Adoration of the Shepherds by Dutch painter Matthias Stom, c. 1650
The Nativity, an early 18th-century Russian Orthodox icon featuring common Orthodox iconographic elements of the Nativity by an anonymous Russian iconographer

The Nativity or birth of Jesus is found in the biblical gospels of Matthew and Luke. The two accounts agree that Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, that his mother, Mary, was engaged to a man named Joseph, who was descended from King David and was not his biological father, and that his birth was caused by divine intervention.

Many contemporary scholars do not see the Nativity stories as historically factual,[1] regarding them as laced with theology and presenting two different accounts and genealogies,[2][3] though they are considered to contain some useful biographical information concerning Jesus's birth during the reign of Augustus and his father's name.[4][5] Some traditional scholars have maintained the historicity of the narratives.[6] Matthew's account of the appearance of an angel to Joseph, the wise men from the East, the massacre of the innocents, and the flight to Egypt, do not appear in Luke, which instead describes the appearance of an angel to Mary, the census; the birth in a manger, and the choir of angels appearing to the shepherds.[7][8][9]

The Nativity is the basis for the Christian holiday of Christmas and plays a major role in the Christian liturgical year. Many Christians traditionally display small manger scenes depicting the Nativity within or outside of their homes, or attend Nativity plays or Christmas pageants focusing on the Nativity cycle in the Bible. Elaborate Nativity displays featuring life-sized statues are a tradition in many continental European countries during the Christmas season.

The artistic depiction of the Nativity has been an important subject for Christian artists since the 4th century. Artistic depictions of the Nativity scene since the 13th century have emphasized the humility of Jesus and promoted a more tender image of him, a major change from the early "Lord and Master" image, mirroring changes in the common approaches taken by Christian pastoral ministry during the same era.

Gospel accounts

Only the Gospels of Matthew and Luke offer narratives regarding the birth of Jesus.[10] Both agree that Jesus was born in Bethlehem in the reign of King Herod, that his mother was named Mary and that her husband Joseph was descended from King David (although they disagree on details of the line of descent), and both deny Joseph's biological parenthood while treating the birth, or rather the conception, as divinely effected.[11] Beyond this, they agree on very little.[11] Joseph dominates Matthew's and Mary dominates Luke's, and James Barker suggests that Luke intended to supplement Matthew’s nativity by adding Mary’s perspective to Matthew’s Joseph, while Brown questions the idea.[12][13] Matthew implies that Joseph already has his home in Bethlehem, while Luke states that he lived in Nazareth.[11] In Matthew the angel speaks to Joseph, while Luke has one speaking to Mary.[13] Only Luke has the stories surrounding the birth of John the Baptist, the census of Quirinius, the adoration of the shepherds and the presentation in the Temple on the fortieth day; only Matthew has the wise men, the star of Bethlehem, Herod's plot, the Massacre of the Innocents, and the flight into Egypt.[13] The two itineraries are quite different. According to Matthew, the Holy Family begins in Bethlehem, moves to Egypt following the birth, and settles in Nazareth, while according to Luke they begin in Nazareth, journey to Bethlehem for the birth, and immediately return to Nazareth.[14][note 1]

Comparison between the Nativity narratives in the Gospels of Luke and Matthew
Luke Matthew
Map of the Nativity narrative according to Luke
Map of the Nativity narrative according to Luke
Map of the Nativity narrative according to Matthew
Map of the Nativity narrative according to Matthew
1. Annunciation to Mary in Nazareth 1. Annunciation to Joseph
2. Census of Quirinius (6–7 CE) –
3. Joseph and Mary travel from Nazareth to Bethlehem –
4. Birth of Jesus in Bethlehem 2. Birth of Jesus in Bethlehem
5. Annunciation to the shepherds in the fields –
6. Adoration of the shepherds in Bethlehem –
– 3. Magi "follow the star" and visit Herod in Jerusalem
– 4. Adoration of the Magi in Bethlehem
7. Jesus is presented at the temple in Jerusalem 5. Joseph, Mary and Jesus flee to Egypt to escape Herod
– 6. Massacre of the Innocents in Bethlehem
– 7. Death of Herod (4 BC)
8. Joseph, Mary and Jesus return home to Nazareth 8. Joseph, Mary and Jesus return from Egypt
– 9. Joseph, Mary and Jesus settle in Nazareth

