— that wouldn’t make much sense.
They’re looking for hope— a narrative much like the ones they wrote after similar experiences in Babylon — Egypt — Assyria— and Greece— when heroes like Moses — Abraham — and Daniel are written for the same purposes.
So who’s the next messianic figure that will lead Israel into a new birth experience from ashes to new life?
You guessed it— Jesus
And so the REASON for the Narrative — THE REASON for the SEASON was to remind people there was hope and new life— new birth was just around the corner.
Now that’s a narrative one can get behind.
So let’s take a minute and look at this odd compilation of names— a Jewish genealogy.
Matthew starts his narrative in chapter one with a long list while Luke will pick up the list at the end of the story in chapter three.
What you’ll notice is both lists seem to point to to Jesus being connected to David. Again, the writers are borrowing from the past to bring light to the future. This style of writing is called midrash; it’s essentially building past narratives and using them to create new ones.
Matthew starts with the father of all the jewish nation Abraham ending with Mary and Jospeh while Luke starts with Jesus and ends with Adam. Now of course the question many will pose is “Is this historically accurate?”
Simple answer: no. Had this been knowledge Jesus would have been considered Jewish royalty and been living in a 1st century mansion of sorts and not a backwoods, small wagon town.
Larger answer: It’s true but in the deepest sense of truth.
What’s fascinating about this is to simply remember Jesus is the new picture of Israel and in this moment the two writers are reminding their readers that Israel’s past is filled with beauty, tragedy and lots of chaos.
They have a rich history and they have been through it all.
This catastrophe of losing their temple , while it is painful will pass and a new era will emerge.
While there are mistakes in their past there are also powerful victories too.
And so for me today, during this holiday season where we often read over this narrative without a second thought of application; I’m choosing to remind myself that though this past year has been difficult in some ways; though there have been ups and downs, failures and successes — the new life, new birth is just around the corner.
And if I open my eyes wide enough, consider my joinery long enough; hope takes flight and my feet begin following suite.