JESUS CHRIST

In the providence of God, the marvelous testimony of Simeon was not to stand alone. Anna, an aged widow, a devout and saintly woman who worshiped constantly in the temple with fasting and prayer both day and night, now approached the holy family. As Simeon was a prophet, so she was a prophetess, and her voice now joined his as a special witness of the birth of Jesus Christ. Anna, whose name means “full of grace,” bore testimony to all Jerusalem who “looked for redemption” (Luke 2:38). Through the countless hours she had spent within the walls of the temple, she was undoubtedly well known to those of the holy city who also faithfully sought the coming of the Messiah. All such would hear her testimony of His birth (see Luke 2:36-38).

Sperry Symposium Classics, Joseph Fielding McConkie, 2006, Brigham Young University & Deseret Book, 115-116.

We have no scriptural record of any words spoken by Joseph, the foster father of Jesus Christ. Despite the lack of words, Joseph’s testimony as to Jesus Christ’s divine sonship is most eloquent. He was, as we are told, a “just man,” meaning that he lived the law of Moses with exactness and honor. We know that he dreamed dreams and entertained angels. Further, we know that he was faithful in keeping the law of Moses, so he faithfully heeded each divine direction that was given to him. Surely his unquestioning obedience is evidence of belief. It included taking Mary, who carried another’s child as his wife, and knowing “her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son,” naming Him Jesus, fleeing by night with Mary and the holy child to Egypt, remaining in Egypt until directed to return, and then living in Galilee rather than Judea upon their return (see Matthew 1:19-21, 25; 2:13-23). Each action witnessed anew Joseph’s conviction that this child was indeed the Hope of Israel, the Son of God.

Sperry Symposium Classics, Joseph Fielding McConkie, 2006, Brigham Young University & Deseret Book, 112.

There could be no more perfect mortal witness of Christ’s divine sonship than His mother, Mary. From Gabriel she received the promise that she would conceive in her womb “the Son of the Highest” (Luke 1:32). Following that marvelous event, she testified, “He that is mighty hath done to me great things; and holy is his name” (Luke 1:49). Nephi gave the most perfect scriptural account of this sacred event. Our eternal Father, he told us, condescended–that is, He came down from His royal court on high and in union with the beautiful virgin girl of Nazareth fathered a son “after the manner of the flesh” (1 Nephi 11:18). “And it came to pass,” Nephi wrote, “that I beheld that . . . after she had been carried away in the spirit for the space of a time the angel spake unto me, saying: Look! And I looked and beheld the virgin again, bearing a child in her arms. And the angel said unto me: Behold the Lamb of God, yea, even the son of the Eternal Father!” (1 Nephi 11:19-21). Alma, testifying of the birth of Christ, said, “He shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God” (Alma 7:10).

Sperry Symposium Classics, Joseph Fielding McConkie, 2006, Brigham Young University & Deseret Book, 112.

The Greek word apokrypha means “hidden writings.” Clement of Alexandria uses it in this literal sense (Stromateis 1.15.69.9). But, for the most part, ancient Christian authors used it to refer to writings of their opponents, which they considered spurious. Clement says that his opponents “derived their doctrines from an apocryphal work. . . . where they have taken a sound doctrine and perversely misapplied it” (Stromateis 4.29). Ireneaus describes “apocryphal writings” as texts written by his opponents “who are ignorant of the Scriptures of truth” (Against Heresies 1.20.1). Tertullian refused to acknowledge teachings from the Shepherd of Hermas because it did not “find a place in the Divine canon” and “had been habitually judged by every council of Churches. . . among apocryphal and false (writing)” (On Modesty 10.6). The phrase New Testament Apocrypha was not used in antiquity. Instead, it is a modern umbrella title referring to a wide variety of Christian texts that ultimately were not included in the New Testament canon.

For the most part, scholars follow the three categories of New Testament apocrypha used by Wilhelm Schneemelcher: 1) Gospels, which include non-biblical material about the life of Jesus; 2) writings related to the apostles; 3) apocalypses and related subjects.[1] Some of the apocryphal gospels, such as The Gospel of the Nazareans and The Gospel of the Ebionites are known today only because ancient Christian authors quoted them in their extant writings. Some, such as The Gospel of Thomas and The Gospel of Judas, were mentioned in ancient sources, but have only recently been discovered. Some texts, such as The Acts of Thomas, were used by both “orthodox” and “heterodox” groups.

