For Christians, Christmas time is one of the most sacred, most joyous celebrations of the year. What about for people who are thinking about it, but who aren't sure about the whole "reason for the season"? What do we really know about what happened in Judea, 2000 years ago?

We're going to try to approach this topic from a neutral standpoint, and see where that leads us.

It's well-established that Jesus existed. He was physically, historically real. There is voluminous evidence from Christian sources, of course. Jesus Christ was also mentioned in non-Christian historical documents that have survived from that period. He's referred to twice by Josephus, the Jewish historian, in his work "Antiquities of the Jews" published in 93-94 AD. Tacitus, the Roman historian, writing in around 116 AD, also refers to "Christus" being put to death by the Romans under Pontius Pilate.

Was Jesus special? Even skeptics would need to wonder why and how this man from a small village in Galilee could launch a religion which would become the biggest, most influential one for at least the next two millennia of human history.

One of the intriguing things about Jesus is that his birth and life seem to have fulfilled prophecies from the Old Testament, which date back to the time of Moses - at least 1500 years BC, and to far older stories in an oral tradition. Those prophecies existed in texts written long before the Christian Era started.

What were some of those prophecies? There are many of them! Swedenborg lists some in Doctrine of the Lord 6. In this article, we're just going to focus on a few of them.

In this very early prophecy, it's indicated that the Messiah would be born as the son of a woman:

"And Jehovah God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, cursed art thou above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life, and I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: he shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. Genesis 3:14-15. This is confirmed in the story in Matthew 1:20.

In Micah, much later in the Bible, we read that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem, in Judea:

"But thou, Beth-lehem Ephrathah, which art little to be among the thousands of Judah, out of thee shall one come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting." Micah 5:2.

This is confirmed in the story in Matthew 2:1, and Luke 2:4-6.

In Isaiah, we read that the Messiah would be born to a virgin:

"Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel." Isaiah 7:14. This is confirmed in the story in Matthew 1:22-23, and in Luke 1:26-31.

Lineage was an important factor, too. At least 5 forefathers of the promised Savior are named. First, he was prophesied to come from the line of Abraham, the progenitor of many of the peoples of the modern Middle East, including the Jews, the Arabs, the Lebanese, the Druze, and others. See Genesis 12:3, and Genesis 22:18. This prophecy is confirmed in Matthew 1:1, and Romans 9:5.

In the next generation, prophecy stated that the Savior would be descended from the line of Isaac, one of Abraham's two sons. See Genesis 17:19, and Genesis 21:12. This is confirmed in Luke 3:34.

For the third generation, the Word states that the Messiah would be a descendant of Jacob. It's prophesied in Numbers 24:17, and confirmed in Matthew 1:2.

For the fourth generation, attention focuses on the tribe of Judah, who was one of the twelve sons of Jacob (whose name was changed to Israel). See Genesis 49:10, and then Luke 3:33, and Hebrews 7:14.

Many generations later, in the second book of Samuel, and again in Isaiah, there are prophecies that the Messiah would be heir to King David's throne. Read 2 Samuel 7:12-13, and Isaiah 9:7. Then see Luke 1:32-33, and Romans 1:3.

There are many more prophecies, and we will look at more of them in a future article. But, to summarize these ones that we've just listed, what would Old Testament readers in the time of Caesar Augustus be expecting?

In Bethlehem, a virgin would bear a son. He would be descended from Abraham, through the line of Isaac, Jacob, Judah, and David. That's the way the story runs, in the Gospels.

It's clear that the Old Testament wasn't altered to suit the "facts on the ground". The prophecies are already there in pre-Christian scrolls. That leaves two possibilities:

1) Scenario A: The New Testament could have been written to twist the facts to match the old prophecies. Faithful Jews were awaiting the Messiah; they would have wanted to find matching stories. In this scenario, Jesus could have been just a regular man, but a standout leader and teacher and healer. He was so inspiring that his apostles endured hardship and death to spread what became a global religion. The stories about him were exaggerated or modified to help match the prophecies.

2) Scenario B: The Old Testament text contains deep inner meaning, and its prophecies were actually prophetic and true. The facts of Jesus' birth and life and ministry actually did match and fulfull the prophecies. In this scenario, Jesus was truly a miracle baby.

