daved@academy.westford.ccur.com (508-392-2990) (12/23/89)
(This is, unfortunately, very choppy in style. I chose
to throw it all open to discussion, rather than try to actually
compose these meanderings into a cogent essay, which would not
have arrived until way past Christmas).
In my first posting on this subject, discussing the Nativity stories
in Matthew and Luke with a view towards the ideas expressed by Joseph
Campbell in his PBS series with Bill Moyers, the Power of Myth,
I held forth that myth is a form in literature, which does not necessarily
imply untruth; that Luke certainly did not sit down to write myth,
at least as indicated by the literary style in his opening paragraphs;
and that Christians may choose to view the Nativity stories, and all
the other elements of the miraculous in the Gospels, as 'myth become fact.'
In my second discussion with my church group on this subject, we looked
at the 'Hero's Journey' tape. Jesus certainly is the hero of Matthew's
tale, in a broad sense. Matthew seems to use the form of 'midrash', a
sympathetic reflection on Scripture, in writing his gospel of the
coming of the Messiah. Matthew is much concerned with the fulfillment
of Messianic prophecy, and references many of the verses (from Isaiah,
for instance) that he sees as fulfilled in the life of Jesus. For my
own part, I can make no defense of the historicity of either the Slaughter
of the Innocents, or the visit of the Magi, except to say that it is
not nonsensical to say they were overlooked or unheard of by Josephus.
I can defend them as midrash. It is also true that the canonical Nativity
stories have analogues in non-Christian and Christian apocryphal
stories.
In my third and last discussion with our group, we looked that the
tape, 'Love and the Goddess' which has an extensive discussion of
'virgin births' in the myths. I use quotes around v.b. because the
Gospel stories do not seem to me to be a straight analog to the other
miraculous births in the myths I know. The sexual element (Leda and
the swan) is absent from the Gospels, but present everywhere else.
Buddha's birth story, though miraculous, includes a normal conception
by human parents.
The Christology of the Virgin Birth is rather complex, but important
to why, I think, it was included in the two Gospels and in the Nicene
creed. It argues against docetism, it indicates a unique and divine
origin for Jesus, and it indicates the beginning of a new covenant,
pointing to Jesus as a new Adam and a new Moses (typologically).
My conclusions: as Christians, we can use Campbell's ideas, and
other explorers like him, to deepen and inform our understanding of
our stories of Jesus. Campbell's insights, however, give us no
information whatever as to the basis in fact of these stories; our
decisions about that come from a different area within ourselves and
from our communities. We ought not to confuse ourselves, or anybody
else, with the logical fallacy of reductionism; which means letting
slide statements of the form: "Your belief A is *nothing but* B."
In this case, it is nonsensical for folks to claim, "The Gospel
stories are nothing but myth," - this shows a near-total
misunderstanding of what myth is, what the Gospels are, and what they
have to do with each other.
Dave Davis daved@westford.ccur.com
'For we also are his children.' {harvard,uunet,petsd}!masscomp!daved