In recent years, scholars have reexamined the role the New Testament apocrypha for understanding ancient Christianity. The more traditional view has been to study them to determine what light they shed on the development of the Christian church, with particular attention to how they compare with the texts that were later canonized. However a recent growing trend is to study these texts in their own right and let them speak independently about the diversity of expressions concerning what it meant to be a Christian in antiquity.

“About a dozen noncanonical gospels were known in the 2d century and . . . the evidence for these apocryphal writings compares quite well with the evidence for the canonical gospels. The attestations do not support a distinction between canonical and apocryphal gospels. Writings of both categories were used and are referred to quite early and often by the same writers.” Helmut Koester is the John H. Morison Research Professor of Divinity and Win Research Professor of Ecclesiastical History at Harvard Divinity School.

Helmut Koester, “Apocryphal and Canonical Gospels,” Harvard Theological Review 73 (1980): 110.

“The value in exerting effort to understand apocryphal literature is twofold: first, once we understand the compositional situation surrounding an apocryphal text, we can then ascertain its potential to preserve credible information about Jesus or the Church that He founded. Second, once we understand how the document impacted Christian communities, we can begin to discern the historical development of the Apostasy within those communities.” Thomas Wayment is an Associate Professor of Ancient Scripture at Brigham Young University.

Thomas A. Wayment, “False Gospels: An Approach to Studying the New Testament Apocrypha,” in How the New Testament Came to Be (ed. Kent P. Jackson and Frank F. Judd, Jr.; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2006), 294.

---

[1] See Wilhelm Schneemelcher, ed., New Testament Apocrypha, 2 vols. (rev. ed.; trans. R. McL. Wilson; Louisville, KY: Westminster/ John Knox Press, 1992).

The New Testament used the term in an eschatological sense to refer to the glorious return of Jesus Christ (see 1 Corinthians 15:23, “coming”). The Greek term means “being present” and was adopted for the state visit of a Roman emperor.

Of the four gospels, only Matthew and Luke give an account of the Jesus Christ’s conception and birth. Written from two different perspectives and containing different details, these two narratives complement each other and together paint an important picture of the nativity, including that Jesus’ mother was named Mary, that she lived at one time in Nazareth, that he would be born near Jerusalem, and that his conception was a divine miracle.

Although Matthew testifies that Mary conceived by the power of God, he emphasizes that Jesus Christ was the son of David by the genealogy at the beginning of the birth narrative and by his focus on the role of Joseph, Jesus’ legal father. Through dreams, Joseph received instructions to wed Mary, accept and name the infant Jesus, and move the family when threatened by Herod and then his son Archelaus. Through the use of quotations from the Old Testament, Matthew further demonstrates how Jesus Christ’s birth fulfilled messianic prophecies.

Luke’s account, on the other hand, frequently illustrates Mary’s perspective and includes more personal and family information. His retelling of the annunciation preserves the stirring angelic instruction that Mary received, and her visit to Elizabeth provided both of them with spiritual confirmations regarding the roles their sons would play. In addition to details of the night of Jesus’ birth, Luke’s narrative also includes accounts of the naming and circumcision of Jesus, his presentation in the temple, and his teaching in the temple as a twelve-year-old.

Some of the aspects of the two narratives that traditional tellings of the Christmas story frequently harmonize provide interesting details when read separately. Matthew gives no indication that Joseph himself was from Nazareth, perhaps suggesting that he or his family were from Bethlehem or owned property there, the traditional home of King David, or that Mary was from Bethlehem, perhaps owning land there. In Luke’s account, when Joseph took Mary to Bethlehem shortly after their marriage, their accommodations seemed improvised. Interestingly, the word katalyma, traditionally translated as “inn” and often interpreted to mean a caravansary or camp, can also mean “guest room” (the other time Luke uses this word, it is for the “upper room” of the Last Supper in Luke 22:11-12). Luke’s account features angels and shepherds, who find the child in the well-known manger, whereas Matthew’s account has the Magi arrive later, and they find the family by that time living in an actual house.

