Around Christmas there are (naturally) various TV shows about Jesus, especially his birth story. I have seen several shows in which (supposedly) serious scholars speculate as to what celestial event prompted the story of the Star of Bethlehem. As a reminder, in the Gospel of Matthew it says that some unnamed wise men (magi) from some unnamed eastern country come to Jerusalem and say, “Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we saw His star in the east and have come to worship Him” (Matthew 2:2). My first question is why these foreigners would care about the birth of a king of the tiny kingdom of Judea, a vassal state of the Roman Empire. If they thought a new Caesar was being born, I would get that, but a King of the Jews? Had they even bothered attending King Herod’s coronation?
But let’s assume they had some interest in this birth. The Gospel goes on to say of the star, “…they went on their way; and behold, the star, which they had seen in the east, went on ahead of them until it came to a stop over the place where the Child was to be found” (Matthew 2:9). Granted, the earth’s movement makes it appear that stars do move through the night sky, and planets have their own movements, but there are no celestial bodies or alignments or conjunctions or whatever that can point out a specific house (in Matthew they’re in a house, not a stable). Clearly the Gospel is describing some miraculous event in the sky capable of leading the Magi to a specific house. (Is this where Congresswoman M T Green came up with the idea of Jewish space lasers?) If you are a person of faith this poses no problem: God can do that. But to pretend that this is describing some natural event observed by the Magi is to deny what the text actually says. If you are a skeptic you are more likely to think that Matthew has created this event as a way to get foreign emissaries to Jesus. His point seems to be that these non-Jewish (Gentile) men sought out Jesus to worship him while those in Jerusalem, the Jews, a short distance from Bethlehem, did not even bother. Herod in fact tries to kill Jesus. This is similar to the message found in the Gospel of Mark: demons, foreigners and finally a Roman centurion recognize Jesus as the Son of God while the Jews, including his own disciples, struggle to see who he was.
Anyway, no matter how you view the Star it is not described as a natural phenomenon that we can analyze using scientific methods, and it seems silly to try. And that is not the only silliness on which I see scholars wasting their time. (Of course, there are probably few true scholars in these pursuits: more likely to be popular authors and TV personalities.)
One of the most famous pursuits of Biblical lore is the search for the Holy Grail. The Grail is the chalice used by Jesus at the Last Supper, which is recorded in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke (but not in John?). If you recall the movie Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade some people think this cup must have miraculous powers. As with the Star story, it seems those who pursue the Grail haven’t bothered reading the texts. Jesus and his disciples are from Galilee and are only visiting Jerusalem. They are using a rented (or possibly borrowed) room (Mark 14:12f). Their Passover meal would have to be catered; I doubt they brought a lamb and the necessary utensils all the way from Galilee. If you read the three accounts it seems clear that the disciples did not know this was their “Last Supper” with Jesus. Why would they think, “Hey, this cup must be significant? Let’s hang on to it!” Even if they tried to take it I suspect the owner of the room would have objected: “Hey, where you going with my cup?!” Even if you think their supper did include a mystical rite Jesus speaks of the wine as being the “blood of the covenant” but says nothing about the cup itself. And what about the plate the bread was served on? Did they keep that, too? Even if they did keep the cup for some reason, there would be no way to identify it later, unless Jesus had taken the time to scratch into the side something like, “Jesus was here” or “My cup – Jesus.”
There is also a later legend that Joseph of Arimathea used the cup to catch some of Jesus’ blood at the crucifixion. That makes no sense to me. How did Joseph get the cup? He wasn’t at the Last Supper. Why would he collect some of Jesus’ blood? Some sort of vampiric blood fetish? Creative but not credible.
The search for the “Holy Grail” seems futile at best, probably silly, and in some ways just pathetic. If you believe the stories of Jesus in the Gospels then you don’t need an unidentifiable cup to bolster your faith. If you are a skeptic you have even less, probably no reason to seek such a relic. But you must admit it does make for good material for books and movies, much like The Maltese Falcon: “The stuff dreams are made of…”
Going back to the Indiana Jones movies, in the final installment there is reference to the Lance of Longinus, the spear used to pierce Jesus’ side on the cross. Most people probably do not realize that is mentioned only in the Gospel of John. But there are several relics today which are said to be parts of the lance, including one kept in the Vatican, although the Catholic Church does not claim it to be authentic. Like with the Grail, why would a Roman soldier regard that lance as something special? Some might point out that the centurion at the cross acknowledges that “Truly this man was the son of God!” (In Matthew and Mark; Luke actually changes it to “This man was innocent.”) Ironically, John alone mentions the piercing with the spear and John alone omits the part about the centurion’s confession. Even so, why would he think that made his lance special? Even if it was stained with Jesus’ blood of what significance would that be to a Gentile soldier who performed routinely crucifixions? He wasn’t at the Last Supper to hear about it being “My blood of the covenant.” He was a soldier not a theologian. The disciples had dispersed in fear; it is not like they would be bold enough to ask the soldier for his spear, especially after he had just skewered their leader. Once again, it makes no sense for this lance to become a treasured relic. But if you need it to hold up your tenuous faith, go for it.