Which scenario is right? In both, there's a recognition that the teachings of Jesus contained wisdom, and that there is great value in them. In New Christian thought, the choice is for Scenario B -- that Jesus really was the Christ, the long-awaited Messiah, or Savior.

This of course requires some level of belief in miracles - prophecy, fulfillment, the virgin birth, angels bearing tidings, healings, feeding the multitudes. Can miracles really happen? Is it scientifically possible? Maybe they can... maybe as science advances, we will begin to understand those boundaries better.

At some level, don't most of us believe in miracles -- in the miracle of the very existence of the universe, and of living organisms that can reproduce, and of human life, and of love?

How to end this article? The whole subject of miracles needs more thought. And, here it is, December 22, and... instead of getting more analytical, I find that right now I just want to "be" in the holy days of Christmas.

If you're feeling skeptical, have a look at Arcana Coelestia 2568, and Arcana Coelestia 2588. They offer an interesting perspective!

---

One source for this article was "100 Prophecies Fulfilled by Jesus: Messianic Prophecies Made Before the Birth of Christ", by Rose Publishing.

(References: Teachings about the Lord 6)

9300. 'The first of the firstfruits of your ground you shall bring into the house of [Jehovah] your God' means that every truth of good and every good of truth is holy because it comes from the Lord alone. This is clear from the meaning of 'the firstfruits of the ground' as the truth that the Church's forms of good and its truths must be attributed to the Lord alone (for these are meant by 'the firstfruits', see 9223, and the Church by 'the ground', 566, 1068), the expression 'the first of the firstfruits' being used because that truth must be paramount, since forms of good and truths receive their life from the Lord, that is, they receive it from the Lord when they are attributed to Him; and from the meaning of 'bringing into the house of God' as bringing them to the Lord, in order that they may be holy (for 'the house of God' is the Lord, see 3720, and everything holy comes from the Lord, 9229). From all this it is evident that 'the first of the firstfruits of your ground you shall bring into the house of your God' means that every truth of good and every good of truth is holy because it comes from the Lord alone.

[2] The terms 'truth of good' and 'good of truth' are used because in the case of a person who is being regenerated, and especially of one who has been regenerated, truths emanate from good, and forms of good emanate from truth. For the truths compose the life of his understanding, and the good the life of his will. And with the person who has been regenerated understanding and will form a mind that is one, communicating reciprocally with each other; the truths which belong to the understanding communicate with the good which belongs to the will, and the good belonging to the will with the truths belonging to the understanding. There is a mutual flow from one to the other, scarcely any different from the flow of the blood from the heart into the lungs, and from them into the heart again, then from the left side of the heart into the arteries, and from these back again through veins into the heart. One can form an idea similar to this regarding the reciprocal flow of the good and truth with a person from his understanding into his will and from his will into his understanding. The reason why the heart and lungs can give us an idea especially of the reciprocal activity of the truth of faith and the good of charity in the understanding and the will is that the lungs correspond to the truths belonging to faith and the heart to the good belonging to love, 3635, 3883-3896. So it is also that 'the heart' in the Word means the life of the will, and 'the soul' ¹ the life of faith, 9050.

[3] The reason why those two organs can help us to form an idea regarding truths belonging to the understanding and good belonging to the will is that all things which are aspects of faith and of love are accompanied by ideas formed from such things as a person knows. For without ideas formed from things that can be known and things that can be perceived by the senses a person has no ability to think. And a person thinks properly, even about aspects of faith and love, when he does so from objects that correspond; for correspondences are natural truths in which spiritual truths are reflected as in a mirror. Therefore to the extent that ideas in the mind regarding spiritual realities are conceived of but not by means of those correspondences, they are formed either from the illusions of the senses or from absurdities. What a person's ideas are like regarding aspects of faith and of love is transparently evident in the next life, for people's ideas there are plainly perceptible.

