Amazing, and how distorted the actual Christian view is of the birh of Jesus! Sheperds indeed, keeping watch over their flocks before the winter rains came!
Being born in a house and NOT a manger like a barnyard, with dirty animals and poop all over.
And a Magi who brought 3 gifts, 18 months later.
Luke tells about shepherds, nothing about Magi. They (poor common folk) and the angels were the first (and for a while the only) witnesses to the birth of the Messiah. As for the sheep being out grazing, What do you think they did the rest of the year? Keep them in their houses? The fact that it was December does not rule this out.
Luke says he was laid in a manger. Luke tells us (based on Mary's own testamony most likely) of the actual night of his birth. Matthew, OTOH, does not. Instead he says, "After Jesus was born...the Wise men came from the East." Two accounts of separate events, both connected to the birth narrative.
And the manger, animals, and poop are in fact an integfral part of the story. Unlike an earthly king, Jesus was born into the humblest of places. The Incarnation of the Almighty Creator of the Universe was real. God became fully human, in every way that WE are human. Including the poop. You don't for a minute imagine that when Mary changed his swaddling cloths that they were filled with rose petals, do you?
And you are right about it being three gifts. I didn't catch that until I came back to this thread.
It was harly a manger but a crib in a house and the sheep herders were not likely to be lodging in the open air in December since they always brought their animals inat the first Oct/Nov rains. Sorry, but Luke says: Lu 2:7 And she gave birth to her firstborn son, and she cradled him, and laid him to rest upon a Crèche; because there was no place for them in the lodge.
2:8 And there were in the same region sheepherders lodging in the field in the open air, to keep protecting over their flock at night.
Bishop Pearce says, “upon the whole it seems probable, that Mary delivered in a chamber of a house, and not a stable; and that for want of a bed to lay her son, she made use of one of the “Eastern Mangers”, made of a coarse cloth, and fastened, like our hammock’s, to some part of the chamber where she was, and there laid him, as having no other place for him.”
Mary gave birth to Jesus in a family home. Luke used the word kataluma, translated “guest room”. It was the kind of guest room Jesus celebrated the last passover with his disciples. (Bailey 1980) κατάλυμα accommodation, lodging; quarters
1Ch 25:5 All these were the sons of Heman the king’s seer (chozeh= to see) in the words of God, to lift up the horn.
Amazing, and how distorted the actual Christian view is of the birh of Jesus! Sheperds indeed, keeping watch over their flocks before the winter rains came!
Being born in a house and NOT a manger like a barnyard, with dirty animals and poop all over.
And a Magi who brought 3 gifts, 18 months later.
Luke tells about shepherds, nothing about Magi. They (poor common folk) and the angels were the first (and for a while the only) witnesses to the birth of the Messiah. As for the sheep being out grazing, What do you think they did the rest of the year? Keep them in their houses? The fact that it was December does not rule this out.
Luke says he was laid in a manger. Luke tells us (based on Mary's own testamony most likely) of the actual night of his birth. Matthew, OTOH, does not. Instead he says, "After Jesus was born...the Wise men came from the East." Two accounts of separate events, both connected to the birth narrative.
And the manger, animals, and poop are in fact an integfral part of the story. Unlike an earthly king, Jesus was born into the humblest of places. The Incarnation of the Almighty Creator of the Universe was real. God became fully human, in every way that WE are human. Including the poop. You don't for a minute imagine that when Mary changed his swaddling cloths that they were filled with rose petals, do you?
And you are right about it being three gifts. I didn't catch that until I came back to this thread.
I'm with Katherine on this. It may not matter exactly when Jesus was born, but I suspect that the date of 25 December is correct.
And how does that answer Why did they go to a House and not a manger? Why did they go to Jerusalem first and not to Bethlehem? Why did S. John Chrysostom calleth these kings Magos, as wicked and evil-doers? Why doesn't Matthew specify how many bewitchers came from the east.
How did they get there so fast from Media, more than a months travel?
