The Bible

I Don’t Believe in a Virgin Birth. But I do Believe in Christmas.

For most Christians, the Christmas story without a virgin birth is like the Harry Potter series without magic, or Star Wars without the father-son reveal.

But for me it’s not really a big deal, because the magic isn’t the point of the story. The magic is all backstory, setting the scene for the first century readers. It’s parable, as biblical scholars would say.

Matthew and Luke weave two different Christmas stories, each a prologue to the bigger picture. A story of political subterfuge, progressive ideologies and a story that we still need to hear today. It says: ‘we can do better‘.

A Virgin Birth in a World of Turmoil

As we open gifts, indulge in feasts and celebrate with families, there are refugees in Libya being sold into slavery at this very moment. There are homeless families living on the street or out of a car. There are people struggling to mend broken relationships.

And it was the same for the first century writers of Matthew and Luke’s Christmas stories. Between 67 and 68 CE, Roman Emperor Vespasian led legions into Jerash (or Gerasa, Jordan) to quash a Jewish revolt. Thousands were slaughtered, women and children were imprisoned and property was destroyed (Borg and Crossan, p77). Then around 70 CE, the future emperor Titus led the siege of Jerusalem.

It was a brutal time for Jews under the Roman rule.

So when Matthew’s author was writing for a Jewish audience in approximately 80 to 90 CE for (Parkinson, p122), he knew these experiences had torn apart their homes and lives. Luke’s gospel (written around the same time), had a similar backdrop, but for a different audience. He wrote for the gentiles and the marginalised – the broken and forgotten members of society.

Matthew and Luke each tailor made their Christmas stories of a virgin birth to bring their audiences a story they could relate to. The story of Jesus would provide an alternative narrative to the brutality of the world they knew.

And it’s an alternative we need just as much today as those first century readers.

The Son of God: Caesar or Jesus?

Julius Caesar’s adopted son Octavian (later known as Emperor Augustus), defeated Marc Antony and Cleopatra around 43 BCE. After which he became known as ‘divi filius‘ or ‘son of the divine‘. To the non-latin speaking common folk, he simply became known as the ‘son of god’.

December 25, 2017 31 comments

Society The Bible

Marriage in the Bible – Marriage has always been cultural

written by Jo Holden

As we come to (hopefully) the pinnacle of the marriage equality debate in Australia, it seems timely to reflect on the portrayal of marriage in the Bible and the history of marriage reform.

In opposing marriage equality, conservative Christians believe that they are protecting the ‘traditional’ view of marriage: upholding the Word of God to ensure that culture and society do not degrade it. They perceive their stance as noble and necessary to the longevity of Christianity itself.

However conservatives fail to recognise that marriage has been influenced by cultural norms throughout history. There has never been one traditional accepted version of marriage.

Marriage in the Bible

If you think that people in biblical times walked down the aisle of their local church, followed a ceremony overlooked by a religious leader, signed legal documents and then upheld them for the rest of their lives then you need to read your Bible (and possible attend a history class).

David had many wives, Solomon had 700 and Jacob had 2, just to name a few. Polygamy was common in ancient times and perfectly acceptable according to the culture of the day.

And this is not the only type of relationship depicted in the Bible. Ryan Grant Long’s infographic (below) gives a great summary of the different depictions of marriage in the Bible.

Click to Zoom

Of course there are also many examples of marriage between a man and a woman.

I’m not going down the rabbit hole of pitching verse against verse. Arguing over which verses apply to today’s culture and which don’t (bacon and cotton blends anyone??) is a pointless debate.

But while the writers of the day may have described the marriage of one man with one woman in Genesis 2:24, it’s worth noting they did not use the words only or exclusively between.

A Religious Ceremony?

Anglo-Saxon marriage was for most of history a civil ceremony, not associated with the church at all. The main purpose of marriage was to forge alliances and for children.

August 6, 2017 37 comments

The Bible

The Mystery of Mark’s Gospel – Adding Mark 16: 9-20

written by Jo Holden

Have you ever watched a movie that has left you seriously disappointed? Maybe it ended so abruptly you were left wondering what just happened.

Well it appears the early scribes of Mark’s gospel also experienced that feeling.

The gospel of Mark is generally believed to be the earliest of the gospels, written around 70 AD (Jesus died around 30 AD). It provides many stories of Jesus’ life and death, but the original version ends very abruptly after Mary Magdalene, Mary the Mother of Jesus and James visit his tomb to find it empty. It says in Mark 16 4-8:

But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away. As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed. “Don’t be alarmed,” he said. “You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid him. But go, tell his disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.'”

Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.

Fade to black. The end. According to Mark.

Imagine: you’ve read this amazing story of a man who performed miracles, healed the sick, challenged a corrupt authority, is interrogated and tortured, put to death and then suddenly the body disappears leaving nothing but a man with a cryptic message.

It’s the original cliff-hanger, and it must have been incredibly frustrating for those early readers and scribes.

Dust off that old Bible you have on a bookshelf somewhere. Open it up to Mark 16, verse 8 and you’ll notice it doesn’t end there. No, in fact it continues to say:

When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons. She went and told those who had been with him and who were mourning and weeping. When they heard that Jesus was alive and that she had seen him, they did not believe it. Afterward Jesus appeared in a different form to two of theme while they were walking in the country. These returned and reported it to the rest; but they did not believe them either.

Later Jesus appeared to the Eleven as they were eating; he rebuked them for their lack of faith and their stubborn refusal to believe those who had seen him after he had risen. He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptised will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.” After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God. Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it.

I don’t know about you, but I feel somewhat comforted by the idea that the verses “they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all” was not in the original version.

So why were these verses added to Mark 16? Well let’s pause for a moment and take a crash course in biblical history.

Who wrote the original version of Mark?

You might be forgiven for thinking that the New Testament gospels are eyewitness accounts of Jesus’ life. After all, to the regular person just reading what is in front of them, that’s how they appear. However none of the gospels were written by anyone who knew Jesus directly. (“Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew” by Bart Erhman (2003)).

May 11, 2017 4 comments