Wait... I have this blog too?! Whoa...
So, I haven't written here for the last couple of years because I've been working on my classic lit blogs, but I am aware that I have it. Usually, though, the writing on those blogs keeps me too busy to write here.
I do write, however, because there are a number of people who want to read what I'm posting here, so I leave it for their perusal.
All Scripture readings are taken from the New Revised Standard Version.
So, I haven't written here for the last couple of years because I've been working on my classic lit blogs, but I am aware that I have it. Usually, though, the writing on those blogs keeps me too busy to write here.
I do write, however, because there are a number of people who want to read what I'm posting here, so I leave it for their perusal.
___________________________________________
Every year for Christmas, my family starts by a reading of the Christmas story. Over the past several years, we've gotten a bit less "traditional" - by which I mean that we have expanded our Scripture readings beyond the second chapters of Luke and Matthew. We've done John 1, Isaiah 60, etc.
This year, my father suggested I find a reading for Christmas - something that included the same great story, but was more devotional and provided some kind of perspective. I peeked around the Internet and read some decent ones... but none that really resonated with me. So, I wrote my own. And here it is...
Seeking the Christ of Christmas in His Gospels
by Stephen E. Foxworthy
by Stephen E. Foxworthy
All Scripture readings are taken from the New Revised Standard Version.
Nowhere do the gospels disagree more than on the subject of
Christ’s birth. While the stories of His ministry, death, and resurrection –
minor discrepancies aside – remain largely the same, the subject of His birth
differs from gospel writer to gospel writer. What differences exist and what do
those differences tell us about the Christ of Christmas?
The Gospel of Mark was the first of the four to be written.
It is simple, concise, and the blueprint for what a gospel should be. Both
Matthew and Luke use his model to directly influence their own. However,
nowhere in Mark’s gospel is any account of Christ’s birth or genealogy overtly
mentioned or alluded to. For Mark, how Christ came into the world is
seemingly not as important as the fact that He did come into the world. In Mark’s account, the ministry of Christ
is the key.
Matthew’s account of Christ’s birth, however, was the first
canonical version recorded. Matthew tells of stars and traveling wise men and
vengeful monarchs, creating a tale of intrigue and suspense. Wise rulers from a
distant land somewhere in the east, upon seeing a prophesied star, embark to
Bethlehem in order to witness the coming of a “King of the Jews” in order “to
pay him homage” (Matt. 2:2). Upon
finding Christ’s birthplace, they present the child with gifts of gold,
frankincense, and myrrh, gifts fit for any reigning monarch.
But by asking for a “king,” these distant princes awaken the
paranoid fears of Palestine’s reigning “client king,” Herod the Great, who by
the end of his life was ever fearful of someone usurping his throne. After his
plot to find the child through the wise men proved fruitless, he decreed that
all infants under two be killed to prevent any from potentially growing up to
overthrow him. But God was with His Son, delivering Jesus and His parents to
Egypt, where they remained until the threat from Herod the Great was finally
over.
Matthew uses nobility and royalty in his account of Christ’s
birth that is conspicuously lacking in all others. For Matthew, the birth of Christ
is the birth of the King of all kings. Not only is His birth recognized by
foreign rulers, but by the reigning monarch of Palestine as well, himself a
Gentile. A quick look at Matthew’s genealogy in chapter 1 cements this idea of
Christ as king by tracing Jesus’ lineage through all the kings of Judah from
David all the way down to Jehoiakim. In fact, by tracing His genealogy through
David, Matthew alludes to an Old Testament prophecy that his Jewish audience
would be sure to understand: “…I will
raise up your offspring after you… and will establish his kingdom. He shall
build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom
forever. I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to me” (2 Sam.
7:12-14).
Luke’s gospel, on the other hand, takes a very different
tack and, in doing so, becomes the definitive version of the Christmas story.
In it, Jesus’s parents are in Bethlehem for a census of the Roman world
instituted by Caesar Augustus who, as the adopted son of Julius Caesar, considered
himself the son of a god. Though Jesus’ mother, Mary, was “expecting a child” (Luke
2:5), no room could be found for them in any inn in town, so they were
relegated to a nearby stable so that she could give birth away from the
elements. When He at last entered the world, Jesus was wrapped in “bands of cloth and laid… in a manger” (Luke 2:7).