I wasn't responding specifically to your post, he-man, but since you asked:
Traditional manger scenes notwithstanding. the Magi did not appear when Jesus was born. They arrived about eighteen months later. (Witness Herod seeking to kill all children under the age of two.) By then, there WAS room in the house.
The Magi had seen the star announcing the birth of the King of the Jews. Where else would such a King be expected other than the capital? It was only after Herod's scribes quoted Joel that they went on to Bethlehem.
You'll have to ask Chrysostom about that.
Who cares? Tradition says three, only because tradition gives three names. (That's not in Matthew either, BTW.)
As I said above, it took them a year and a half to get there.
Amazing, and how distorted the actual Christian view is of the birh of Jesus! Sheperds indeed, keeping watch over their flocks before the winter rains came!
Being born in a house and NOT a manger like a barnyard, with dirty animals and poop all over.
And a Magi who brought 3 gifts, 18 months later.
1Ch 25:5 All these were the sons of Heman the king’s seer (chozeh= to see) in the words of God, to lift up the horn.
I'm with Katherine on this. It may not matter exactly when Jesus was born, but I suspect that the date of 25 December is correct.
And how does that answer
Why did they go to a House and not a manger? Why did they go to Jerusalem first and not to Bethlehem? Why did S. John Chrysostom calleth these kings Magos, as wicked and evil-doers? Why doesn't Matthew specify how many bewitchers came from the east.
How did they get there so fast from Media, more than a months travel?
I wasn't responding specifically to your post, he-man, but since you asked:
Traditional manger scenes notwithstanding. the Magi did not appear when Jesus was born. They arrived about eighteen months later. (Witness Herod seeking to kill all children under the age of two.) By then, there WAS room in the house.
The Magi had seen the star announcing the birth of the King of the Jews. Where else would such a King be expected other than the capital? It was only after Herod's scribes quoted Joel that they went on to Bethlehem.
You'll have to ask Chrysostom about that.
Who cares? Tradition says three, only because tradition gives three names. (That's not in Matthew either, BTW.)
As I said above, it took them a year and a half to get there.
I'm with Katherine on this. It may not matter exactly when Jesus was born, but I suspect that the date of 25 December is correct.
And how does that answer
Why did they go to a House and not a manger? Why did they go to Jerusalem first and not to Bethlehem? Why did S. John Chrysostom calleth these kings Magos, as wicked and evil-doers? Why doesn't Matthew specify how many bewitchers came from the east. How did they get there so fast from Media, more than a months travel?
1Ch 25:5 All these were the sons of Heman the king’s seer (chozeh= to see) in the words of God, to lift up the horn.
Then why did you post it as an answer to my questions?
I didn't post it as an answer to your questions. Quite frankly, your questions are irrelevant. I posted it as an alternative theory to the Dec. 25 date for the celebration of the birth of Christ.
And I asked if that was an Interesting theory just like the problem with “goodwill to men” as a translation (apart from the gender issue) is that it is based on a different Greek text, eudokia (nominative) rather than eudokias (genitive). The latter is almost certainly original. You could if you like translate “people of goodwill”, but that may sound too Arminian in suggesting, but not completely implying, that “goodwill” is an attribute of the people rather than of God
Lu 2: 14 δοξα εν υψιστοις θω και επι γης ϊρηνη εν ανθρωποις ευδοκιας 14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among mankind of his good pleasure.
Why did they go to a House and not a manger? Why did they go to Jerusalem first and not to Bethlehem? Why did S. John Chrysostom calleth these kings Magos, as wicked and evil-doers? Why doesn't Matthew specify how many bewitchers came from the east. How did they get there so fast from Media, more than a months travel?
Joh 7:41 Others said, This is the Christ. But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee?
Magus also is said enchanter. And hereof be said the enchanters of Pharaoh, Magi, which by Their malefice made their marvels by the enchanting of the craft of the devil. (Midieval Source Book)
What about Act 13:8 But Elymas the sorcerer...said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy
1Ch 25:5 All these were the sons of Heman the king’s seer (chozeh= to see) in the words of God, to lift up the horn.
Then why did you post it as an answer to my questions?