Gospel of Matthew

A page from the 11th-century Bamberg Apocalypse showing Matthew 1:21

Annunciation to Joseph

Mary, the mother of Jesus, was betrothed to Joseph, but was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit. Joseph intended to divorce her quietly, but an angel told him in a dream that he should take her as his wife and name the child Jesus, "because it is he who will save his people from their sins". This would fulfil the prophecy that a virgin would give birth to a son, who would be known as Emmanuel, meaning "God is with us". Joseph awoke, took Mary for his wife, did not have intercourse with her, and she gave birth to a boy, and gave him the name Jesus (Matthew 1:18–25).[15]

Joseph has been shown to be the descendant of David (the angel addresses him as "son of David") and heir to the kingdom of Judah, but Matthew 1:16[16] reveals that Jesus is not Joseph's son, and Matthew is careful never to refer to him in this way.[17] The role of Joseph in naming the child indicates that he is being legally adopted, and thus becoming, like his now-legal father, "son of David."[18]

Adoration of the magi

The birth took place in the town of Bethlehem in the region known as Judea to the Romans and Judah to the Assyrians, in the time of King Herod (Herod the Great). Wise men from the East (the Magi) came to Jerusalem, asking where they could find the child born king of the Jews, for they had seen his star at its rising, and wished to pay him homage. Herod and all Jerusalem were afraid when they heard this, but Herod, learning from the chief priests and scribes that the messiah would be born in Bethlehem according to prophecy, sent the Magi there with instructions to return and tell him when they had found him. The Magi worshipped the child in Bethlehem and gave him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh, but an angel warned them in a dream not to return to Herod, and they returned home by another way.

Massacre of the Innocents, flight into Egypt, and return to Israel

When Herod learned that the Magi had tricked him, he was infuriated and killed all the children in and around Bethlehem under the age of two (the Massacre of the Innocents). This was in fulfilment of the prophet Jeremiah: "A voice was heard in Ramah, wailing and loud lamentation, Rachel weeping for her children; she refused to be consoled, because they are no more." But an angel had appeared to Joseph in a dream and warned him to take the child and his mother and flee to Egypt, and the Holy Family remained there until Herod died to fulfil the words of the prophet, "Out of Egypt I have called my son." On the death of Herod an angel appeared to Joseph in a dream and told him to return with the child and its mother to Israel, but Herod's son was now ruler of Judea, and after being warned in a dream Joseph went instead to Galilee, where he made his home in Nazareth "so that what had been spoken through the prophets might be fulfilled, "He will be called a Nazorean.""[19]

In this chapter, the author of Matthew needs to establish that "Jesus of Nazareth" was in fact born in Bethlehem, the town where David was born, for the "son of David" born there will be "King of the Jews" (a designation that does not reappear in Matthew until the crucifixion).[20] Herod's fear and the visit of the Magi underline the royal birth, as do the various prophetic texts quoted or referenced in this chapter.[21]

Gospel of Luke

Angel Gabriel's Annunciation to Mary, by Murillo, c. 1660

In the Gospel of Luke, when Herod was king of Judea, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth in Galilee to announce to a virgin named Mary, who was betrothed to a man named Joseph, that a child would be born to her. The angel Gabriel announced that she was to name him Jesus, for he would be the son of God and rule over Israel forever. When the time of the birth drew near, Caesar Augustus commanded a census of Roman domains, and Joseph took Mary to Bethlehem, the ancient city of David, as he was of the House of David. Jesus was born in Bethlehem; since there was nowhere for them to stay in the town, the infant was laid in a manger while angels announced his birth to a group of shepherds who worshipped him as Messiah and Lord.

In accordance with the Jewish law, his parents presented the infant Jesus at the Temple in Jerusalem, where two people in the temple, Simeon and Anna the Prophetess, gave thanks to God who had sent his salvation. Joseph and Mary then returned to Nazareth.

Date and place of birth

Altar in the Church of the Nativity, Bethlehem

Matthew and Luke agree that Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea during the reign of Herod the Great.[11] In Luke the newborn baby is placed in a manger "because there was no place in the katalyma".[22] Katalyma might mean a private home (this has little support among scholars), or a room in a private home, or an inn, but it is impossible to be certain which is meant.[23]

In the 2nd century, Justin Martyr stated that Jesus had been born in a cave outside the town, while the Protoevangelium of James described a legendary birth in a cave nearby.[24][25] The Church of the Nativity inside the town, built by St. Helena, contains the cave-manger site traditionally venerated as the birthplace of Jesus, which may have originally been a site of the cult of the god Tammuz.[26] In his Contra Celsum (1.51), Origen, who travelled throughout Palestine beginning in around 215, wrote of the "manger of Jesus".[27]

