IS PEACE IN BETHLEHEM POSSIBLE?

 

Jesus, the Prince of Peace, was born in Bethlehem. Today, almost 2,028 years later, there is no peace in Bethlehem. One hotelier commented, “this is the worst Christmas ever”. Normally, this time of year is the brightest for the city of Bethlehem. One church has replaced the traditional crèche with the figure of baby Jesus and shepherds, with Jesus resting surrounded by concrete rubble from a destroyed building.  

This year, no traditional Christmas tree will be placed in Manger Square. Many stores and hotels which cater to tourists will be partially closed. With tongue in cheek, one journalist said of Bethlehem, “there’s plenty room in the Inn”. Imagine, even Christmas celebrations have been cancelled. Bethlehem is heavily reliant for income and jobs on visitors from all around the world who go to see the Church of the Nativity, believed to be built on the site where Jesus was born.

Interestingly, when Jesus was born, many experienced a different kind of emptiness. The philosophical and religious backgrounds of paganism in the first century left a sense of emptiness among many. For instance, belief in the reality of the ancient gods and goddesses of classical mythology resulted in widespread agnosticism.

Many skeptics deduced that the gods were originally men who had distinguished themselves either as warriors or benefactors of mankind, and who after their death were accorded divine honors. What was aptly termed “the failure of nerve” characterized the moral and religious vacuum that many felt, but could not overcome, despite the panaceas offered by a welter of competing teachers, philosophers, priests, astrologers and quacks.

Epictetus, a first century Roman historian and philosopher said of this era: “while the emperor may give peace from war on land and sea, he is unable to give peace from passion, grief and envy. He cannot give peace of heart, for which humanity yearns more than even for outward peace.” As emperor, Caesar Augustus ruled the nations, but could not conquer the human heart.

That was the religious and philosophical world into which Jesus came. That was the world which heard the angels say, “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to men on whom His favor rests” (Luke 2:14). So unlike today’s understanding of peace, the angels were not referring to the absence of war. They were declaring God's desire for harmonious relationships between men and nations.

Like with the Hebrew word shalom, the Greek word for peace suggests completeness, wholeness, health, welfare, safety, soundness, tranquillity, prosperity, perfectness, fullness, rest, harmony, the absence of agitation or discord. Shalom comes from the root verb shalom, meaning to be complete, perfect and full.

That understanding of peace is so different from those who believe that assuming a posture of strength dissuades potential attacks, consequently leading to peace – the absence of war. But peace is much more than the absence of war.

In his letter to the Ephesians, Paul linked peace to a person, and not merely to an ideology. He contended, “for He (Jesus) is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility...” (Ephesians 2:14).

Hundreds of years earlier, the prophet Isaiah predicted of the coming Messiah, that He would be sar shalom – Prince of Peace (Isaiah 9:6). Jesus, who Christians believe is that Messiah, said to His disciples, “Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you...” (John 14:27). For this reason, Christians see Christmas as the arrival of the Prince of Peace.

Despite the isolated cases in history of using Christianity to incite and initiate wars, the Christian message is universally known as a message of peace. Christianity influenced the abolition of slavery and infanticide. In addition, it is because of the Christian ethic that the outrage against euthanasia, sex trafficking and abortion persists.

Because Christians are expected to demonstrate the life of Christ as a lifestyle, we should constantly pursue peace. The biblical teaching is unambiguous, “... as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone” (Romans 12:18). Christmas provides tremendous opportunities to illustrate this truth. Not knowing that they are referring to Jesus, many Jews believe that the Messiah will bring about peace when he comes. Even Sunni Muslims believe in the second coming of Jesus. Although the purpose of his reappearance is quite different from the view held by Christians, both religions agree that his sovereign might will be on display.

Christians believe that the babe of Bethlehem will return. Until he does, his followers are expected to reflect the peace to which the Angel referred at his birth. “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to men on whom his favor rests” (Luke 2:14). When the psalmist encouraged pilgrims to pray for the peace of Jerusalem (Psalm 122:5), he was not limiting his prayer to the absence of war, but to the presence of wholesomeness, safety, soundness, tranquillity, rest and harmony. May that be our prayer for Bethlehem and the Middle East this Christmas.

