Image courtesy of Flickr user woodleywonderworks.
The celebration of the birth of Messiah is not a sacrament. It is not doctrinal. It is neither sanctioned nor is it prescribed by the Bible. In fact, for a majority of Protestant history, Christmas was considered to be a pagan celebration of the Catholic Church. From Calvin, to Jonathan Edwards, many Church leaders have recognized this point, not only did they refuse to celebrate Christmas, but they were stalwart in their opposition to it.
In America, the Puritans, like the reformers themselves, abhorred the celebration of Christmas such that they made it specifically illegal.
"For preventing disorders, arising in several places within this jurisdiction by reason of some still observing such festivals as were superstitiously kept in other communities, to the great dishonor of God and offense of others: it is therefore ordered by this court and the authority thereof that whosoever shall be found observing any such day as Christmas or the like, either by forbearing of labor, feasting, or any other way, upon any such account as aforesaid, every such person so offending shall pay for every such offence five shilling as a fine to the county."
From the records of the General Court,
Massachusetts Bay Colony
May 11, 1659
However, other respected Church leaders like Luther and Charles Spurgeon, allowed for this celebration notwithstanding its fundamentally pagan roots. Spurgeon, in his 1871 sermon on Christmas, said:
"We have no superstitious regard for times and seasons. Certainly we do not believe in the present ecclesiastical arrangement called Christmas: first, because we do not believe in the mass at all, but abhor it, whether it be said or sung in Latin or in English; and, secondly, because we find no Scriptural warrant whatever for observing any day as the birthday of the Saviour; and, consequently, its observance is a superstition, because not of divine authority... It was not till the middle of the third century that any part of the church celebrated the nativity of our Lord; and it was not till very long after the Western church had set the example, that the Eastern adopted it.... Nevertheless since, the current of men's thoughts is led this way just now, and I see no evil in the current itself, I shall launch the bark of our discourse upon that stream, and make use of the fact, which I shall neither justify nor condemn, by endeavoring to lead your thoughts in the same direction. Since it is lawful, and even laudable, to meditate upon the incarnation of the Lord upon any day in the year, it cannot be in the power of other men's superstitions to render such a meditation improper for to-day. Regarding not the day, let us, nevertheless, give God thanks for the gift of his dear son."Therefore, since its widespread acceptance among Evangelicals, the celebration of Christmas has become an important tool in emphasizing the veracity and import of the gospel message: that God sent His only begotten Son to die as a ransom for many in order to establish for Himself the Kingdom of Heaven. Right or wrong, the story of the conception and birth of the Lion of Judah remains known as the “Christmas story.”
That being said, I think that the significance of God’s ingress into time and space cannot be overstated. The entirety of the gospel hinges on the authenticity of this truth-claim. If Jesus did not fulfill every prophecy that foretold Messiah, then He was not Messiah. One prophecy in particular has stood out to me this year:
Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel.” Isaiah 7:14 (NASB)NOTE: I understand that there is some ambiguity in the translation for the word "virgin" in this passage. This word may very well have a double meaning: (1) "A young woman of marrying age" in reference to Isaiah's wife, AND (2) "a virgin" since the gospels explicitly affirm the virgin birth. We must always use the entire context of the Bible when interpreting Scripture. Therefore, I believe that this prophecy had a typological fulfillment in the time of Isaiah, but its ultimate fulfillment was in the virgin birth of Messiah.
What is the significance of the virgin birth? Is it just to affirm the deity of Christ or is there some ancillary meaning associated with Messiah being born of a virgin?
Before we delve into these questions, let us revisit Jesus’
conception.
And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus… The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God.” Luke 1:31,35 (ESV)
I think most Orthodox Christians would affirm that Yeshua
was indeed virgin born, that it happened to fulfill Isaiah’s prophecy, and that
it confirms His identity as Immanuel (God with us). But I think that there is
much more to God’s decision to send Messiah in this way. In fact, I think this
was the only way Messiah could have come. This
thought originates from the book of Leviticus:
“For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life… 14For the life of every creature is its blood: its blood is its life. Therefore I have said to the people of Israel, You shall not eat the blood of any creature, for the life of every creature is its blood. Whoever eats it shall be cut off.” Leviticus 17:11, 14 (ESV) (emphasis added).
As the Bible articulates it, life is within the blood. When
God breathed into the nostrils of His first human, life was infused into his
bloodstream and he became a living being. Today we understand blood to be,
“the fluid circulating through the heart, arteries, capillaries, and veins, carrying nutriment and oxygen to body cells, and removing waste products and carbon dioxide. It consists of the liquid portion (the plasma) and the formed elements (erythrocytes, leukocytes, and platelets).”[1]
Accordingly, the Leviticus passage does an
adequate job of relating the anthropological and theological origin story found
in Genesis
2:7 to the actual biological processes found within the human body.