Joseph seems to have intended to keep the family in Bethlehem, leaving only when warned that Herod wanted to kill the child. Herod’s death in 4 B.C. helps date the account, for that is when Joseph brought the family back from Egypt to Nazareth. Finding Herod’s unstable son Archelaus ruling in Judea, Joseph, again warned in a dream, decided to take the family instead to Nazareth which may have been Mary’s home. His fears were justified; ten years later, in A. D. 6, the Romans deposed Archelaus at the instigation of the Jews themselves because of his violence and misrule. This was also the year that P. Sulpicius Quirinus, or “Cyrenius,” began his governorship in Syria. Although B.C. 6 is the date Luke seems to give for Jesus Christ’s birth, historically, it was the year when Judea became a province.

Jews typically had only a single name, which has caused difficulties in distinguishing between individuals with the same name in the New Testament. For example, the New Testament records the names of at least seven different Marys. To distinguish among them, the New Testament authors included nicknames or other identifying facts about them, such as where they were from (Mary Magdalene or Mary of Magdala).

Who was Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ?

Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ, lived in Nazareth, probably with her parents, when the annunciation of Jesus’ birth came, although Matthew and Luke report strong connection among her, her husband, and Bethlehem (Matthew 1:16-23; Luke 2:4-7). She was a witness to the miracle in Cana (John 2:3), portions of the ministry (Matthew 12:46), the crucifixion (John 19:25), and possibly the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Matthew 28: 1; Mark 16:1; Luke 24:10). She is also mentioned as being present during a meeting of disciples after Jesus’ resurrection (Acts 1:14). Nowhere in the Bible is Mary’s genealogy reported, although later traditions attempted to identify the genealogical record found in Luke as that of Mary (Luke 3:23-38).

Who was Mary Magdalene?

Mary Magdalene was from the town of Magdala. She probably offered financial support for Jesus Christ’s ministry as suggested by her ability to travel freely (Mark 15:41; Luke 8:1-2) She was healed miraculously of demonic possession (Luke 8: 2). She witnessed the crucifixion, burial, empty tomb, and Jesus’ resurrected body (see Matthew 27:55-56, 61: John 20:14-18). According to the Gospel of John, she was the first person to see Jesus after the resurrection.

Who was Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus?

Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus, was commended for her discipleship when her sister reported to Jesus Christ that she was overwhelmed with the domestic shores of the house (Luke 10:41-42). Mary also anointed Jesus’ feet with spikenard and dried them with her hair prior to his burial, thus making Mary the first person besides Jesus to openly call attention to his impending death (John 12:3-7).

Who is Mary, the mother of James and Joses?

Mary, the mother of James and Joses, was a disciple who followed Jesus Christ from Galilee (Matthew 27:55-56). The Gospel of Mark presents her as a benefactor of the public ministry; she was also a witness to the empty tomb (Mark 15:40-41; Matthew 27:56). She is probably the “other Mary” referred to in the accounts of the empty tomb (Matthew 27:61). Interestingly, Jesus had four brothers, the two eldest of whom were named “James and Joses” (Mark 6:3), making it possible that this Mary is the same as Jesus Christ’s mother, a conclusion supported by Mark’s assertion that this Mary was the mother of “James the less”, a popular nickname for Jesus’ younger brother by the same name (Mark 15:40).

Who is Mary, the wife of Cleophas?

Mary, the wife of Cleophas, is mentioned by name only in John 19:25 as a witness to the crucifixion and is called “Mary the wife of Cleophas” or, more literally, “Mary of Cleophas.” Some have thought she was Mary, the mother of Jesus’ sister. However, it seems unlikely that two sisters would have had the same name. Therefore, some scholars believe the reference in John listed Jesus’ mother and “his mother’s sister,” and “Mary the wife of Cleophas,” as three separate people.

Who is Mary, the mother of John Mark?

Mary, the mother of John Mark, was an important disciple who opened her home to the Saints in Jerusalem shortly after the death of Jesus Christ (Acts 12:12). Luke describes her as a woman of means (Acts 12:12-14).

Who is Mary mentioned in Romans?

Mary, mentioned in Romans, appears to have no connection to any of those mentioned in the canonical Gospel, but she was a great blessing to the congregations in Rome. Paul extolled her service saying, “Greet Mary who bestowed much labor on us” (Romans 16:6).