 

HISTORY AND THE VIRGIN BIRTH

According to Encyclopaedia Britannica, “modern historians aim to reconstruct a record of human activities and to achieve a more profound understanding of them.” In addition, “the writing of history is based on the critical examination of sources, the selection of particular details from the authentic materials in those sources, and the synthesis of those details into a narrative that stands the test of critical examination.”

After reading the above paragraph, I re-read Luke 1:1-4. There, Luke used language similar to classical Greek. He began with a formal preface, common to historical works of that time. He stated his purpose for writing and identified the recipient. He acknowledged other reports on the subject and showed the need for his contribution. He presented his method of approach and sources of information. That was Luke’s approach to both books of the New Testament credited to his authorship.

He demonstrated his commitment to proper recording of events in reporting on the birth of Jesus. He provided specific names of political luminaries, he identified the locations and circumstances of the events. Luke’s reporting allows us to check the biblical and other historical records to verify the accuracy of his reporting. Ascertaining accuracy is critical because the events provide a foundation for major biblical doctrines.

The late Sir William Ramsay, a skilled archaeologist, did not believe that Luke was a very credible historian. Ramsay did not believe that there was enough archaeological evidence to verify the accuracy of Luke’s work in the Gospel of Luke and the book of Acts. So he traveled throughout Asia Minor, Greece and other regions in the late 1800’s to bolster his opinion. However, following years of study, he found the exact opposite to be true and he reversed his position. He went on to comment that “Luke is a historian of the first rank – not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy, he is possessed of the true historic sense…in short, this author should be placed along with the greatest historians.” Ramsey was so impressed with the historicity of Luke’s writings that he eventually became a Christian.

Luke was aware that he lived at a time when some contended that non-miraculous virgin births or parthenogenesis was possible. It was alleged that Romulus and Remus, twin founders of Rome, were born of the virgin Rhea Silvia. Some also contended that the Phrygo-Roman god, Attis, was born of a virgin. In such a culture, Luke as a historian was fully aware of the skepticism and risks in presenting the virgin birth of Jesus. Today, we are also aware that some birds, crayfish and sharks experience parthenogenesis, a sort of asexual fertilization process.

How then can Christians present a credible story of the Virgin Birth of Jesus? Firstly, we need to recognize that it is not our responsibility to recreate the birth of Jesus to accommodate a twenty-first century scientific mindset. Our obligation is to retell the story that Luke told – it is historically credible.

Luke’s story is not a legend. It was not based on the conclusions of communities over a long period of time. He argued that “eyewitnesses” were among the sources he contacted. In stating one of his purposes for writing, Luke said to Theophilus, he was compiling his findings “so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught” (Luke 1:4). Luke was not attempting to embellish a story, in order to sensationalize the birth of Jesus. The mention of persons and circumstances that were not culturally elite, is consistent with accurate reporting and not exaggeration.

Some critics may contend that Luke’s story of the virgin birth was not corroborated by other New Testament writers. Agreed, Matthew was the only other evangelist to write on the virgin birth of Jesus. However, the silence of the other writers does not mean disagreement. “Silence does not equal denial.” What if the Jewish practice of downplaying the celebration of births could have prejudiced the thinking of the Jewish-influenced New Testament writers? Furthermore, what if the writers were satisfied and never saw the need for further comment, like their silence with the baptism of Jesus and the appearance of the Holy Spirit like a dove?

Honestly though, does the virgin birth really matter? It certainly does. The virgin birth affirms prophecy. Both Matthew and Luke believed that the virgin birth was a fulfillment of the prophecy of Isaiah  - “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign – the virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel” (Isaiah 7:14). The virgin birth also affirms Scripture. Apart from Matthew and Luke, Paul alludes to the birth of Jesus in Galatians, “… God sent his Son, born of a woman…” (Galatians 4:4). The virgin birth further affirms our understanding of God’s sovereignty, incarnation, Hamartiology, biblical genealogy and the Trinity.

 

 

 

ISLAM AND THE VIRGIN BIRTH

 

Muslims believe that Jesus was the son of Mary. In addition, they believe that Jesus was conceived without the intervention of a human father. The Qur'an describes that an angel appeared to Mary, to announce to her the "gift of a holy son" (Qur’an 19:19). She was astonished at the news, and asked: "How shall I have a son, seeing that no man has touched me, and I am not unchaste?" (19:20). When the angel explained to her that she had been chosen for the service of God and that God had ordained the matter, she devoutly submitted herself to His will.

