The Nativity

The Christmas story is perhaps the most beloved and well-known Christian story of all times. Even those who might not know all the details of Jesus' birth are familiar with the Christmas crèche: the figures of Mary and Joseph and the baby Jesus with, perhaps, the addition of a few animals or shepherds. These figures represent an event that has been commemorated for over 2000 years. Since this is such a big part of our lives, isn't it interesting, then, that only two of the four gospels even mention the birth of Jesus?

Mark, who was the first witness, opens his gospel with a story about John the Baptist and Jesus' baptism. For him the voice from heaven said it all. John begins his gospel with a prologue that stresses the eternal existence and identity of Jesus. Matthew and Luke, writing after Mark but before John, begin at the beginning. Though they each devoted only two chapters to Jesus' birth, the importance of these chapters far exceeds their length. Consider the numerous poems, songs, pieces of art, and stories relating to this event. For believers, these chapters authenticate Jesus as being the Son of God from the moment of his birth, but also make plain his humanity. For nonbelievers, these miraculous events have provided fodder for "rationalistic scoffing." ¹

Scholars believe that, for the most part, the gospels were composed backwards, with the earliest stories focusing on the passion and resurrection of Jesus. As the disciples preached this event over and over, they began to better understand who Jesus really was and the implications of God's saving act through him. Soon, of course, collections of his words and deeds were added. The infancy stories, then, came considerably later. Perhaps they grew out of a simple sense of curiosity. Where was Jesus born? Who were his parents? But let's not forget that there was also significant opposition to the Jesus movement (remember Saul?). It is likely, then, that these stories were added to address specific needs of the times, whether apologetic or theological. Perhaps some people were wondering who was greater - Jesus or John the Baptist? Luke deals with that issue. Perhaps the Jews were spreading rumors that Jesus was illegitimate. Both Matthew and Luke address that point through the virgin birth. Matthew, in addition, draws many OT parallels, illustrating that Jesus relived certain segments of Jewish history. They both use prophetic words from Scripture to indicate the fulfillment of God's design.

Are we, then, to treat these events as historical? Scholars will never answer this with a simple "yes" or "no." Most agree that historical accuracy was not the main focus of the gospel writers. But that is quite different from saying these stories aren't true. If Matthew and Luke wrote independently (which was probably the case), then any shared stories would indicate a common, and possibly authentic, infancy tradition. These are some of the shared points: ²

1. The parents to be are Mary and Joseph who are legally engaged or married, but have not yet come to live together or have sexual relations (Matt 1:18; Luke 1:27, 28).
2. Joseph is of Davidic descent (Matt 1:16, 20; Luke 1:27, 32; 2:4).
3. There is an angelic announcement of the forthcoming birth of the child (Matt 1:20-23; Luke 1:30-35).
4. The conception of the child by Mary is not through intercourse with her husband (Matt 1:20, 23, 25; Luke 1:34).
5. The conception is through the Holy Spirit (Matt 1:18, 20; Luke 1:35).
6. There is a directive from the angel that the child is to be named Jesus (Matt 1:21; Luke 1:31).
7. An angel states that Jesus is to be Savior (Matt 1:21; Luke 2:11).
8. The birth of the child takes place after the parents have come to live together (Matt 1:24-25; Luke 2:5-6).
9. The birth takes place at Bethlehem (Matt 2:1; Luke 2:4-6).
10. The birth is chronologically related to the reign (days) of Herod the Great (Matt 2:1; Luke 1:5).
11. The child is reared at Nazareth (Matt 2:23; Luke 2:39).

Alongside these shared stories, however, there are considerable differences (and a few outright contradictions) in the remaining narratives. Matthew begins with a genealogy. Luke places his after the infancy stories (nor are they the same). Luke tells the story of Zechariah, Elizabeth, and the birth of John the Baptist. He has Jesus' family arrive at Bethlehem because of the required census. The shepherds are in his account. The family returns to Nazareth after Jesus’ circumcision (8 days after his birth) and his presentation in the Temple in Jerusalem (approximately 40 days after his birth). Matthew has the star, the magi, Herod's decree, the slaughter of the innocents, and the flight into Egypt. Matthew has the family living in Bethlehem from the start. And they stay in Egypt until Jesus is at least two years old, whereas in Luke they quietly return to Nazareth after the birth in Bethlehem. In the absence of any corroborating data (and there really isn't any), it would be impossible to determine which account is more accurate.

Despite these differences, however, most of us have merged these two stories and hear them as one continuous, harmonious narrative. It begins with Luke's announcement of the birth of John the Baptist.