I didn't post it as an answer to your questions. Quite frankly, your questions are irrelevant. I posted it as an alternative theory to the Dec. 25 date for the celebration of the birth of Christ.
“The Law of the Church is to give oneself to what is given not to seek one’s own.” Fr. Alexander Schmemann
Re: December 25th“The most loudly touted theory about the origins of the Christmas date(s) is that it was borrowed from pagan celebrations. The Romans had their mid-winter Saturnalia festival in late December; barbarian peoples of northern and western Europe kept holidays at similar times. To top it off, in 274 C.E., the Roman emperor Aurelian established a feast of the birth of Sol Invictus (the Unconquered Sun), on December 25. Christmas, the argument goes, is really a spin-off from these pagan solar festivals. According to this theory, early Christians deliberately chose these dates to encourage the spread of Christmas and Christianity throughout the Roman world: If Christmas looked like a pagan holiday, more pagans would be open to both the holiday and the God whose birth it celebrated.Thus, we have Christians in two parts of the world calculating Jesus’ birth on the basis that his death and conception took place on the same day (March 25 or April 6) and coming up with two close but different results (December 25 and January 6).Connecting Jesus’ conception and death in this way will certainly seem odd to modern readers, but it reflects ancient and medieval understandings of the whole of salvation being bound up together…www.bib-arch.org/e-features/christmas.as...
Interesting theory, however, How is it that they went to a House and not a manger? How is it that they went to Jerusalem first and not to Bethlehem? How is it that S. John Chrysostom calleth these kings Magos, as wicked and evil-doers? How is it that Matthew does not specify how many bewitchers came from the east. How did they get there so fast from Media? Magus also is said enchanter. And hereof be said the enchanters of Pharaoh, Magi, which by Their malefice made their marvels by the enchanting of the craft of the devil.
(Midieval Source Book)
Act 13:8 But Elymas the sorcerer...said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?
The article is not about the Magi, and thus doesn't address any of your questions.
Then why did you post it as an answer to my questions?
Pervasive throughout the Eastern Mediterranean and Western Asia until late antiquity and beyond, Greek mágos "magian"/Magician was influenced by (and eventually displaced) Greek goēs, the older word for a practitioner of magic, to include astrology, alchemy and other forms of esoteric knowledge.
1Ch 25:5 All these were the sons of Heman the king’s seer (chozeh= to see) in the words of God, to lift up the horn.
“The most loudly touted theory about the origins of the Christmas date(s) is that it was borrowed from pagan celebrations. The Romans had their mid-winter Saturnalia festival in late December; barbarian peoples of northern and western Europe kept holidays at similar times. To top it off, in 274 C.E., the Roman emperor Aurelian established a feast of the birth of Sol Invictus (the Unconquered Sun), on December 25. Christmas, the argument goes, is really a spin-off from these pagan solar festivals. According to this theory, early Christians deliberately chose these dates to encourage the spread of Christmas and Christianity throughout the Roman world: If Christmas looked like a pagan holiday, more pagans would be open to both the holiday and the God whose birth it celebrated.Thus, we have Christians in two parts of the world calculating Jesus’ birth on the basis that his death and conception took place on the same day (March 25 or April 6) and coming up with two close but different results (December 25 and January 6).Connecting Jesus’ conception and death in this way will certainly seem odd to modern readers, but it reflects ancient and medieval understandings of the whole of salvation being bound up together…www.bib-arch.org/e-features/christmas.as...
Interesting theory, however, How is it that they went to a House and not a manger? How is it that they went to Jerusalem first and not to Bethlehem? How is it that S. John Chrysostom calleth these kings Magos, as wicked and evil-doers? How is it that Matthew does not specify how many bewitchers came from the east. How did they get there so fast from Media? Magus also is said enchanter. And hereof be said the enchanters of Pharaoh, Magi, which by Their malefice made their marvels by the enchanting of the craft of the devil.
(Midieval Source Book) Act 13:8 But Elymas the sorcerer...said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?
The article is not about the Magi, and thus doesn't address any of your questions.
“The Law of the Church is to give oneself to what is given not to seek one’s own.” Fr. Alexander Schmemann
