Studied by 9 people
eduquas a level Christianity: Theme 1: Religious figures and sacred texts For AO1 you need to know: Consistency and credibility of the birth narratives Harmonisation and redaction Interpretation and application of the birth narratives to the incarnation. Substantial presence and kenotic model. For AO2 you need to be able to debate: The extent to which the birth narratives provide insight into the doctrine of the incarnation The relative importance of redaction criticism for understanding the biblical birth narratives
Define a birth narrative + which two gospels include them?
the accounts about how God the Son came into the world. There are only two gospels about it: Matthew and Luke.
Give details of Matthew and his individual nativity, including what perspective it is from, who the visitors were, and other details. 1:18-2:23
Matthew (tax collector) - therefore would've been older than Jesus, so would have been alive during the time of Jesus. - important because he would not have been a tax collector in his 20s (it was a very highly respected job, you had to have experience), meaning it was likely he was older and so was alive during the birth of Jesus, the massacre of the innocents and the death of Herod- this influenced his story. For the massacre of the innocents, he could have been a child himself and so that could have had a long-lasting impact on him as a child hears about murders of other children- a very pivotal moment.
Annunciation to Joseph (by the Angel)
The marriage happens after the revelation of the angel.
Birth of Jesus in Bethlehem
Magi visited Herod in Jerusalem (never told how many there were, but we assume 3 because there were 3 gifts. It does not say they are kings, but tradition supposes they are based on Psalm saying that ‘kings will fall down before him’.)
Adoration of the Magi in Bethlehem
Massacre of the Innocents in Bethlehem (important detail for credibility- his age means he would have remembered being told about it)
Joseph, Mary and Jesus’ flight to Egypt to escape
Death of Herod (4BCE)
The family returned to Israel and then relocated to Nazareth
Give details of Luke and his individual nativity including what perspective it is from, who the visitors were, and other details. 1:26-2:40
Luke (physician/doctor)- lived after Jesus.
Annunciation to Mary in Nazareth by the Angel Gabriel
Census of Quirinius (6-7CE)- declared by Augustus
Joseph and May travel from Nazareth to Bethlehem
Mary visited Elizabeth & the birth of John the Baptist. Visit to cousin Elizabeth who is pregnant with John the Baptist, joy through the Magnificat. Her husband Zechariah makes prophecy known as the Benedictus.
Birth of Jesus in Bethlehem.
Annunciation to the shepherds in the fields.
Adoration of the shepherds in Bethlehem.
Presentation of Jesus at the Temple in Jerusalem. - reference to circumcision. + the 3 hymns
Joseph, Mary and Jesus return home to Nazareth
what are the 4 similarities between the two birth narratives?
What are the differences?
Similarities:
Someone visits the new-born baby
Virgin birth
Supernatural elements
Joseph-son of david
Differences:
Mathew writes from Joseph’s viewpoint whereas Luke writes from Mary’s
In Matthew, an un-named angel announces Mary’s pregnancy, whereas in Luke the angel is named as Gabriel.
Matthew writes that Jesus is born in a house in Bethlehem, Luke that there was no room at the inn, so Jesus was born in a manger
What are the 2 supernatural elements within the birth narratives and what have they led historians to think?
virgin birth through the Holy Spirit - “the word became flesh”
the appearance of the angel
these elements have led many historians to doubt the validity of these stories.
Which 2 other details have led historians to doubt the validity of the birth narratives? what do specific scholars think this reveals?
Matthew mentions the massacre of the innocent but it is not reported in historical sources of the time - including in Josephus’ reports of Herod’s bad actions (we do know that Herod murdered 3 of his own sons) - Matthew may have made it up to link Jesus to Moses.
Raymond Brown, a Roman Catholic scholar, thinks that the lack of ancient records means that the historicity of the nativity is impossible to fully determine. The important task, then, is understanding what the birth narratives meant to early Christians.
Luke’s Census- King David was from Bethlehem hence why Joseph had to go there for the census.
Bart Ehrman claims that since David lived a thousand years before Joseph, it is absurd to think that Joseph could trace his ancestry back that far, and also absurd to think that everyone went to the place their ancestors lived a thousand years ago for the sake of a census. - not what the Romans did!
Ehrman claims there is no mention of this census in any other sources than Luke and Christian authors who read Luke. Ehrman concludes that this census didn’t happen and that the author of Luke invented it to fit the Jewish belief that the saviour has to come from Bethlehem. This casts doubt on the historical credibility of Luke. Ehrman notes Jesus was in Mary's womb during the census of Quirinius(6CE), then he couldnt have been born under the rulership of Herod (died 4CE) (10-year gap between those events.) although - It is possible that the scribe miscopied Quirinas for Saturninus (governor from 9BCE to 6CE). Some argue that Herod died later than 4bce, such as 1bce.
