Christian Story of Jesus's Birth Is a Myth Born of Politics
Stay up to date with the latest headlines via email.
The Advent season is a fun time. For many Christians, it is the happiest season of the year. The joy comes from the anticipation: "Joy to the world, the Lord has come. Let earth receive her king."
I do not desire to dim the lights of Christmas, but it might be helpful to some to hear what the stories of Jesus birth are really about.
There are four versions of the life of Jesus. We call them the Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Only two of the versions say anything about the birth of Jesus.
Mark, the first of the Gospels, begins the Jesus story with Jesus as an adult. John, the last Gospel written, likewise says nothing about the birth of Jesus. Matthew tells the birth story in only a few short paragraphs. Luke's version of the beginnings of Jesus is four times as long as that of Matthew.
Those two versions are very different. Luke plays with a much larger cast. His flair for the dramatic is pronounced. He includes an abundance of poetry and music with the support of angelic hosts.
Reconciling the two versions has been tried by many, but never with success. They are two different stories. They each have their own distinctive version of the events that surrounded the birth of Jesus.
In attempting to understand the meaning of the birth stories, we ask some familiar questions. Who wrote the material? When did he write it? Why did he write it? For whom was he writing? What literary device was the author using?
The actual authors of the two stories (who wrote them down) are historically unknown. The stories were written 40 to 50 years after the death of Jesus. The reason the narratives were written is a bit more complicated.
By the time of the writings, Christians and Christian churches were under severe persecution by their Roman masters. The growth in the number of followers of Jesus was dramatic and had become a matter of concern to local puppet rulers.
Lord had become the title given Jesus throughout the churches. Calling someone "Lord" had the companion confession of servitude. For Christians of the late first century CE, Jesus was the true possessor and ruler of their lives.
Under the Caesars, Augustus and Octavian, the mantle of divinity was claimed for the Roman emperor. They claimed the titles Lord, Son of God, Bringer of Peace, and Savior of the World.
First century Christians remembered very well that according to Jesus "You shall love the Lord your God with heart, mind, soul, and strength." Jesus was their Lord. They did not have divided loyalties.
The ancient world was full of miraculous birth stories. It was a favorite way for rulers to claim divine rights. It was a literary tool that was waiting for early Christians to use to declare the divine specialness of the one they called Lord.
The birth narratives that were eventually attached to Matthew's and Luke's Gospels, were stories that were created and circulated to counter the claim of the Caesars to be divine and worthy to be called Lord. Every claim of specialness for Caesar was countered by the claim that all his titles belonged to Jesus.
The birth narratives are as much political treatise as theological statement. They cannot be found as a part of the earliest memories of followers of Jesus and make sense only in the context of their Roman oppressors claim for divinity.
For whom were the birth narratives written?