The date of birth for Jesus of Nazareth is not stated in the gospels or in any secular text, but basing it on the death of Herod would place the date between 6 BC and 4 BC.[28] The historical evidence is too ambiguous to allow a definitive date to be determined,[29] but dates have been estimated through known historical events mentioned in the Nativity accounts,[30] by working backwards from the estimated start of the ministry of Jesus,[31][32] or by associating the claimed astrological portents mentioned with actual historical astronomical alignments and phenomena.[33]

Themes and analogies

Thematic analysis

Gospel of Matthew from an Ethiopian Bible, 1700

Helmut Koester writes that while Matthew's narrative was formed in a Jewish environment, Luke's was modeled to appeal to the Greco-Roman world.[34] In particular, while shepherds were regarded negatively by Jews in Jesus's time, they were seen in Greco-Roman culture as "symbols of a golden age when gods and humans lived in peace and nature was at harmony".[34] C. T. Ruddick Jr. writes that Luke's birth narratives of Jesus and John were modeled on passages from Genesis, chapters 27–43.[35][36] Regardless, Luke's Nativity depicts Jesus as a savior for all people, tracing a genealogy all the way back to Adam, demonstrating his common humanity, and likewise for the lowly circumstances of his birth. Luke, writing for a gentile audience, portrays the infant Jesus as a savior for gentiles as well as Jews.[37] Matthew uses quotations from Jewish scripture, scenes reminiscent of Moses' life, and a numerical pattern in his genealogy to identify Jesus as a son of David, of Abraham, and of God. Luke's prelude is much longer, emphasizing the age of the Holy Spirit and the arrival of a savior for all people, both Jew and gentile.[38]

Mainstream scholars interpret Matthew's Nativity as depicting Jesus as a new Moses with a genealogy going back to Abraham,[39][40] while Ulrich Luz views Matthew's depiction of Jesus at once as the new Moses and the inverse of Moses, and not simply a retelling of the Moses story.[41] Luz also points out that in the massacre narrative, once again, a fulfilment quotation is given: Rachel, the ancestral mother of Israel, weeping for her dead children (Matthew 2:18).[42][43]

Scholars who interpret Matthew as casting Jesus in the role of being a second Moses argue that, like Moses, the infant Jesus is saved from a murderous tyrant; and he flees the country of his birth until his persecutor is dead and it is safe to return as the savior of his people.[44] In this view, the account in Matthew is based on an earlier narrative patterned on traditions about the birth of Moses. Moses's birth is announced to Pharaoh by Magi; the child is threatened and rescued; the male Israelite children are similarly put to death by an evil king.[39][44]

According to Ulrich Luz, the beginning of the narrative of Matthew is similar to earlier biblical stories, e.g., the Annunciation of Jesus's birth (Matthew 1:18–25)[45] is reminiscent of the biblical accounts of the births of Ishmael (Genesis 16:11, Genesis 17),[46] Isaac (Genesis 21:1),[47] Samson (Judges 13:3, 13:5),[48] and recalls the Haggadic traditions of the birth of Moses. Yet in Luz's view, the contours appear, in part, strangely overlapped and inverted: "Egypt, formerly the land of suppression becomes a place of refuge and it is the King of Israel who now takes on the role of Pharaoh. Yet Matthew is not simply retelling the Moses story. Instead, the story of Jesus really is a new story: Jesus is at once the new Moses and the inverse of Moses."[41]

Old Testament parallels

Scholars have debated whether Matthew 1:22 and Matthew 2:23 refer to specific Old Testament passages. Fourth century documents such as the Codex Sinaiticus do not mention the prophet Isaiah in the statement in Matthew 1:22: "All this happened to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet", but some copies of Matthew from the 5th–6th centuries, such as the Codex Bezae, read "Isaiah the prophet".[49] The statement in Matthew 1:23, "Behold the virgin shall be with child", uses the Greek term parthenos ("virgin") as in the Septuagint Isaiah, while the Book of Isaiah 7:14 uses the Hebrew almah, which may mean "maiden", "young woman", or "virgin".[50] Raymond E. Brown states that the 3rd century BC translators of the Septuagint may have understood the Hebrew word almah to mean "virgin" in this context.[50]