What is Harmonisation? + is it possible and how so?
the attempt to show that the accounts to not contradict each other. Arguably the accounts do not involve any serious contradictions. It’s possible that Matthew and Luke had access to different information and/or different sources. The accounts could possibly work together.
Evidence that they can be harmonised:
Joseph and Mary may have fled to Egypt after Jesus was presented at the Temple, so Matthew would be seen as carrying on where Luke left off
Both Mathew and Luke agree that Jesus was born in Bethlehem when Herod was king of Judea.
Mary was betrothed to Joseph, Mary was a virgin, Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit.
People travelled to visit the newborn baby.
Jesus was the fulfilment of the Old Testament prophecy and he came to save all mankind.
What is Bart Ehrman’s view on harmonisation?
claims it is impossible to reconcile the differences
“If Matthew is right that they fled to Egypt, how can Luke be right that they went back to Nazareth a month later? The chronology doesn’t work.”
he suggests that the Gospel authors each knew that Jesus was raised in Nazareth but wanted to place him in Bethlehem for his birth to fit Jewish prophecy about the birthplace of the Messiah.
he also points out if Jesus was in Mary’s womb during the census of Quirinius, then he could not have been born under the rulership of Herod, as Matthew says, since there is a 10-year gap between those events. Both Luke (1:5) and Matthew (2:1) state that Jesus was born during the rule of Herod. The census mentioned by Luke is claimed to occur during the governorship of Quirinius of Syria (Luke 2:1-2). However, according to the 1st century Jewish historian Josephus, Quirinius did not become the governor of Syria and conduct the census until 6 CE.
What is the redaction criticism?
the theory that the New Testament writers altered pre-existing material about Jesus to suit their own agenda.
Redaction criticism makes the point that any narrative in the Gospels must have gone through three stages. Firstly, the actual life and teaching of the historical Jesus. Secondly, in the life of the early church. Thirdly, in the mind of the evangelists who wrote the Gospels
What do many people argue is the reason for the differences between the narratives?
they were written for different audiences
Arguably which audience did Luke aim his narrative at?
Gentiles
Luke is the only non- jewish writer in the New Testament and believed that Jesus had universal significance
he quotes from the greek version of the old testament not the Hebrew- references a different culture from the Jewish culture.
Luke emphasises the work of the HS more
Writes from Marys perspective - less bothered about making a link with King David.
Arguably which audience did Matthew aim his narrative at? + how
Jewish readers
he created a link between Joseph and King David > this is an attempt to show that Jesus is the fulfilment of the Old Testament and the revelation of God, he is the Messiah.
he includes quotations from the Old Testament.
Matthew says the “scriptures are fulfilled”, which is a reference to the fulfilment of the Jewish prophecy of the Messiah. Isiah 53 prophesises one who will suffer and bare the sins of humanity who are like lost sheep. Matthew seems convinced that Jesus did not only come for the Jews but for all people, i.e. very first visitors were Gentile foreigners.
What is the importance of Luke using Mary’s perspective?
Shows sympathy for those who were marginalised at the time- Jesus brought salvation to the poor and needy
News of Jesus’ birth was brought to the poor shepherds not the wealthy wise men
Joseph and Mary were poor people- the sacrifice they make is the sacrifice of the poor - 2 turtledoves
The birth of John the Baptist emphasises Jesus’ connection with the Jewish
John the Baptist was the last prophet of the Old Testament but he is no match for Jesus
What is the incarnation?
the coming of God to earth in the form of Jesus (‘in the flesh’)
What is the hypostatic union?
Jesus is fully God and fully human, not half each
He was fully God in that his human life was just a brief interlude in his total existence, he exists before and after Jesus of Nazareth.
-He is fully human because he became flesh and blood and died.
-Any idea that suggests he was more one than the other has been rejected by the Church
This Supports substantial presance
-Nicene Creed "begotten, not made, of the same essence as the father"
What are the two theories of how the incarnation worked?
The Substantial presence view is that God was fully present in Jesus, who was fully present in humanity.
The Kenotic Model is that God’s presence was somehow lessened and not fully present in Jesus, because in some way Jesus lessened or ‘emptied’ himself of God’s divine attributes when on earth.
Arguments/ Evidence for Substantial Presence
in Matthew, Jesus is referred to as Immanuel - meaning God is with us
The Magi wouldn’t have worshipped an ordinary not divine baby
It has been argued that Matthew uses a mistranslation of an Old Testament prophecy when referring to Jesus’ virgin birth (which implies his divinity). He quotes from Isaiah 7:14: “…, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel” The original Hebrew text of Isaiah uses the word “almah” (a young woman of marriageable age), not the word “bethulah” (which means virgin).
