sign in sign up
<<
Home , Star of Bethlehem

First Congregational United Church of Christ – Eugene, Oregon

THE SAYS . . . WHAT? :18-2:23 & Luke 1:26-56; 2:1-40

“INFANCY NARRATIVE - I” (Introduction)

The story describing ’ birth is one of the best-known and most celebrated stories of the Christian Church. It is read, re-told, and re-enacted every year in churches along with all the props necessary to remind us that together with Mary, Joseph and the baby in a , there were shepherds, , and Wise Men—and, of course, the Star of ! There was also the evil King Herod, the flight of the to Egypt and the return to , all wrapped up into one story of holiday cheer with on top! There is no need to analyze the story because its meaning is clear to everyone. It’s the story of Jesus’ birth, pure and simple. Or is it? Earlier, in our discussion of Gospel, we suggested that the stories about Jesus’ birth are not of the same genre as Gospel. Instead, the stories about Jesus’ birth employ a literary form called Infancy Narrative which has been set within that of Gospel. We also suggested that the Infancy Narratives are Christological statements (theological interpretations of the person of Christ) rather than biographical details from a point of view contemporary with the birth of Jesus. An Infancy narrative can be found in both the Old and New Testaments, as well as in the biblical culture of which it is a part, but not in our own culture. The author of an Infancy Narrative is not trying to describe the exact details of someone’s birth but instead wants to help his audience understand that the person he is writing about was “special” from the beginning. The Infancy Narratives in Matthew and Luke, therefore, are not written from a point of view contemporary with Jesus’ birth but in hindsight in light of subsequent events in order to teach what came to be known and believed about Jesus after his death and resurrection. Most scholars agree that the Gospels were written “backwards.” The Gospel writers began with what they considered the most important thing about Jesus, namely his crucifixion and resurrection, and then added stories and other remembered sayings and deeds to support their faith portraits of Jesus as they worked in reverse. For Matthew and Luke, that meant a birth narrative was added last. Consequently, the two stories about Jesus’ birth are Christological rather than biographical and should be read as theological statements about the person of Christ rather than as biographical details about Jesus’ birth. They were written by looking backward through the experience of the resurrection in order to claim for “The Risen One” an origin that was as God-revealing as was his ending. Matthew’s and Luke’s accounts, though separate, share much in common. Joseph is of Davidic descent. Mary and Joseph are engaged but not yet married at the time of Jesus’ conception. Mary conceives through the Holy Spirit. An directs that the child should be named Jesus. The angel says that Jesus is to be a savior. Joseph takes Mary as his wife and Jesus is born in Bethlehem during the time of . Jesus grows up in Nazareth. But just as there are similarities within the two stories, there are also differences:

First Congregational United Church of Christ – Eugene, Oregon

Only in Matthew Only in Luke The to Joseph The annunciation to Mary The Star over Bethlehem Annunciation to Elizabeth and Zechariah The from the East The census during ’ reign Herod’s plot against Jesus “Firstborn” in swaddling clothes/manger Herod’s massacre of infants The shepherds & angelic hosts The Presentation of Jesus in the temple

What is the significance of these differences? Are both authors simply choosing to include and exclude certain things? Or is something of deeper significance going on here?

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

1. Do you agree or disagree with this paper that the infancy stories are “Christological” (a theological attempt to interpret the Person of Christ) rather than “biographical” (historical depiction of the life of Jesus)? Explain your reasoning.

2. If you agree, what problems or questions does your conclusion leave unanswered for you? If you disagree, how would you explain to someone who asked your rationale for doing so?

3. Do the differing details surrounding Jesus’ birth in Matthew and Luke raise any specific concerns for you? What are they and how do you reconcile them with your present beliefs?

4. What difference does it make for you to either insist on the historicity of the Virgin Birth or to explain it as a literary device for interpreting the Person of Christ? Explain your answer.

5. What would you say to someone about the meaning of Jesus’ birth for you? Would it differ from the way you might explain the birth of one of your own children? How and why?

NEXT WEEK

“MIDRASH” Google “Reading the as Midrash” and “Midrash and the Gospels”

Spong, John Shelby, “The Method Called Midrash”, chapter 1, Resurrection: Myth or Reality?, Harper San Francisco, 1994 (In our church library)