[4] The statement that the truths of faith belong to a person's understanding and the good of charity to his will may seem to be nonsensical to people who say and are convinced that having a belief in matters of faith is all that is necessary. This is because the natural man and his power of understanding has no grasp whatever of things of that nature, and because faith comes not from a person himself but from the Lord. But those same people nevertheless acknowledge and believe that a person is enlightened by truths and inspired by good when he reads the Word, and that when he is enlightened he perceives what is or is not the truth. They also speak of those who excel others in uncovering truths from the Word as the enlightened. From this it is evident that those who are enlightened see and perceive within themselves whether something is the truth or not; what is then enlightened within them is their understanding, and what is then inspired within them is their will. But if that which enlightens them is the authentic truth of faith and that which inspires them is the authentic good of charity, it is the internal man's understanding that is enlightened and the internal man's will that is inspired. The situation is different if the truth of faith, or the good of charity, is unauthentic.

[5] People governed by these, and even those ruled by falsities and evils are indeed able to give their assent to the Church's truths; yet they have no inner ability to see and perceive whether they really are truths. So it is that most people keep to the teachings of the Church in which they were born but go no further than giving their assent to them. They would assent even to extremely heretical beliefs such as those of Socinianism or Judaism if they had been born from parents holding such beliefs. From all this it is evident that the understanding is enlightened in the case of those with an affection for truth arising from good but not in the case of those with an affection for truth arising from evil. In the case of those with an affection for truth arising from good the internal man's understanding is enlightened and the internal man's will is inspired, whereas in the case of those with an affection for truth arising from evil the internal man's understanding is not enlightened nor is the internal man's will inspired, for the reason that they are natural men and women. As a consequence of this they maintain that the natural man has no ability to grasp any thing which is a matter of faith.

[6] The fact that the understanding is what is enlightened by the truths of faith and the will is what is inspired by the good of charity in the case of those with an affection for truth arising from good, who are therefore more internal or spiritual men and women, is evident from the same kind of people in the next life. Those who are there are able to understand all matters of faith and to will all that constitutes charity, as they themselves also clearly perceive. Consequently intelligence and wisdom beyond description are theirs; for after they have cast aside the body they enjoy that more internal understanding which was being enlightened in the world and that more internal will which was being inspired in the world. But they could not perceive during that time how they were being enlightened and inspired because during that time their thinking took place within the body and was founded on such things as belong to the world. From all this it is now clear that the truths of faith compose the life of the understanding and the good of charity composes the life of the will, that is, that the understanding ought to be present in those things which are matters of faith and the will in those which are aspects of charity. Or what amounts to the same thing, those two powers of mind are what faith and charity from the Lord flow into; and these are received according to the state of those powers. Thus the Lord's dwelling-place with a person is nowhere else than within those powers.

[7] An idea of what more there is to all this may be gained from what has been stated about the internal man and the external man in 6057, 9279, namely this: The internal man has been created so as to conform to an image of heaven, but the external man so as to conform to an image of the world; and those whose internal man has not been opened up see nothing from a heavenly point of view. And what they see from a worldly point of view regarding heaven is thick darkness, as a consequence of which they cannot have any spiritual idea about such things as are matters of faith and charity. As a result of this furthermore they fail so completely even to see what Christian good is, that is, what charity is, that they entirely suppose that the life of heaven consists solely in truths, which they call the truths of faith, and also that this life can be imparted to anyone at all with whom the assurance of faith exists though not the life of faith.

[8] How blind these people are regarding the life of faith, which is charity, is plainly evident from the consideration that they pay no attention whatever to thousands of things taught by the Lord Himself regarding goodness of life, and that when they read the Word they instantly toss them away behind the back of faith, thereby concealing them from themselves and from others. So it is also that anything which has to do with good, that is, with charity and its works, is banished by them from the teachings of the Church to that lower body of teachings which they call moral theology, and which they regard as natural, not spiritual. But in reality the life of charity remains after death, and faith only in the measure that it accords with that life, that is, thought regarding the truths of faith remains in the measure that there is a will to do good in accordance with them. Those who have faith that arises out of good are able to use any factual knowledge whatever to corroborate things for themselves and thereby make their faith stronger, see 2454, 2568, 2588, 4156, 4293, 4760, 5201, 6047, 8629.

Footnotes: