Tuesday, 31 March 2020

The Star of Bethlehem




Many Christmas crib scenes show the Holy Family surrounded by oxen, asses, shepherds and kings, with the Star of Bethlehem shining down from above. The star is referenced in the account of the Nativity given in Matthew’s gospel, according to which “wise men from the east” had seen the star that announced the birth of the new “King of the Jews” and made their way to Jerusalem to ask for further directions.

The New Testament gives two accounts of the Nativity, in the gospels of Matthew and Luke, and they are very different. In fact, there are hardly any points of agreement between them! Many efforts have been made to reconcile the two accounts, but the attempts often seem extremely forced and lacking in credibility.

So either Matthew or Luke must be wrong, or perhaps both are – after all, the authors of the works (whoever they were, and they were not called either Matthew or Luke!) were not eye witnesses and their prime concern seems to have been to tell stories that fitted supposed ancient prophecies.

However, there are features of the stories that might just have had a basis in reality, although this is more probable in the case of “Matthew” than of “Luke”. One of these features is the Star of Bethlehem.

It has been thought that references to a star being followed suggest a comet, and various suggestions have been made as to which comet this might have been. However, although a comet has a tail that might suggest an arrow pointing in a certain direction, it would not have “stood over the place where the young child was”, which is claimed in Matthew 2:9. 

This is also the case with any other sort of astronomical event, such as a planetary conjunction or a supernova, so that part of the account can be easily dismissed as fiction.

A supernova is probably the best candidate for being the star, and there is evidence that there was such an event at about the right time. Chinese astronomers during the Han Dynasty had recorded the sudden appearance of a bright star that lasted for several weeks until it faded from view.

A supernova is the explosion of a star that is considerably larger than our own Sun. If one were to explode relatively close to our solar system, then it would outshine everything else in the night sky and even be visible during daylight hours, even to the naked eye.

If a supernova had been observed in China, then it would certainly have been seen in Palestine. Just such an event was awaited by scholars who knew, from the Book of Numbers (24:17), that “there shall come a star out of Jacob, and a sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth”. 

Not many miles to the east of Jerusalem is the Dead Sea, on the shores of which lived a Jewish sect known as the Essenes. These were zealots who were desperately awaiting the arrival of the Messiah who would free the Jewish lands from the yoke of oppression under the Roman Empire. A supernova explosion was all they needed to get extremely excited about the prospect of their hopes being fulfilled.

So were the wise men Essene zealots from not very far away? One thing to remember is that for “wise men” to be interested in the birth of a Messiah, they must have been Jewish – the idea that oriental “magi” would have made a long journey to the west to bring “gold, frankincense and myrrh” does sound extremely fanciful. 

There are certainly elements of Matthew’s Nativity account that do not hang together, but the Star of Bethlehem may be something that the author of the gospel got right.
© John Welford

The shaky foundations of Christianity





The more I look at the religion known as Christianity, the more I realise that it is far from secure, in theological/philosophical terms, having been built on very shaky foundations.

The Messiah – Really?

At the heart of Christianity is the preacher from Galilee known as Jesus, to whom posterity has added the name “Christos”, meaning “the anointed one”. That is the Greek word for the concept, the Hebrew word being “Messiah”.

At the time that Jesus was alive the land of Palestine was under Roman rule. Most Jews were content to knuckle under and get on with their lives as best they could, but there were some who fervently wanted to change things and had high hopes that a new king would arrive who would lead his people to overthrow the Romans. Anointing with oil only applied to kings, which is why the Messiah had to be a king.

The early Christians were convinced that Jesus was the anointed one, but they saw the anointing as being a heavenly rather than earthly event. He had been anointed before he was born and therefore fitted the bill. That concept might raise a few eyebrows as it stands, as it presupposes a certain suspension of disbelief at the outset.

Fulfilling the Prophesies

The first four books of the New Testament, the Gospels, include many references to Old Testament passages that, according to the writers, proved that Jesus was the Messiah. This is where things get very suspicious indeed.

It is true that there are several references in the Old Testament to a Messiah who will come to rescue the Jews from their oppression and overthrow their enemies, but this figure was clearly a long way from the character of Jesus of Nazareth. However, that did not stop the Gospel writers from digging up dozens of references that clearly, according to them, pointed at Jesus.

However, when these references are looked at more closely, the case for Jesus as predicted Messiah is far from convincing.

Some of the quoted passages make absolutely no reference to a Messiah. One of these is the very well-known Isaiah Chapter 53 (“Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows … He was wounded for our transgressions , he was bruised for our iniquities” and so on). There is no indication as to who “he” is, other than “my servant”, and, although some of this chapter seems to fit the story of Jesus reasonably well, there are verses in this chapter that do not fit at all and are hence quietly forgotten about in the context of Christian prophesy.

Other “prophesies” can only be regarded as such with the application of a good dose of imagination. Passages were yanked out of context and held to have meanings that it is highly unlikely were intended by their writers.

An example of the latter is Matthew 2:14/15, which reads: “… he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt: and was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying Out of Egypt I have called my son”. However, the verse from Hosea (11:1) is clearly not a prophesy at all: “When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt”. What could this possibly be other than a reference to the Exodus led by Moses? Trying to pretend that Hosea was predicting an incident in the life of Jesus is plainly absurd.

Both Matthew and Luke (the gospels were written anonymously and the names by which they are generally known were added later) were keen to fulfill Biblical prophesy on many fronts, one of them being the birthplace of Jesus at Bethlehem. The prophesy in this case was by Micah (5:2): “But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel”.

The gospel writers felt compelled to use this prophesy to convince their audience (Jewish or Gentile) that the fact of Jesus’s birth in Bethlehem was proof that what had been predicted had come to pass. But this leads to further difficulties. For one thing, Micah was talking about a military leader (no mention of a Messiah) who would sort out the Assyrians who had already devastated the northern kingdom and might well do the same to the southern one, which was where Micah lived.

The main problem, however, was that Jesus clearly came from Galilee and not Bethlehem (not far from Jerusalem). How could this circle be squared? Writing independently of each other, Matthew and Luke came up with completely different solutions. Matthew had the parents of Jesus living in Bethlehem and then moving to Nazareth, after a sojourn in Egypt, and Luke invented the absurd scenario of a census that forced a heavily pregnant woman to make a long and dangerous journey to Bethlehem from her home in Nazareth.

Efforts have been made to reconcile these two accounts and pretend that both could have happened, but these attempts are far from convincing.

St Paul

There can be very little doubt that Christianity would not have got going had it not been for St Paul. For one thing, it was his idea to spread the story of Jesus beyond the realm of Judaism, which is where some factions of the early Church thought it should stay. Without Paul, Christianity would have been nothing other than one more sect of Judaism.

It was Paul who developed the theology of Christianity, with the emphasis on belief as opposed to following rules or doing good works. According to Paul, belief in the fact that Jesus was the son of God, that his death relieved the faithful from the burden of sin, and that his resurrection from the dead opened the way for his followers to go to Heaven, was all that was necessary.

Given that Paul spread his message to places outside the immediate vicinity of Jerusalem, and to people who would otherwise never have heard of Jesus, he had free rein to tell potential converts whatever he wanted about Jesus as Messiah, and with little risk of being challenged about the details.

It is well known that many Jesus stories did the rounds in the early Church, and people have always loved to hear stories, whether true or not. The four Gospels, which were written after most of Paul’s letters had been sent to the young churches, were needed to scotch some of the more lurid tales and also put words into Jesus’s mouth. If people wanted something new other than Greek mysticism and Roman emperor-worship, Paul was pushing at an open door.

But was it all a massive confidence trick based on very little in the way of firm foundations?

The Christian Legacy

I am far from convinced that Christianity is anything other than a massive cloud floating on air. The very existence of Jesus is difficult to confirm, given that the evidence outside the texts of the New Testament is extremely sketchy and dubious.

However, the teachings of Christianity do merit serious attention. There can surely be nothing wrong in loving one’s neighbour, acting justly and forgiving one’s enemies. Beyond that, I find the package as offered very hard to accept.
© John Welford

Thor: the Norse thunder god





Norse mythology was alive and well in what is now Scandinavia (Denmark, Sweden, Norway and Iceland) until the 10th and 11th centuries, which is when Christianity finally ousted Paganism in the region. Many of the myths told of the doings of Thor.
Thor acted as the protector both of gods and men, sometimes appearing to be the equivalent of Heracles/Hercules in the Greek/Roman pantheon, and sometimes substituting for Zeus/Jupiter.
Thor was widely venerated as a thunder and lightning god, as well as the weather in general. His popularity can be seen in the many Scandinavian personal names that incorporate his name, such as Thorlakr and Thorleifr. 
In southern Germanic areas Thor was known as Donar, the Anglo-Saxons called him Donar, and in Viking Age Britain (8th to 11th centuries) he was Thur, which is why the day after Wednesday is Thursday!
Thor was seen as the protector of pagan people against the spread of Christianity, which is why Thor and his hammer often appeared on pagan gravestones.
© John Welford