Mary is the only named woman mentioned in Islam’s holy book, the Qur’an - she is mentioned 34 times. Called Maryam in Arabic, Mary has an entire chapter/sura (19) in the Qur’an named for her. Interestingly, Mary’s name is mentioned more times in the Qur’an than in the entire New Testament. The story of the birth of Jesus in the Qur’an contends that his first miracle took place when he spoke as an infant. It is alleged that Jesus said (Sura/Chapter 19:29), “I am the servant of God… He has exhorted me to honour my mother and has purged me of vanity and wickedness. Blessed was I on the day I was born, and blessed I shall be on the day of my death and on the day I shall be raised to life”.

Because of the interest shown in aspects of the birth of Jesus, some believe that that interest can be used as a bridge to dialog with Muslims. Particularly, some Roman Catholics, because of their emphasis in the doctrine of Mariology, have been exploring their mutual interests with Muslims. Evangelicals, however, tend to be less gullible regarding this tepid affirmation of the Virgin Birth.

Actually, Arab evangelicals tend to be offended by the idea. Imad Shehadeh, Founder and President of Jordan Evangelical Theological Seminary believes, “… it is nice that Christians and Muslims can use Mary as a bridge, but so what?” Imad contends, “it is the nature of any system that rejects a superior truth to elevate less important truths or to mix error with lesser truths.” Islam celebrates the virgin birth, but denies Jesus’ deity and his death and resurrection – even though the Maryam chapter/sura states clearly that Jesus would die and then rise again. That major truth is denied elsewhere in the Qur’an.

It would be prudent to observe, not only what Islam affirms about the Virgin Birth, but what Islam denies about it. For instance, there is no mention of Joseph the carpenter, nor any recollection of the inn, the manger or Simeon who officiated at Jesus’ dedication as an infant. The Qur’an describes that Mary retreated from her people, outside the city, and gave birth to Jesus underneath a remote date palm tree. The tree miraculously provided nourishment for her during labour and delivery.

The Qur’an repeatedly reminds us that Adam, the first human being, was born with neither a human mother nor a human father. Accordingly, “Jesus is like Adam in the sight of God. He created him of dust and then said to him: ‘Be,’ and he was” (Sura/Chapter 3:59). In Islam, Jesus is regarded as a human prophet and messenger of God, not part of God Himself. In Islam, Jesus is not considered to be divine. Honestly, “…in Islam, the baby growing in Mary’s womb is part of creation. In Christianity, the baby growing in Mary’s womb is actually the Creator”.

In his letter to the Colossians, Paul presented Jesus as “the firstborn over all creation” (Colossians 1:15). The description was speaking of Jesus’ pre-existence. The word “firstborn” signifies priority. In the culture of the Ancient Near East, the firstborn was not necessarily the oldest child. Firstborn referred to rank, not to birth-order. The firstborn possessed the inheritance and leadership. The phrase expresses Jesus’ sovereignty over creation. In the New Testament, Jesus is referred to as the firstborn of God on six occasions. Each passage made reference to Jesus’ pre-existence and sovereignty.

Furthermore, in the same letter to the Colossians, Paul went on to say of Jesus, “for by him, all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible…all things were created by him and for him” (Colossians 1:16). As far as Paul was concerned, the Bethlehem story of Jesus’ birth was not his origin. Like other New Testament writers, Paul believed that at Bethlehem, God came to dwell among his creatures. Wasn’t this what Joseph was told by an angel? “The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel, which means, ‘God with us’” (Matthew 1:23).

Unlike the Qur’an, the Bible consistently recognizes the pre-existence and sovereignty of Jesus. Through the doctrine of the Incarnation, Christians believe that the eternal Son of God took on human flesh, without losing any of his divine nature. That miraculous, history-changing event took place in the womb of the Virgin Mary. Hundreds of years earlier, the prophet Isaiah alluded to this when he said: “The Lord himself will give you a sign – The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel” (Isaiah 7:14). Interestingly, in reporting on the birth of Jesus, Matthew quotes this prophecy from Isaiah (Matthew 1:22). Matthew recognized that the birth of Jesus was unique. It was more than another fatherless birth, like Adam.

A proper understanding of the Virgin Birth preserves the truth that Jesus is fully God and fully man. Jesus did not acquire divinity because of the life he lived, nor because of a ruling by a Church Council. He came as Immanuel, and did not become Immanuel later.