Life is contained within the blood. The blood carries fresh
oxygen from the lungs to the body and removes that which is toxic as it leaves.
Blood makes life possible. According to the Genesis account, not only do our
bodies run on oxygen just as the animals do, but there is also a transcendent
component to the breath in our lungs that separates us from them.[2]However, there’s something else to know about Adam:
the origin and meaning of his name. This statement may seem odd, but I think it
is vitally important to the theological underpinnings of the New Testament.
Below is a chart of two Hebrew words. The first is the Hebrew word for blood.
The second is the Hebrew name, Adam.
Strong’s
H1818 – dam (Blood)
דָּם
|
Strong’s
H120 – ‘adam (Adam)
אָדָם
|
||
Transliteration
dam
|
Phonetic Pronunciation
dawm
|
Transliteration
‘adam
|
Phonetic Pronunciation
aw-dawm
|
Outline of Biblical Usage
|
Outline of Biblical Usage
Etymology: From אָדַם (H119) which
means red
|
||
Firstly, notice that “Adam” comes from a very similar root
that means “red,” the color of blood. In gematria, א represents the number 1. Adam’s
name is the word “blood” with an additional letter at the beginning (Hebrew
reads from right to left). That extra letter is “Aleph.” It is the first letter of
the Hebrew alphabet. Also, this letter happens to have special significance. To
the Hebrews, their alphabet served also as a numbering system. From the
earliest Jewish traditions, gematria has
played a special role in understanding concepts within words or
phrases. I am not suggesting that there are “Bible-codes” or
anything of the sort. I’m simply saying that for millennia, Jews have used
their alphabet to express numeric values, especially within the scriptures to
help them better understand the concepts that God relays through them.
What makes this so interesting to me is how poignantly
meticulous God is in His redemptive plan from the very beginning. In summation:
- The
name, Adam, comes from a root that means red, which is the color of blood
and it’s spelling is almost identical.
- Adam
consists of the word “blood” and the letter aleph, which represents the
number 1.
- Several
scriptures, including 1
Corinthians 15:45 and Romans
5:14 show a special connection between the first man of creation
and the firstborn over all creation.
This information together leads me to believe that God
placed something beautiful in Adam’s name. I think that, in addition to its
plain meaning, “Adam” means: First Blood. Adam is the
beginning of the human race. We all come from common blood. We all share some
of the life that was breathed into the veins of Adam by God himself. Adam was a
type, his anti-type being Christ. This by itself is a beautiful thought,
but it is focused on humanity as much as it is God.
What effect did The Fall have?
Genesis 3 recounts The Fall of man. In it we see death instituted as a consequence for disobedience. In addition, the Bible paints the picture of The Fall in such a way that it serves to condemn every individual, and it does so in a very peculiar way. Here are a few verses to illustrate the point.
|
|
This Romans passage affirms, like many others, that the
consequence of The Fall rests on us all. It rests on us from birth. If both my
parents are sinful to the core, then I will necessarily be corrupted from
conception. Why? Because the life in my veins was created through the union of
my parents. When a man and a woman conceive a child, the child is an
amalgamation of the genetic material of the parents. This unification of
genetic material, borrowing from the two sets to create one, renders a unique DNA
set. The Fall of man effected humanity to its core. It corrupted the pure life
that God breathed into Adam and his wife, who would only now (after The Fall)
be called Eve because she was to become the mother of all the living.
It is an established physiological fact that the mother’s
blood is neither the source nor supply of the blood in
the unborn infant’s veins.[3] Without the vital contribution of the male no
blood could be produced because the female, of herself, does not produce the
elements essential for the production of new blood. Gray’s Anatomy, a
recognized medical authority, states:
The fetal and maternal blood currents traverse the placenta, the former passing through the blood vessels of the placental villi and the latter through the intervillous space. The two currents do not intermingle, being separated from each other by the delicate walls of the villi. Nevertheless, the fetal blood is able to absorb, through the walls of the villi, oxygen and nutritive materials from the maternal blood, and give up to the latter its waste products.”[4]
Therefore, it is only the contribution of the male which
leads to the development of new blood. While the female’s ovum is the basis for
the production of human flesh, it is the male’s introduction of sperm that
allows for the creation of life according to the understanding of life from the
Leviticus passage above. This biological fact renders Christ’s virgin birth
essential to His efficacy as a blood sacrifice that could actually serve to
remove sin from humanity.[5]
The blood of animals cannot take away the sins of men. Hebrews 10:4 (NASB)
I think the passage below shows the clearest picture of the
significance of the virgin birth of Jesus and how the biological aspects of
blood are pivotal in understanding how Christ, as the second Adam, could be
sinless despite taking on flesh.