Of course, the original Indiana Jones movie was The Raiders of the Lost Ark, referring to the Ark of the Covenant going back to the time of Moses. It is described in Exodus 25: a box about 4 feet by 2 by 2, covered in gold, with two golden cherubim (winged warrior creatures, not cute little angels) on top, to be placed in the most holy part of the tabernacle. Sounds like a beautiful object. Can you imagine what a priceless treasure this would be? I think you have to use your imagination, because I doubt it ever existed. I say this for several reasons. First, the whole story of Moses is suspect; historians and archaeologists have struggled to find clear evidence of Moses and the surrounding story. For another thing, just a few chapters earlier (20:4) in the Ten Commandments, which were supposed to be stored in the Ark, it says not to make any graven images “or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath.” I think that would include cherubim. Kind of ironic if the tablets of the commandments were contained in a vessel displaying images of heavenly creatures contrary to the commandments. It sounds more to me like the description of a pagan relic, that was adopted into Jewish lore.
In the New Testament the Book of Hebrews reveals a tradition not mentioned in the Old Testament, that the Ark also contained Aaron’s staff, which had budded flowers in miraculous fashion (Numbers 17:1-11), and a jar of manna, their miraculous sustenance during the Exodus (Hebrews 9:4). Interesting to note that 1st Kings 8:9 specifically says that the ark only contained the tablets of Moses, so that seems problematic. Anyway, the Ark was said to contain various objects of miraculous origin. OK for the faithful but questionable to the skeptic. And the Ark itself is reported to have miraculous properties. In Joshua 3 when the priests carried the Ark into the Jordan River it dried up so the people could pass through. When the Philistines took the Ark as described in 1st Samuel 5 it first caused the idol of Dagon to fall down during the night, and then be decapitated. When they moved it to Gath the people there were afflicted with hemorrhoids (you can’t say God doesn’t have a sense of humor!). In 2nd Samuel 6 a man named Uzzah touches the ark to steady it and is smote dead by God. To the faithful such things are entirely possible, but a skeptic has to question its existence; it sounds like legend. Still, it is quite possible an artifact exists without the miraculous properties credited to it. Finally, the stories involving the Ark occur in Israel’s earlier, more legendary history; in King Josiah’s time they supposedly put it in the temple without any hoopla (2nd Chronicles 35:3), and then it just disappears from sight. Seems like a rather inconsequential ending for such a supposedly glorious sacred object.
This has led to all sorts of speculation as to what happened to it (carried off by Nebuchadnezzar, buried in Jerusalem, taken off to Egypt or Ethiopia, taken to England by the Knights Templar, etc.). I suspect there is no record of what happened to it because it was merely a legend. If there was some sort of vessel used during worship in the temple then it was likely taken away when the temple was ransacked by Nebuchadnezzar. It would have been valued for its gold, but otherwise would be of no significance to the Babylonians. It might have been repurposed for their pagan worship, or melted down for other uses. Who knows? This leads to an interesting passage from Jeremiah, which seems to sum up the Ark’s fate:
“And it shall be in those days when you become numerous and are fruitful in the land,” declares the Lord, “they will no longer say, ‘The Ark of the covenant of the Lord.’ And it will not come to mind, nor will they remember it, nor miss it, nor will it be made again.”
Jeremiah 3:16
If you want to seek fortune and glory pursuing this relic, have at it. I think it’s a fool’s errand.
A final thought about religious relics. After the emperor Constantine converted (ca 312 CE), his mother Helena traveled to the Holy Land to find holy sites, and sure enough, she found some! Like the site that is now the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. Imagine, the mother of the emperor comes and wants to know where Jesus was buried. Are you going to disappoint her? “Right this way, ma’am, here it is! And look, here are some of the nails used to crucify Jesus!” Yes, she reportedly was given two nails, which were put in Constantine’s helmet and horse bridle, to give him miraculous help. Aside from self-preservation there is always the profit motive. Income from relics helped support individuals and churches down through the ages. And there is also an evangelistic angle. Some years ago I visited a Greek Orthodox church in our area and one of the members spent some time detailing some of the marvelous relics contained in churches in Europe; they clearly bolstered his faith (but not mine).
So, if the pursuit of holy relics strengthens your faith or simply excites your sense of adventure, have at it. I think you are wasting your time; fortune and glory do not await you. I think it is better to pursue what I see as the true legacy of Jesus, which is to feed the hungry, quench the thirsty, shelter the stranger, clothe the naked, care for the sick and visit the incarcerated (Matthew 25:35, 36). That is a challenging adventure available to each and every one of us.
Thinking exercises:
1. Can you think of any relic from the Bible that would be truly faith-inspiring, especially for those not already inclined to believe?
2. How would you authenticate the following?
* The Holy Grail.
* The Lance of Longinus.
* A piece of the cross.
* The tomb Jesus was buried in.
3. Why do you think the Ark of the Covenant just dropped out of sight without explanation? Are you tempted to go look for it?
4. The doctrine of transubstantiation says that in the Eucharist/Lord’s Supper the bread and wine actually become Jesus’ body and blood. How do you feel about cannibalism as part of your religion? Isn’t crucifying him bad enough without also eating him?