At that moment, Luke cuts to some common shepherds attending
their flocks at night. These shepherds were simple men, likely watching the
flocks of wealthier men to ensure that no predators would lay hand, paw, or
fang on them. They were amazed, however, when an angel appears suddenly in a
burst of brilliant light above their heads, proclaiming the birth of “a Savior, who is the Messiah, the Lord”
(Luke 2:11). Other angels quickly
join them and sing together, “Glory to
God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace among those whom he favors!”
(Luke 2:14).
After the angelic visitors vanished just as quickly as they
had appeared, the shepherds rush into Bethlehem, abandoning their flocks in
order to see if what the angels had told them was correct… and behold! Once
they arrived, they witnessed the child lying in the manger, wrapped in cloth,
just as the angel had told them. After seeing the child, they rushed out again,
in order to proclaim His birth to anyone and everyone who would hear them,
becoming – in essence – among the first proclaimers of the Gospel.
Gone are the royal trappings of Matthew’s gospel. Gone are
the vengeful kings, the reverent princes, and the prophetic celestial orbs.
Luke eschews these things in order to present a simpler, more humble origin for
the Christ. Nowhere in his Christmas story does Matthew mention shepherds or
mangers or angels… these are not a part of what he is trying to do. In making a
move toward simplicity, however, Luke shows us the universality of the Gospel
of Jesus Christ. He did not come simply for the regal or the high-born – He did
not even come only for the Jews! – but for the lowly, the simple, the common,
and the ordinary. While the angelic messengers are certain to tell us that
Christ’s birth is nothing short of divine, their audience lets us know that the
message of Christ is for all… and even goes so far as to give us a clue as to
how we ought to respond to such a message!
And then, there’s John. Of all the gospels, John’s is the
most different. Unlike Matthew and Luke before him, he abandons the blueprint
of Mark’s gospel for what is widely regarded as a more theological text, filled
with symbolism and mystery. Like Mark’s gospel, however, John seemingly avoids
the story of Christ’s birth, instead filling his first chapter with language of
origins and Words and light and darkness. And yet, taking a closer look, we see
that this chapter is, in so many ways, the story of Christmas after all.
Rather than beginning on a spring night in Bethlehem, John
starts at the beginning of time itself, starting as the Book of Genesis does: “In the beginning…” Instead of
introducing foreign magi, spiteful rulers, and lowly shepherds, John introduces
us the “the Word” who “was with God, and… was God” (Jn. 1:1), claiming that this Word was “life, and the life was the light of all
people. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness did not overcome it”
(Jn. 1:4-5).
John speaks of Christ’s incarnation,
that God Himself took on flesh in order to dwell among mankind. Unlike Matthew
and Luke before him, John is not merely content to think of Christ in human
terms – even terms so great as those of a king. Instead, John insists on
highlighting Christ’s divinity, His
unity with God the Father. “Do you not
believe,” He asks His disciples before His death, “that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say
to you I do not speak on my own; but the Father who dwells in me does his
works. Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me” (Jn. 14:10-11).
As such, John 1 is the story of Christmas – the story of God
taking on mortal flesh in order to redeem mankind. To quote the apostle Paul, “Let the same mind be in you that was in
Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality
with God as something to be exploited, but emptied himself, taking the form of
a slave, being born in human likeness. And, being found in human form, he
humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death – even death on a
cross” (Phil. 2:5-8).
So… what do the gospel writers teach us about the Christ of
Christmas? How do we justify the differences between their various stories? In
Matthew, we see a Christ born regal, recognized as kings by some of the most
prominent rulers of His day, either in celebration or aggression. In Luke, we
see a simpler origin, a boy born into poverty, attended by shepherds in a
stable, who would grow to be the Savior of mankind. In John, we see God
Himself, reaching down to bless mankind with His presence, emptying Himself in
order to know our pain and to be our redemption. And, finally, we come to Mark.
In Mark, we realize that the story of Christmas is not an end, but a beginning.
Any talk of Christmas must take into account why this Christ came – He came to suffer, to die, and ultimately to
redeem mankind. This is the Christ of
Christmas. May we be like the wise men, always seeking Him. May we be like the
shepherds, constantly proclaiming the Good News of His arrival. May we be like
Christ, who Himself showed us what life truly means.
Posts
