Tabloid Bible-ism
Many people these days are very interested in their heritage and, so, study their genealogy to learn about the trunk and branches of their family trees. Some invest significant amounts of time, money, and travel in this exploration. Other folks scratch their heads about devoting so much to the pursuit of the past: and wonder, "Shouldn't we focus on the future or, at least, on the here and now?" The Bible itself directs Christians to avoid foolish and endless genealogies.
Why then do two of the gospels, Matthew and Luke, devote space to genealogies, what we sometimes have jokingly called the "Begatitudes?" St. Matthew gives two thirds of the first chapter of his gospel over to "Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren; and Judas begat…" (1: 2-3, King James Version) Apparently St. Matthew never took a class in creative writing or even journalism. He certainly doesn't seem to get the idea of using an interesting "hook" to grab the attention of readers and keep them from turning over to the Gospel of Mark. At least his litany of begatting wouldn't be considered much of a hook by today's standards. Still there must be something of value there for us, even today. Since St. Matthew took the trouble to include them, let's invest a few minutes of our own time in looking at these begats.
One thing which quickly becomes apparent is that this genealogy is primarily about men and their sons. This is not surprising given the highly patriarchal nature of the culture of that day. Noting this, though, draws our attention to the several exceptions in the genealogy.
The first one we encounter is in verse three. The New International Version reads, "Judah the father of Perez and Zerah, whose mother was Tamar" (1:3). The nutshell version of the story behind this verse is that Tamar posed as a prostitute in order to trick Judah into impregnating her to raise heirs for her deceased husband who was Judah's son because Judah didn't follow through on his obligation to her after her husband, his son, died. Get all that? Now that's one for the National Enquirer!
In verse five we read, "Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab." This woman wasn't even a Jew, so, how did she get to be in the genealogy of Jesus? Well she, who may also have been a prostitute--although some scholars say she was likely in a more reputable line of business--betrayed her king and people to harbor enemy spies. After her city fell (literally, it was Jericho) she was spared by the victorious Jews and rewarded with her life. She also had the distinction, although she wouldn't have lived to know it, of being the great-great-grandmother of the famous King David.
Still in verse five, we find Ruth listed as the mother of Obed. Ruth was a Moabitess. Moab was a pagan nation and Jews were repeatedly warned not to intermarry with them since this often lead to incorporating pagan practices into the religion of the Jews. In spite of her dubious heritage, though, Ruth becomes a foremother of Jesus.
In the following verse we read that Solomon--probably Israel's second most famous king--was the son of King David and that Solomon's mother was the woman who "had been Uriah's wife." Now Uriah was a Hittite and, though we don't know for sure, Bathsheba may have been one too. At the very least, she was the wife of a Hittite who may well have adopted his religion and religious practices. As with Moabites, Jews were warned not to intermarry with Hittites and, in this case, it is the King of Israel who's doing the marrying. Still, this intermarrying with pagan peoples pales in comparison to what Paul Harvey would call, "the rest of the story." If you turn from Matthew to the Old Testament book of 2 Samuel (chapters 11 and 12) you learn that David had his devoted servant, Uriah, killed in battle after sleeping with Uriah's wife Bathsheba so he could have her for himself.
Now there aren't any women noted in the remainder of St. Matthew's genealogy, but this doesn't mean that the scandals screech to a stop. Among the men who were kings of Israel after David were Rehoboam, Ahaz, and Manasseh. Among the other things the Bible records about their reigns is the fact that Rehoboam allowed pagan religious practices which included his subjects consorting with a group of male temple prostitutes. The Bible documents that Ahaz sacrificed his own son by burning him as an offering to a pagan god. Manasseh also sacrificed his son, practiced sorcery and divination, consulted mediums and spiritists, and even set up pagan idols in the very courts of God's temple in Jerusalem.
Now we're talking here about Jesus' family tree, albeit only his earthly one. No one who's ever been on the Jerry Springer show could hold a candle to Jesus when it comes to having a stunning set of reprehensible relatives.
What was God thinking when he sent angels to Joseph and Mary? Wasn't there a better family Jesus could have been born into? Wouldn't it make sense for the Savior of the World to not be associated with the likes of these?
Apparently God didn't think so and, when he grew up, Jesus showed the continuing influence of his Father. He was often found hanging out with an undesirable element. Among other things, he was called, "a friend of tax collectors and sinners."
You know what? God still doesn't think so. Jesus isn't satisfied with having a few black sheep in the family. He's constantly reaching out to people who don't honor their obligations; who lie, betray others, steal, have extramarital sex, kill, defile themselves, engage in witchcraft, worship other gods. He continues to invite us all to become part of the family; his brothers and sisters; sons and daughters of God.