Hebrews 2:14 (NASB) Therefore, since the
children share (koinōneō) in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also
partook of the same, that through death He might render powerless him who had
the power of death, that is, the devil,
|
Hebrews 2:14 (KJV) Forasmuch then as the
children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part
of (metechō) the same; that through death he might destroy him that had
the power of death, that is, the devil;
|
Koinōneō
|
Metechō
|
God has often worked through a child whose existence is
impossible. Notice here that the “children,” that is the human children, are
said to be partakers of flesh and blood. Then speaking of
Jesus, the King James says that He “himself likewise took part of the same.”
The Greek word rendered “took part of the same” (KJV), as applying to
Christ, is an entirely different word than “share” (NASB) as applied to
the children. The Greek word for partakers is κοινωνέω (koinōneō) and means “to
share fully,” so that all of Adam’s children share fully in Adam’s flesh
and blood. When we read that Jesus “took part of the same” the word
is μετέχω (metechō), which means to take “part”, but not all. This word implies
“taking part in something outside one’s self.” So whereas the Children
take both flesh and blood of Adam, Christ (the second Adam) took
only part, that is the flesh (from his mother), while the blood was the result
of supernatural conception. As Timothy Keller points out in
His commentary on the Book of Judges:
The Old Testaments births occurred in the shadow of disgrace (the mother being in a state of barrenness ), but Christ’s birth brought disgrace upon both mother and Son. And out of His disgrace, He brought the fullness of the grace of God to mankind.”
Jesus was a perfect human being.[6] He was of the seed of David according to the
flesh,[7]but His blood is that part which was the divine
addition. This allowed for His physical conception with uncorrupted blood.
In the creation of man, Adam’s body was made from the dust of the earth and God
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life.[8]The first Adam’s blood was corrupted and sin
transmitted through it to all mankind. In the last Adam, a new and divine and
sinless blood was produced in a body that was still the seed of Adam. This
resulted in the production of a new, uncorrupted human bloodline.[9] For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ
shall all be made alive.1
Corinthians 15:22 (ESV)
Mary contributed the body of Jesus. The Holy Spirit
contributed the Blood of Jesus.It was Divine blood. It was pure, sinless blood.
It was truly innocent blood. And it was specifically prepared to be spilled by
those for whom it was made to save.
Whatever has a defect, you shall not offer, for it will not be accepted for you. Leviticus 22:20
Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.Hebrews 9:22 (ESV)
Jesus had to be fully human so as to be an appropriate blood
sacrifice, but he also had to have uncorrupted blood so as to be our Savior.
Knowing that you were not redeemed with perishable things like silver or gold from your futile way of life inherited from your forefathers, but with precious blood, as of a lamb unblemished and spotless, the blood of Christ. 1 Peter 1:18-19
Conception by the Holy Ghost, then, was the only way justice
could be fully administered and salvation fully accomplished. And so,
Jesus, the second Adam and first-born from among the dead, accomplished on the
cross what could only have started in the womb of a virgin.
Grace to you and peace, from Him who is and who was and who is to come, and from the seven Spirits who are before His throne, and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To Him who loves us and released us from our sins by His blood— and He has made us to be a kingdom, priests to His God and Father—to Him be the glory and the dominion forever and ever. Amen. Revelation 1:4-6 (NASB)
[1] “ Blood,” Dorland’s Medical Dictionary for Health
Consumers, 2007.
[2] The phrase “breath of life” (Hebrew: נשמה חי nĕshamah chay)
is different from the similarly translated Hebrew phrase: רוח חי ruwach chay (See,
Genesis 7:15), which signifies the general “breath of life” which animals also
possess. It appears that the breath of life in this passage is used exclusively
for God or humankind, which bolsters the proposition that mankind, as made in
the image of God (Genesis 1:26), is a distinct being that is fundamentally
different from the animal kingdom. Even Deuteronomy 20:16, using the Hebrew
phrase כֹּל נשמה kol nĕshamah (suggesting
literally “everything that breathes”), is clarified by verse 17, elucidating
that the passage is specifically talking about the people groups of the
Promised Land. See also Genesis 1:2, which uses kol to
signify everything within a specific subset of the animals consistent with this
interpretation.
[3] Howell’s Textbook of Physiology, Second Edition,
pages 885 and 886, Williams’ Practice of Obstetrics, Third Ed. page
133, Louise Zabriskie, R.N., Nurse’s Handbook of Obstetrics, Fifth
Ed. p. 75.
[4] The Bartleby.com edition of Gray’s Anatomy of the
Human Body.http://education.yahoo.com/reference/gray/subjects/subject/12 (emphasis
added)
This post has been republished from my personal blog.
No comments:
Post a Comment