Chapter 6 In David's City of Bethlehem > 성서와 신학--독서토론

The First Christmas

By

Borg & Crossan

 

 

 

Chapter 6

 

In David’s City of Bethlehem

 

 

Thesis:

 

In both Matthew and Luke, parallelism between David and Jesus established to meet the expectations of the audience, 1^st century Jews.  The general expectation based on ‘midrashim’ of the time was that a “Davidic Messiah” will come to establish justice and righteousness, peace and security for God’s people.  However, based on ‘midrash’ understanding, the ‘old David’, a militant warrior king must change to be inline with Jesus’ message of non-violent victory to peace and justice.

 

Matthew adds parallelism of Moses’ birth as well as contrast Rome’s theology of peace to transform the traditional Davidic Messiah who was a militant peace maker into a non-violent and transcendent peace maker for all (not just Jews). 

 

 

Problem:

 

• In making a parallelism with David, it established and reinforced the Davidic Messiah image of Jesus to the 1^st century audience.  But how do you turn this warrior king into a transcendent and non-violent peace maker?

• Similarly, why were terms “Savior” and “Lord” significant to Luke’s version of Jesus’ birth?

• How did gentiles come to be included in the audience of these gospels?

• Did Jesus transform from human to more transcendent figure in Luke?

 

 

Argumentation:

 

Matthew –

 

Midrashim is a way of interpreting biblical stories that goes beyond simple distillation of religious, legal or moral teachings.  Knowing the midrashim was important to understanding the theology of the 1^st century Jews, the first audience of the gospels.  This audience was expecting a Davidic Messiah while under Roman rule as David was when Philistines over ran Israel during David’s time.  Therefore, to meet this expectation, it was important that Jesus be born in Bethlehem.

 

The authors question this birth place by describing it as “quite negotiable.”  It’s clear the authors believe Bethlehem to be a metaphorical than historical to meet the audience’s expectations.  But this creates a conflict with Jesus’ teaching of non-violent victory to peace.  To over come and transform Jesus from violent Davidic Messiah to a non-violent Davidic Messiah, Matthew introduces a parallelism to Moses’ birth in Jesus’ birth story.

 

To create parallelism to Jesus’ and the birth of Moses in the Midrashim, Matthew introduces events related to King Herod.  The dream, fear, advice and interpretation of both Herod and the Pharaoh are very similar.  As with Pharaoh orders the killing of Jewish male infants, Herod orders the killing of newborns.  The innocents are killed but peace ultimately achieved through escaping Egypt for Moses and escaping to Egypt for Jesus.  The Moses/Jesus parallelism implants a non-violent means to peace and justice.

 

Luke –

 

The authors start off with questioning the birth place based on geography impossibility, a bureaucratic nightmare and a fiscal disaster.   The story we’re all familiar with is the census for the entire Roman Empire.  The familiar story line is important because it introduces the readers to the Roman term “oikoumene” or the predestined rule over the whole world or inhabited earth.  The authors challenge this unlikely and logistically unrealistic version and provide their theory on what may have occurred. 

 

The authors believe it was more likely that in 6 CE, Herod was removed from power and direct Roman control of the region took place.  To carryout Roman taxation plans, a more regional registration was conducted.  To emphasize conflict to the Roman theology of oikoumene, Luke claims the census was ordered for the entire Roman Empire.  Metaphorically, the Roman taxation and Roman theology of oikoumene was Luke’s deliberate political intention.  The titles and terms Lord, Savior, Gospel and Peace were used in references Caesar the Augustus at the time.  He deliberately uses these terms to describe Jesus to make his points in opposition to Roman rule and theology.

 

Gentiles -

 

The Roman’s claim to the world stem from the theology of oikoumene.  This application of predestined right was being challenged by Luke as he pivoted ‘Jesus the Savior of the World’ against ‘Caesar’s Lordship of the inhabited world.’  With the Roman Empire dominating the political, cultural and theology of the times, the Davidic Messiah has evolved in Matthew from militant to non-violent, and now Jewish Savior to Savior of the World.  As Augustus is not just the Savior of Rome but Savior of Humanity, Jesus’ message of peace and justice was expanded to match that of Roman Empire.   

 

Luke has taken a regional theological and political confrontation to empirical or global level to include all, not just Jews, his initial audience. 

 

Transcendent -

 

In addition, in the process of competing with the predestined right to conquer other people and land and/or the divine rights of Caesars rule the whole world, Jesus too was transformed from human teacher to a more transcendent figure in gospels. 

     

 

Additional Thoughts:

 

How would Jesus’ message according to Luke change if the filters of politics and competing motivating factors with Roman rule and theology didn’t exist?