I do confess to having a bit of a rant last BLOG. I just had to get it out of my system and do what I could to recover something of what we in the church have called “Christmas” for many centuries. If nothing else, I hope I give helpful cause to some personal reflection when I write a BLOG. Hopefully, what I write here is informative, challenging and sound. I think it is important that Christians have intelligent, well thought out responses and opinions in the world in which we live. I’m not one to just let everything go through to the keeper unchallenged. Some things need to be addressed, responses made and so on.
We are fast approaching Christmas, and so we tend to talk about and preach about Christmas as the day approaches – we’ve done that for centuries using the gospel narratives. But of the two gospel writers who record the birth of Jesus – Matthew and Luke – neither are writing about “Christmas”, as such. That’s not their objective. No, they’re writing an account of the advent of Jesus, His message, His death and resurrection. Neither writer even knew of the word “Christmas”. According to the encyclopaedia Britannica the word “Christmas” (denoting the Christian festival celebrating the birth of Jesus) is an old English term which is derived from “mass on Christ’s day”, and is of fairly recent origin. Prior to that the term Yule was used having been derived from the Germanic jōl or the Anglo-Saxon geōl, which referred to the feast of the winter solstice. Christmas in the west, from the early 20th century up to today, has increasingly become a secular holiday season observed by the whole population – Christian or not – where increasingly elaborate gifts are exchanged with family and friends along with increasing credit card debt, as well. Of course, Santa became part of the whole Christmas package from humble beginnings way back in the 3rd century, although there are various competing and overlapping traditions and legends that have all morphed their way into 21st century shopping centre versions of the jolly man in red.
But Matthew and Luke are unconcerned with these Christmas trappings we have overlaid on the ancient accounts – and then some. Church tradition has added so much to these narratives that are not in the original stories in order to create Christmas. Mary rode no donkey to Bethlehem – she walked with Joseph. No stable is mentioned in either narrative, just that the baby Jesus was laid in a manger. And the story of the innkeeper is pure legend, too – neither Luke nor Matthew ever mention him. The Magi from afar number three according to tradition, the truth is, we don’t really know – Matthew doesn’t specify. It could have been a dozen for all we know. The list goes on and on …
Now, please don’t think I don’t love and appreciate the Christmas story, the traditions, the season of worship, the carols and all of that, because I really do. But we need to pause at Christmas and see past the traditional overlays on the gospel accounts to what is really there. Even more than our inherited traditions of Christmas, I love even more the detail of the ancient records of Matthew and Luke about the coming of Jesus into the world – and what that all meant.
Matthew includes a genealogy in his narrative, very different to that of Luke’s genealogy. Matthew’s genealogy is fascinating and would have appeared to the religious elite of the day to be grossly improper with the “pedigree” of the Messiah considered highly questionable. In his genealogical list Matthew includes some unusual and unsavoury characters – but that is the way it happened. Of the twelve sons of Jacob, Judah is singled out – his tribe bears the royal sceptre “and his brothers” is included by Matthew to indicate that the Messiah emerges from within the whole matrix of the covenant people of God. Neither the half-brothers of Isaac, nor the descendants of Jacob’s brother, Esau, qualify as covenant people in the Old Testament. Perez and Zerah are twins (Gen. 38:27; cf. 1 Chron. 2:4), Tamar, wife of Judah’s son, Er, is the first of fourteen mentioned. It went radically against convention to include women in any genealogy! This shows that Matthew is conveying much more than genealogical information – he is writing a theology. Tamar enticed her father-in-law into an incestuous relationship (Gen. 38). She was a foreigner, as well. Rahab was a prostitute. She saved the spies of Israel who were scoping out Jericho before the Israelite army attacked. She joined the Israelite nation (Josh. 2 & 5). She is a foreigner, too, and Ruth was also a foreigner, a Moabite who married Boaz. Remember Bathsheba who was taken in adultery by King David? Another foreigner - by marriage. She was the wife of Uriah the Hittite whom David murdered in an attempt to cover up his adultery. An Israelite who married a foreigner, became a foreigner in the eyes of Israelites. Hence Matthew saying, “the wife of Uriah the Hittite”. Rehoboam, a wicked king (1 Chron. 3:10-14), is father to wicked Abijah who is the father of the good king, Asa. Asa was the father of the good king Jehoshaphat, who sired the wicked king Joram. Not going well, is it?
Then there is Manasseh, an exceedingly wicked king who practiced child-sacrifice and other evils. The reason for the women’s names, the foreigners and wicked people in Matthew’s list? The awaited Jewish Messiah extends His blessing and grace beyond Israel, even as Gentiles are included in His line. The Jewish Messiah will forgive the grossest of sins (three of the four women were involved in serious sexual sin). All four women reveal something of the strange and unexpected workings of God to fulfil His purposes. This makes Mary’s conception all the more amazing! See Shealtiel there? He died childless (1 Chron. 3:19). His brother married his widowed wife to ensure his brother’s family line. The son, Zerubbael, himself becomes a messianic model (Haggai 2:20-23). But a child born in such circumstances in those days was considered a second-class citizen – everyone would have known how he got here!
This may all be perplexing for some. Genealogies in the Old Testament are always working to communicate multiple layers of information to readers. They obviously trace family trees, but they also help us follow priestly and royal lines through Israel’s story. And so Matthew is saying, legally Jesus stands in the line of David’s throne. Now, if you’ve ploughed through all of that, (and there is more by the way), what on earth is Matthew trying to achieve here?
The reason for the names of the wicked and the good … and others, too, is important. Good or wicked, Jew or foreigner, male or female, they were all part of the Messiah’s line. Matthew is showing his readers that God has been using all types of people to move His great plan forward over centuries. This picture of an inclusive and expanding God and kingdom will continue to appear far beyond Matthew’s genealogy into the rest of his gospel. He will continue to include the rejects and outsiders into God’s family. So we read the genealogy of Matthew and see the royal lineage of Jesus. He’s the one who will bring the blessing of Abraham to the whole world. He’s the royal son of David that all of Israel has been waiting for. He’s the one that the prophets wrote about, and the psalmists sang about. He will be the king of Israel who blesses all of the nations of the world, especially the outsiders. We know all of this because Matthew tells us right up front in a genealogy that carefully reveals the hope that has arrived in Jesus. One more thing, Matthew is saying in all of this that God’s grace does not run in the blood, and His providence cannot be deceived, thwarted or outmanoeuvred!
Immanuel. God with us … ALL.
Meditate on these things.
Ps Milton
[Sources: Encyclopaedia Britannica; History Channel, various commentaries; The Bible Project resources.]