Matthew used the Septuagint (a Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures) and not the original Hebrew version as his source material. As a result he used the Greek word “parthenos” meaning virgin (implying Jesus’ divinity).
Luke specifically refers to Jesus as the ‘Son of God’ (Luke 1:35)
-In response to the against arguments - epistemic distance - we cannot understand the trinity.
Arguments/ Evidence against Substantial Presence
Substantial presence is criticised by reform theologians for depending too much on Aristotle’s views on substance which are pagan philosophy and thus not Christian.
Hick
Jesus being the Son of God and not just a prophet was a later invention.
The earliest gospel- Mark does not include a divine birth- Jesus is depicted as a prophet.
the gospel writers wrote long after Jesus’ life so they were not eyewitnesses.
the label ‘son of God’ was a common title in Judaism when referring to a very special human chosen by God, not a truly unique divine person. (Adam was called the son of God)
the incarnation was metaphorical
Jesus embodied ‘the goodness and love of God’.
Hick argues the benefit is this avoids the paradoxes of the duality of Christ and the trinity.
The Trinity
the traditional Jewish view of a messiah was equivalent in meaning to ‘Son of God’ - someone chosen by him to perform certain deeds.
In Greek the meaning changed to a human elevated to the divine (during his time)
The Church fused the 2 meanings together in the Council of Chalcedon in 451 so that Jesus was thought of as both fully God and fully human.
Channing - the trinitarian view of Jesus is one of “infinite confusion”
They are contradictory qualities which cannot inhere in the same being, or that being would have contradictory qualities. Divinity is infinite, humanity is finite; something cannot be both infinite and finite. (Hick agrees- to say Jesus is God is like saying that a circle is also a square. Hick goes on to conclude that Christ being a mere human solves the paradoxical implications of the trinity)
What is the Kenotic Model?
Kenosis means “self-emptying”, - from the Greek word Keno, meaning to make empty.
In Luke, Jesus is presented as growing in knowledge, getting hungry and tired. Since God is omniscient and omnipotent, it shouldn’t be possible for God to be affected by such human weaknesses. (this doesn’t make sense!!!)
The Kenotic model attempts to explain these things by drawing on Paul, in Philippians 2:5-11, who describes Jesus “humbling himself and taking he form of a servant” and “emptying himself and becoming obedient to death”.
-This self-emptying is theorised to consist of a preincarnate self-limitation by Jesus, agreeing to take the form of a servant but maintaining that he was fully human whilst maintaining the divine presence.
-Self-emptying of his own will and submitting to the will of God.
Arguments/ Evidence for the Kenotic Model
C Evans proposes that Jesus voluntarily gives up or just does not make use of divine attributes. This is why he appears in Luke a having human frailties, as he does not have or is not making use of omniscience and omnipotence.
C Evans proposes a Kenotic model that claims God chooses to limit himself to live a finite human existence which amounts to a genuine change in God. Evans claims that this does not contradict the principle of divine perfection.
In Luke, Mary’s response to the angel captures the themes of humility and obedience that are central to kenosis “Here am I the servant of the Lord, let it be with me according to your word” (Luke 1:38)
Mary relates a message where the rich are emptied and the poor filled with good things. It echoes the message Jesus himself is given, that he will give “recovery of sight to the blind” (Luke 4:18). There is a theme of reversal where the rich will be emptied and the poor filled, materially and spiritually, just as Jesus also reverses from the purely divine to the divine incarnate who is an obedient servant.
Arguments/ Evidence against the Kenotic Model
N. T. Wright argues that the idea that Jesus stopped being divine when he became human is a “misunderstanding” and “completely un-true to what Paul has in mind”. Wright claims that the point of Paul’s previous verse was that Jesus was already equal with God before he existed as a human being.
“the decision to become human, and to go all the way along the road of obedience to the divine plan of salvation … was not a decision to stop being divine. It was a decision about what it really meant to be divine”.
the pre-existent Son did not think that being equal to God meant that he was excused from the task of redemptive suffering and death, but that he was actually uniquely qualified and apt for that task
Wright is arguing that if you think that God becoming human was a lessening of God, then you don’t understand what it means to be divine and what a divine being would do.
The Council of Chalcedon in 451 so that Jesus was thought of as both fully God and fully human. Evans’ Kenotic idea of self-limitation seems to contradict the Chalcedon characterisation of Christ as having two natures that co-exist “without change, without division, without separation”.
Pope Pius XII condemned the interpretation of kenosis that suggests Jesus’ divinity was taken away. He points out that there are bible quotes which suggest that the incarnation did not in any way make Jesus lesser: “I and the father are one” (John 10:30), “The word was made flesh” (John 1:14). Pope Pius XII concludes that the Kenotic model is “a wicked invention, equally to be condemned with the Docetism opposed to it”.
Note 
Flashcard (78)