The statement in Matthew 2:23 that "he will be called a Nazarene" does not mention a specific passage in the Old Testament, and there are multiple scholarly interpretations as to what it may refer to.[51] Barbara Aland and other scholars consider the Greek Ναζωραίος, Nazoréos used for 'Nazarene' of uncertain etymology and meaning,[52] but M. J. J. Menken states that it is a demonym that refers to an "inhabitant of Nazareth".[53] Menken also states that it may be referring to Judges 13:5 and 13:7.[54] Gary Smith states that Nazirite may mean one consecrated to God, i.e. an ascetic; or may refer to Isaiah 11:1.[55] The Oxford Bible Commentary states that it may be word-play on the use of nazirite, "Holy One of God," in Isaiah 4:3,[56] meant to identify Jesus with the Nazarenes, a Jewish sect who differed from the Pharisees only in that they regarded Jesus as the Messiah.[44] The Swiss theologian Ulrich Luz, who locates the Matthean community in Syria, has noted that Syrian Christians also called themselves Nazarenes.[57]

Christian theology

The theological significance of the Nativity of Jesus has been a key element in Christian teachings, from the early Church Fathers to 20th century theologians.[58][59][60] The theological issues were addressed as early as Apostle Paul, but continued to be debated and eventually led to both Christological and Mariological differences among Christians that resulted in early schisms within the Church by the 5th century.

Birth of the new man

Nativity at Night, by Geertgen tot Sint Jans, c. 1490

Paul the Apostle viewed the birth of Jesus as an event of cosmic significance which brought forth a "new man" who undid the damage caused by the fall of the first man, Adam. Just as the Johannine view of Jesus as the incarnate Logos proclaims the universal relevance of his birth, the Pauline perspective emphasizes the birth of a new man and a new world in the birth of Jesus.[65] Paul's eschatological view of Jesus counter-positions him as a new man of morality and obedience, in contrast to Adam. Unlike Adam, the new man born in Jesus obeys God and ushers in a world of morality and salvation.[65]

In the Pauline view, Adam is positioned as the first man and Jesus as the second: Adam, having corrupted himself by his disobedience, also infected humanity and left it with a curse as inheritance. The birth of Jesus, on the other hand, counterbalanced the fall of Adam, bringing forth redemption and repairing the damage done by Adam.[66]

In patristic theology, Paul's contrasting of Jesus as the new man versus Adam provided a framework for discussing the uniqueness of the birth of Jesus and the ensuing events of his life. The Nativity of Jesus thus began to serve as the starting point for "cosmic Christology" in which the birth, life and Resurrection of Jesus have universal implications.[65][67][68] The concept of Jesus as the "new man" repeats in the cycle of birth and rebirth of Jesus from his Nativity to his resurrection: following his birth, through his morality and obedience to the Father, Jesus began a new harmony in the relationship between God the Father and man. The Nativity and resurrection of Jesus thus created the author and exemplar of a new humanity.[69]

In the 2nd century Church Father Irenaeus writes:

When He became incarnate and was made man, He commenced afresh the long line of human beings, and furnished us, in a brief, comprehensive manner, with salvation; so that what we had lost in Adam – namely to be according to the image and likeness of God – that we might recover in Christ Jesus.[59][60]

Irenaeus was also one of the early theologians to use the analogy of "second Adam and second Eve". He suggested the Virgin Mary as the "second Eve" and wrote that the Mary had "untied the knot of sin bound up by the virgin Eve" and that just as Eve had tempted Adam to disobey God, Mary had set a path of obedience for the second Adam (i.e. Jesus) from the Annunciation to Calvary so that Jesus could bring about salvation, undoing the damage of Adam.[70]

In the 4th century, this uniqueness of the circumstances related to the Nativity of Jesus, and their interplay with the mystery of the incarnation, became a central element in both the theology and hymnody of Ephrem the Syrian. For him, the uniqueness of the Nativity of Jesus was supplemented with the sign of the majesty of the Creator through the ability of a powerful God to enter the world as a small newborn.[71]

In the Middle Ages the birth of Jesus as the second Adam came to be seen in the context of Saint Augustine's Felix culpa ("happy fall") and was intertwined with the popular teachings on the fall from grace of Adam and Eve.[72] Augustine was fond of a statement on the Nativity by Gregory of Nyssa and he quoted it five times: "Venerate the Nativity, through which you are freed from the bonds of an earthly nativity".[73] He also liked to quote: "Just as in Adam all of us died, so too in Christ all of us will be brought to life".[73][74]

The theology persisted into the Protestant Reformation, and second Adam was one of the six modes of atonement discussed by John Calvin.[75] In the 20th century, leading theologian Karl Barth continued the same line of reasoning and viewed the Nativity of Jesus as the birth of a new man who succeeded Adam. In Barth's theology, in contrast to Adam, Jesus acted as an obedient Son in the fulfilment of the divine will and was therefore free from sin and could hence reveal the righteousness of God the Father and bring about salvation.[58]