St. Luke, that other genealogist gospel writer sums it up:
"For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost."
Luke 19:10
--Lee Lower
Why then do two of the gospels, Matthew and Luke, devote space to genealogies, what we sometimes have jokingly called the "Begatitudes?" St. Matthew gives two thirds of the first chapter of his gospel over to "Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren; and Judas begat…" (1: 2-3, King James Version) Apparently St. Matthew never took a class in creative writing or even journalism. He certainly doesn't seem to get the idea of using an interesting "hook" to grab the attention of readers and keep them from turning over to the Gospel of Mark. At least his litany of begatting wouldn't be considered much of a hook by today's standards. Still there must be something of value there for us, even today. Since St. Matthew took the trouble to include them, let's invest a few minutes of our own time in looking at these begats.
One thing which quickly becomes apparent is that this genealogy is primarily about men and their sons. This is not surprising given the highly patriarchal nature of the culture of that day. Noting this, though, draws our attention to the several exceptions in the genealogy.
The first one we encounter is in verse three. The New International Version reads, "Judah the father of Perez and Zerah, whose mother was Tamar" (1:3). The nutshell version of the story behind this verse is that Tamar posed as a prostitute in order to trick Judah into impregnating her to raise heirs for her deceased husband who was Judah's son because Judah didn't follow through on his obligation to her after her husband, his son, died. Get all that? Now that's one for the National Enquirer!
In verse five we read, "Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab." This woman wasn't even a Jew, so, how did she get to be in the genealogy of Jesus? Well she, who may also have been a prostitute--although some scholars say she was likely in a more reputable line of business--betrayed her king and people to harbor enemy spies. After her city fell (literally, it was Jericho) she was spared by the victorious Jews and rewarded with her life. She also had the distinction, although she wouldn't have lived to know it, of being the great-great-grandmother of the famous King David.
Still in verse five, we find Ruth listed as the mother of Obed. Ruth was a Moabitess. Moab was a pagan nation and Jews were repeatedly warned not to intermarry with them since this often lead to incorporating pagan practices into the religion of the Jews. In spite of her dubious heritage, though, Ruth becomes a foremother of Jesus.
In the following verse we read that Solomon--probably Israel's second most famous king--was the son of King David and that Solomon's mother was the woman who "had been Uriah's wife." Now Uriah was a Hittite and, though we don't know for sure, Bathsheba may have been one too. At the very least, she was the wife of a Hittite who may well have adopted his religion and religious practices. As with Moabites, Jews were warned not to intermarry with Hittites and, in this case, it is the King of Israel who's doing the marrying. Still, this intermarrying with pagan peoples pales in comparison to what Paul Harvey would call, "the rest of the story." If you turn from Matthew to the Old Testament book of 2 Samuel (chapters 11 and 12) you learn that David had his devoted servant, Uriah, killed in battle after sleeping with Uriah's wife Bathsheba so he could have her for himself.
Now there aren't any women noted in the remainder of St. Matthew's genealogy, but this doesn't mean that the scandals screech to a stop. Among the men who were kings of Israel after David were Rehoboam, Ahaz, and Manasseh. Among the other things the Bible records about their reigns is the fact that Rehoboam allowed pagan religious practices which included his subjects consorting with a group of male temple prostitutes. The Bible documents that Ahaz sacrificed his own son by burning him as an offering to a pagan god. Manasseh also sacrificed his son, practiced sorcery and divination, consulted mediums and spiritists, and even set up pagan idols in the very courts of God's temple in Jerusalem.
Now we're talking here about Jesus' family tree, albeit only his earthly one. No one who's ever been on the Jerry Springer show could hold a candle to Jesus when it comes to having a stunning set of reprehensible relatives.
What was God thinking when he sent angels to Joseph and Mary? Wasn't there a better family Jesus could have been born into? Wouldn't it make sense for the Savior of the World to not be associated with the likes of these?
Apparently God didn't think so and, when he grew up, Jesus showed the continuing influence of his Father. He was often found hanging out with an undesirable element. Among other things, he was called, "a friend of tax collectors and sinners."
You know what? God still doesn't think so. Jesus isn't satisfied with having a few black sheep in the family. He's constantly reaching out to people who don't honor their obligations; who lie, betray others, steal, have extramarital sex, kill, defile themselves, engage in witchcraft, worship other gods. He continues to invite us all to become part of the family; his brothers and sisters; sons and daughters of God.
St. Luke, that other genealogist gospel writer sums it up:
"For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost."
Luke 19:10
--Lee Lower
posted by L-Po @ 5:24 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home