New Testament accounts of the birth and early life of Jesus – the “Infancy Narratives” — are found in Matthew 1:1–2:23 and Luke 1:5–2:52. The Infancy Narratives are certainly not fairytales. But they are not strictly historical either.

The Bible contains a variety of literary forms by which the truths of our faith are expressed and communicated. We find poetry, drama, symbolism, metaphors, imaginative recreations of past events, and varying degrees of historical narration.

When it comes to the New Testament Infancy Narratives, I suspect that most people simply ignore the differences found in Matthew and Luke. They easily combine the accounts without noticing the differences. Nor do they realize that imaginative infancy suppositions, that arose centuries after Jesus’ birth, got thrown into the mix.

In reality, most of our contemporary Jesus-birth imagery comes from the Catholic friar, Giovanni di Pietro di Bernardone (c. 1181 – 1226), known today as St. Francis of Assisi.

Francis created the Christmas Creche tradition in Greccio, Italy, where he had visited a community to celebrate Christmas. Francis had wanted to create a scene that would be symbolic of Jesus’ birth and have an impact on the community. He therefore prepared a manger — the feeding trough for animals —and even brought an ox and a donkey to the location where he prepared the altar. He put a statue of baby Jesus on the altar so all could see it. The scenery created by Francis clearly symbolized the poverty and simplicity associated with the birth of Jesus.

Over the centuries, of course, misconceptions have crept into accounts about Jesus’ birth. The “three kings” stories are a good example.

Neither Matthew nor Luke mention “three kings.” Matthew mentions “wise men,” magoi in Greek, from which we get the English word “magi.” He does not say there were three “wise men.” That number was a medieval creation. Although the “Magi” are now commonly referred to as “kings,” there is nothing in Matthew that implies that they were rulers of any kind. In addition, nowhere in the New Testament do we find them called “Balthasar, Melchior, and Casper.” Those names first appeared in the Chronographia Scaligeriana, an early medieval historical compilation composed in Greek between 527 and 539. The only surviving text is a Latin translation from the late 8th century.

Most contemporary historians and biblical scholars regard the Magi as legendary figures. Nevertheless, in Germany’s Cologne Cathedral, since the 13^th century, there has been a reliquary that tradition says holds the bones of the Biblical Magi.

Summary of what we find in Matthew:

• In Matthew we find: the visit of the wise men, the star, and Herod’s plot to kill Jesus. Herod I (c. 73 BCE – 4 BCE) also known as Herod the Great, was the tyrant King of Judea from 37 to 4 BCE.
• In Matthew 2:16–18, we read that Herod the Great ordered the execution of all male children who were two years old and in the vicinity of Bethlehem. In fact, there is no historical evidence that it ever happened other than this passage in Matthew. But it is certainly congruous with Herod’s violent character.
• Clearly the author of Matthew’s Gospel – who saw Jesus as the new Moses — modeled the Herod episode on the biblical story of Pharaoh’s attempt to kill the Hebrew children in Exodus 1:15-22. Pharaoh’s scribes had warned him of the impending birth of the man who would be a threat to his crown, i.e., Moses.

Comparing Matthew and Luke:

• In Matthew we see the visit the wise men, the star, and Herod’s plot. They are not found, however, in Luke.
• In Luke we do find the shepherds and the presentation of Jesus in the Temple. But these are not found in Matthew.
• The differences between Matthew and Luke are nearly impossible to reconcile, although they do share some similarities.

The American biblical scholar and Catholic priest, John P. Meier (1942 – 2022), often stressed that accounts of Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem are not to be taken as historical facts. In his 1991 book, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, Meier describes the Infancy Narratives as “theological affirmation put into the form of an apparently historical narrative.” In other words, the belief that Jesus was a descendant of King David led to the development of a story about his birth in Bethlehem, because King David (c. 1010 – c. 970 BCE) was born and raised in Bethlehem.

Concluding this week’s reflection, I would like to offer some reflections about the virginal conception of Jesus.

The Virgin Birth doctrine of traditional Christianity maintains that Jesus had no natural father but was conceived by Mary through the power of the Holy Spirit. The doctrine that Mary was the virginal mother of Jesus is expressed in the infancy narratives of Matthew and Luke. The two passages in the Infancy Narratives are: Matthew 1:18-25 and Luke 1:26-38.

Traditionally, Christian theologians writing about the “virgin birth,” have referred to a passage from the Greek Septuagint version of the Hebrew Scriptures produced between the third century BCE and the first century CE: Isaiah 7:14, which is found in Matthew 1:23, “Behold, the virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call his name Emmanuel.”

Examining both the original Hebrew version of Isaiah 7:14 and the later Greek translation version, biblical scholars point out, significantly, that the Hebrew word ’almâ, meaning “a young woman of marriageable age” found in the original Hebrew Scriptures text was not so carefully translated into the Greek Septuagint text which used the word parthenos, which means “a virgin.”

In short, using only historical research one cannot come to any conclusion, either for or against a virginal conception of the baby Jesus. An excellent book that discusses this is The Virginal Conception and Bodily Resurrection of Jesus by the respected American Catholic priest and biblical scholar Raymond E. Brown (1928 – 1988).

Years ago, I decided to not get into the occasionally heated debate about the virginal conception of Jesus. I understand the issues, but for me the all-important fact is that Jesus of Nazareth in his life, death, and resurrection is the revelation of divinity and authentic humanity. That truth keeps me going.

 

Jack

Dr. John A. Dick – Historical Theologian

P.S. Next week we look at a courageous and confident Jesus in the Gospel of John.