I very much enjoyed the first episode of BBC1's Son of God, with its
Walking with Dinosaurs-style computer graphics and cutting-edge historical and archaeological thinking. It might surprise some to learn that Jesus was a real man, mentioned by contemporary historians, but, in part, Christianity must stand or fall on the reliability of its stated facts.
Unfortunately, apocryphal stories so easily spring up: as the programme pointed out, the stable we see on Christmas cards of the nativity was more likely to have been a cave, and the 'wise men' were almost certainly astrologers, drawn to Bethlehem by unusual planetary movements in the constellation of Aries.
The realisation that God may have used 'pagan' astrologers to herald the arrival of his Son on Earth might in turn shock some Christians - after all, doesn't God condemn astrology in the Old Testament? He does - but perhaps this was God's way of announcing Jesus's birth to the wider world. Indeed, it strikes me more and more that God is less concerned about our strict divisions into 'secular' and 'religious' activities than we are. (After all, there is a book in the Old Testament that doesn't mention God by name but is instead a poem about erotic love.)
As Son of God makes clear, belief that Jesus was the Son of God still requires faith - it cannot be proved. But if we make that step, God requires
everything in return - not just that part of our lives that we label 'religious'.