The Fully Human Christ

Consider the following scenario:

You're a member of the very early church, around 80 CE.

Jesus was murdered about 50 years prior. So if you were a contemporary of his, you'd be quite old for the time - around 70-80 years of age. Or you might be a 2nd generation follower of Christ.

You want to write a testament to Jesus's life and legacy, and portray your understanding of his teaching. So, you sit down to paint a literary portrait - a true work of art - that is your best attempt to do justice to the meaning of Jesus's life and teaching.

As a follower of "the Way" within the Jewish faith (which is how the early Christians were known within the synagogue), tensions have been developing and are quickly accelerating within the synagogue community.

The Temple has recently been destroyed and the Jews are at violent odds with the Romans.

As a follower of the Way, existential threat exists from all sides. Meanwhile the new faith, which will become known as Christianity, is still trying to build it's roots and teach the gospel that Jesus of Nazareth was and is the Christ (or Messiah).

However, detractors exist. Not everyone, by any means, is accepting the revelation that the recently murdered Jesus is somehow resurrected to life and is the true Messiah that the Jewish messianic believers have been waiting for.

The expectation of this Messiah was to establish a kingdom of wealth and riches. They expected their enemies to be expelled from the territory. They expected the earthly Kingdom of God to be established.

But nearly the opposite of that expectation has become reality. The Temple has been destroyed. The Jewish community is at the spear tip of the Romans. Its mere existence is being threatened. And here you are proclaiming as the Messiah, a teacher who was executed by the Romans a generation and a half ago.

And in addition to not fulfilling those expectations, are criticisms and speculation in regards to the legitimacy of your proclaimed Messiah's birth.

Many are saying that he's not Joseph's child. Which creates two problems:

How could the expected Messiah be born from illegitimate intercourse - whether it was an affair or the result of something more sinister, such as rape.
The Messiah is supposed to be of Davidic lineage - a child born within the genealogy of King David. If the child is not Joseph's, this breaks the Davidic line. Joseph is supposedly from the line of David and if Jesus is not Joseph's child, then he cannot be of Davidic lineage, and therefore cannot be the Messiah.

So, there's an issue that needs to be dealt with here.

But the teaching that you've received as a follower of the Way, paints a different picture of the expected Messiah and the kingdom that he is to establish.

You've come to understand that it is not an earthly kingdom that is G-d's kingdom, but a spiritual one. You understand that the kingdom will not be full of human bodies, but of eternal consciousness (or souls, if you prefer). You understand that the power of G-d is displayed more greatly by working through the imperfection of human beings rather than by their strength.

So you begin writing your testament of Jesus's life and teaching (your gospel as it will come to be known) by facing these detractors head on.

You establish first, the genealogy of Jesus, showing his connection to the origin of the Jewish faith and the Hebrew people. From the Promise to Abraham to the kingdom of David. From the kingdom of David to the Babylonian exile. From the exile to the Eternal Kingdom of G-d brought forth through the Christ.

And in that genealogy which is written (mostly) according to the norms of patriarchic society, you do something very odd, but very clever, and very bold.

You add women.

And not just any women. Five specific women.

You begin your work with force. By inserting women into the genealogy of Jesus, you make a loud statement. (A statement that has been largely ignored to this day. But one that must be heard and understood if one is to understand the true gospel message.)

The five women you choose are ones well known to your readers:

Tamar, Rahab (the prostitute), Ruth, the wife of Uriah (whose name is Bathsheba), and Mary the mother of Jesus.

If you're unfamiliar with these women's stories, I encourage you to go read them.

Tamar's story of tricking her father-in-law into impregnating her by pretending to be a prostitute so that justice can be served to her, is found in Genesis 38.

Rahab's story of hiding Joshua's spies in her brothel in order to save them, which resulted in her own salvation, can be found in Joshua 2.

Ruth's tale of subtle and opportunistic seduction, and her ultimate redemption can be found in the succinct book that bears her name.

And the story of Uriah's wife, Bathsheba, can be found in 2 Samuel 11. King David calls for the wife of one of his soldiers (who is off fighting a battle) to his quarters after seeing her bathing from his rooftop. He has sex with her. Impregnates her. And then tries to cover it up by calling the soldier Uriah back for leave so that he might have sex with Bathsheba and conclude the child is his own. But Uriah's dedication to his fellow soldiers does not allow him to seek any pleasure while his fellow soldiers are still in battle. So he sleeps outside in a tent. David's plan now foiled, he sends Uriah off to the front lines to be killed. David takes in Bathsheba as a wife, the child dies as declared by the prophet Nathan, and justice is served. However, their next child is Solomon. And it is through Solomon that G-d builds his earthly Temple.

It's an odd way to start your gospel message if you're only trying to establish that Jesus's genealogy goes back to Abraham.

It would be very easy - and very normal - not to include these women and the stories they represent in the introduction of your work.

But it is as if the writer wants to make a statement to these detractors of the Way.

It is as if he is saying to the critics, "your disbelief about Jesus as the Messiah is nothing more than your limited perception of the power of G-d. It is G-d alone who is good. It is G-d who lifts up. It is G-d who works for the good of those who love G-d. And it is your limited faith in the power of G-d that keeps your eyes shut to seeing the truth that Jesus is the Messiah. You don't simply doubt us, you doubt G-d!"

It was G-d who worked through the incest of Tamar to bring justice.

It was G-d who worked through the prostitute, Rahab, to show faithfulness.

It was G-d who used the seduction and humility of Ruth to bring redemption.

It was G-d who through adultery and murder showed his justice, but also provided a son to David and Bathsheba who would ultimately go on to build G-d's earthly Temple.

And it is G-d, who through the circumstances of the fifth woman - Mary - whatever those circumstances might have been, that brought forth the Messiah, the Christ, into the world. And it is this man Jesus, who would go on to teach the Way to eternal life and (re)union with G-d. It would be G-d, working through this man Jesus, who would establish the true, eternal Promised Land and fulfill for all time, the original promise to Abraham.

Skillfully, tactfully, and boldly the writing that we now call the Gospel of Matthew opens. Not hiding from conflict, but meeting it head on with force and artful mastery. He tells his critics that the true reason you cannot accept Jesus as the Messiah is not because of the circumstances around his conception, but your lack of faith in the power of G-d.

If we are willing to understand, we can see the message that the writer of Matthew is crying out:

There is no circumstance that is beyond the power of G-d to redeem.

There is nothing you, or I, or anyone can ever do that will put us outside the reach of the love of G-d.

This is how the masterful writer chooses to introduce his testament to the life and teaching of Jesus, the Christ. Not hiding from controversy, but acknowledging it and telling the world that regardless of the circumstances around his birth, it is the nature of G-d to use dire situations to express his power and love.

An Earlier Gospel

Whoever wrote The Gospel According to Matthew was by no means the first writer to attempt to provide an account of the life of Jesus of Nazareth and the essence of his teaching. Even though Matthew appears first in your Bible, there was an earlier text that predates Matthew by about 10-15 years. This is The Gospel According to Mark.

The writer of Matthew actually uses much of Mark in his writing. Mark was likely in circulation and used in the synagogue to teach, so the writer of Matthew would have had access and knowledge of Mark's contents. In fact, the majority of biblical scholars confirm that over 90% of Mark's gospel narrative is included in Matthew.

So, it would make sense for us to take a peak at Mark to see if there are any references to a miraculous virgin birth. Such an event and pivotal moment would surely be included in Mark's account if it is essential to the establishment of Jesus as the Christ.

Looking at Mark's gospel, what do we find in regards to a virgin conception?

Nothing. He never mentions it.

Odd, no? If it were such a well-known part of his life and common to the teaching of the Way, one would assume that this monumental and miraculous account of a virgin conceiving a child through the Spirit of G-d, would be included in every teaching about the significance of Jesus's life.

But it's not.

So, let's take a look at what is included:

Mark 1:9:11, was baptized by John and then anointed with the Holy Spirit (not before).
Mark 2:12-13, spent time in the wilderness and needed angels to minister to him.
Mark 2:28, identifies as the Son of Man (although he is talking here about the broader humanity, not just himself, but it includes himself in that fold)
Mark 2:32, he has brothers and sisters.
Mark 3:21, as he is teaching, people are gathering around, and he’s speaking presumably in parables or interpreting Scripture, his family members see this and declare “he is out of his mind.” That hardly seems like the reaction of people who were aware of his divine origin.
Mark 6:3, he had a job, and is the “son of Mary” (which is a term of derision - men were not referred to as the son of their mother, but the son of their father), has at least 4 brothers who are named, and an unknown number of sisters who were not named.
Mark 9:37, whoever receives such as child, receives me, but not me, him who sent me.
Mark 10:17-18, “why do you call me ‘good’? No one is good except God alone.”
Mark 14:32-39, “sit here while I pray”, “My soul is sorrowful, even to death”, “Remove this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will.”
Persistent references of himself as the “Son of Man”
Mark 15:39, “truly this man was a son of God”

Each one of these points can be further expounded upon. And I encourage you to go read the passages of scripture for yourself. Read the surrounding context.

What I believe you'll come to understand is that the writer of Mark, the earliest gospel that is known and accepted in Christianity, understands Jesus of Nazareth not as a person literally born of G-d, but as a human who transcended the limitations of his humanity to become a son of G-d through the elevation of his conscious mind into the consciousness of G-d and thereby being reborn as a son of G-d. Born through a virgin consciousness.

Born of a Woman, Born Under the Law

There was an even earlier author who's work has been accepted into the canon of Scripture - the Apostle Paul. Paul is in fact the earliest producer of Christian documents that we have. He wrote from around year 50 CE to the mid-60's. He was not a direct disciple of Jesus but claims to have had some encounter with the "risen" Christ, whether that was a vision or dream or enlightenment, I doubt we'll ever know for sure.

But he was a zealous teacher and preacher of the gospel of Christ. He was responsible for expanding Christianity to the surrounding Greek cultures - the Gentiles - who were outside the fold of Judaism.

Paul provided us with the earliest description that we have of Jesus's birth. It can be found in a letter he wrote to the church in Galatia. He penned these words somewhere between 49 CE and the early 50's. Predating the writing of Matthew and the writing of Mark.

Here's what he says in Galatians 4:4, "But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons."

That's it. Born of a woman. Born under the law.

No visitation from angels. No vision in a dream. No wise men following a star. No virgin conception. No virgin birth.

It would appear as though he has no knowledge whatsoever of the miraculous origin story of what we call the virgin birth.

The Fully Human Christ

What are we to make of all this? How does it impact the teaching of mainstream Christianity? What does it mean to our understanding of the true gospel message?

As I've shown, the earliest writer, Paul, makes no mention of a virgin birth. Neither does the second earliest, the author of Mark. The writer of Matthew, does tell a story of virgin conception, but only by way of misinterpreting a passage from Isaiah; and only after showing that G-d can use any circumstance to bring forth redemption by the inclusion of Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba into the genealogy of Jesus.

I'll mention that writer of the fourth gospel, The Gospel According to John, also makes no mention of a virgin birth story.

So, of the five earliest writers about the message and life of Christ, the writer of Matthew is the first to mention a virgin birth and only does so after making a profound statement in his genealogy. The author of Luke also tells a virgin birth narrative, but the vast majority of scholars agree that it is a replication and expansion of Matthew's story.

Judging analytically, it's hard to come to a conclusion other than that the virgin birth story was an invention of the writer of Matthew, told allegorically to proclaim the uniqueness of the person of Jesus and need for a rebirth of the mind through a virgin consciousness that is not defiled by the things of the lower mind, but born of G-d.

But why do we find this challenging to accept? One reason is that it's not what the church has largely taught. They've taught a literal conception of the teaching of the Bible. They've traditionally ignored the deeper, allegorical meaning of the true gospel message.

The other reason is that it is intimate. A gospel message that is centered on the rebirth of your very own conscious mind, exposes you to deep vulnerability. Your salvation and redemption did not occur in some far off place thousands of years ago.

It is happening here.

It is happening now.

It is happening in the place that is closer to you than your own breath.

It happens in the very seat of consciousness by which you perceive and understand the world and your existence.

And that's hard to accept. It's somewhat imposing, even. There's nothing more real to us than our very awareness. We are nothing if we are not that.

And it is in this most intimate place, this most vulnerable place, that G-d has determined to save you. By the renewal of your conscious mind. It's the true Holy of Holies where G-d resides.

In John 3:3 Jesus says, "unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."

In Romans 12:2, Paul encourages his readers, "Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect."

The overwhelming call of the gospel of Christ is to be transformed at the core of your very being. To be renewed. To be reborn in the seat of your conscious mind. One with Christ. One with G-d. Restored and redeemed. Fully alive. Fully human.

So, I implore you to sit, meditate, quiet your mind, and ask G-d to show him/her/itself to you. If you seek, you will find. But you must go inward. This is the Way of Christ.