Questions about the Nativity [Where's You're Jesus Now!]

The Boston Globe ^ | 12/23/2003 | James Carroll

[johnny7]

OUR CALENDAR assumes that Jesus was born in the year 0 -- but was he? Scholars, noting a mistaken calculation by the 6th century sage who invented a scheme of time to honor a "Christian era," tell us that Jesus was born in the year 4 BC. But was he?

[johnny7]

But is any of it factual?

Yea... it's just some mumbo-jumbo. At least a golden idol is something of value.

[joesbucks]

Sarcasm aside, can you explain the differences of the Gospels?

[Ff--150]

But most Christians are effectively fundamentalist in their beliefs, with little capacity for critical thought about sources,

Not only are we the bad guys, we're also stupid. Do any of you see something like a tribulation sorta brewing?

[kittymyrib]

The author has not been given the gift of faith. As Jesus said after his post-resurrection encounter with Thomas, the doubter,"Blessed are they who have not seen and yet have believed." (John 20:29) Without the gift of faith, understanding God's plan of salvation though Jesus is like trying to fathom eternity.

[IronJack]

Another vain attempt to secularize the birth of Christ. It's notable that anyone can pose questions; it's much harder to provide any answers.

By the way, nitwit, "your" is the second person possessive. "You're" is a contraction of "you are." As in "Your arguments tend to lack credibility when you don't even speak the language coherently."

[Klickitat]

"In the early 21st century, religious fundamentalism has shown itself to be a danger to peace. In the West, it is commonly assumed that Islam is the problem, with many Muslims at the mercy of an intolerant rigidity of belief. But most Christians are effectively fundamentalist in their beliefs, with little capacity for critical thought about sources, doctrines, and theology. Church leaders and scholars have kept it this way for the sake of their own power, but in a new era of inflamed religious conflict, childish passivity by a broad population in matters of faith is irresponsible."

Suprised it took until end of article to slip in the comparison. Sounds like we need government intervention in religion to protect us from christian fundamentalists. Same way we needed government intervention to protect us from all those dangerous political ads before an election.

[joesbucks]

So are the scriptures infallable?

[Pietro]

"Christian lay people are discouraged from such lines of inquiry, because thinking critically about small matters may lead to a difficult confrontation with ultimate ones."

The author of this peice doesn't have even a passing knowledge of Christian theology. We are not merely encouraged to think critically but rather commanded to do so.

It is "thought" that the census happened in 6 AD, hmmm that's definitive. The Gospels were written by committee, say modern scholars who may or maynot be right and yet we should take their jaundiced opinions because...well....just because they're scholars and you're not.

This article is loaded w/ horse dung meant to insult Christians. Only a fool would approach such an important subject w/ so little knowledge and evident hostility.

Could it be that you fear the truth and so take cover behind some convenient lie?

[the_Watchman]

There aren't really "differences". Note that the author concludes that since Matthew didn't write about the taxation trip, that he must have believed that Joseph and Mary already lived in Bethlehem. However, the TRUTH is that the conjecture is on the part of the modern author. It's really hard to conclude that Matthew is ASSERTING that Mary and Joseph already lived in Bethlehem.

The Gospels do not purport to be complete in every detail. They were written with different perspectives for different audiences.

There have been various attempts to "harmonize" the Gospels so that the common truths can be extracted. Most have been academic endeavors which are really not much fun to read. [Who wants to read Robertson's book in four disjoint columns of discontiguous text?]

I found one of the best "harmonies of the Gospels" was written by the Baptist, Johnston Cheney. Unfortunately, the book seems to be out of print. Cheney was a student of Greek and decided to take some stories of the Gospels and blend them together using Greek texts. He found that he could combine all the Gospels together into one continuous story.

He developed a terminal illness and made the completion of the book his life work. He died shortly after completing it.

The chronology of the birth of Christ is actually child's play if one is looking for harmony, rather than imagining discord, like the author of this article. An interesting fact to be gleaned from careful reading is that the wise men did NOT arrive the night that Christ was born. Therefore, all the nativity scenes are historically flawed. Now some feel the Joseph and Mary had moved back to Nazareth by that time while others feel that Joseph and Mary had stayed in Bethlehem after the birth. But, does it really matter? Is there error in the Bible, or simply incompleteness?

A rather interesting part of Cheney's harmony is the story of the crucifixion. Cheney says it all flowed together and he didn't have to leave anything out.

Another interesting point is that Cheney's harmony indicates a four year ministry of Christ. Johnston claims to have found four Passover celebrations in the course of the four Gospels.

[AppyPappy]

As much as words can be infalliable. It's the inerrant word of God. That means it is merely a history book.

[AppyPappy]

That means it isN'T merely a history book.

[stopem]

At the risk of being banned from posting on this site,
The very questioning of the Gospels and our beliefs that were a part of our great country for centuries have suddenly become politically incorrect.

Damn political correctness, why have Christians suddenly become the minority and second class citizens.

I thought at first that this year was the first year that I did not feel like it was Christmas, a time for hope and giving. I thought that it was something from within me, but it isn't from within, there is a major push to take away a collective spiritual feeling in our nation.

Our President should not have to cave in to special interest groups or religions to stop a Christian Christmas. I would have expected this to happen under clinton.

[bobjam]

"Can you explain the difference in the Gospels"

There are no differences. Most of the so-called discrepencies come from some scholar's attempt to disprove Scripture. Matthew 2:1 simply says that Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea. Matthew does not get into why they were in Bethlehem, but he does go on to indicate that their proper home was in Nazareth. Luke explains that they were in Bethlehem to be counted and taxed in accordance with Caesar's proclaimation. Now Matthew says that after the visit of the Magi, the Holy Family fled to Egypt for two years until Herod died. Luke simply says that after they had done everything the Lord required of them, they returned to Nazareth. Again, there is no discrepency. Luke (who was writing to a Roman audience) simply doesn't bother mentioning the trip to Egypt because it's not important to Roman Christians. It is important to Jewish Christians, which is why Matthew talks about it.
Now the date of all of this is in dispute. We know Herod the Great died in 4 BC. We know that there were several censi and taxations taken under Caesar Augustus. I'm not sure when Quirinus was Governor of Syria. We know that there was a gathering a planets in a certain constellation that would indicate to eastern astrologers the birth of a king in Israel- possibly the star of Bethlehem- in 5-6 BC. Basically, the Nativity ocurred in 5-6 BC.

[4CJ]

Not only are we the bad guys, we're also stupid. Do any of you see something like a tribulation sorta brewing?

They make us out to be stupid. And yes on the latter - it's getting closer and closer.

Notice the text states "that the three Wise Men traveled from the East". The Bible does NOT state that there were THREE wise men. They did not find Jesus in Bethlehem in a manger. The magi found him in "the house", where "they saw the young child with Mary his mother." (KJV Mat 2:11).

[Ff--150]

"The magi found him in "the house", where "they saw the young child with Mary his mother." (KJV Mat 2:11)"

Great points! "Magi"s--magic men??! Why would magicians seek the Lord?

[Gil4]

The gospels are told from different viewpoints and show different aspects of Christ's character. Different details are included win each (with a great deal of overlap.)

Joseph and Mary were living in Nazareth, went to Bethlehem for the census intending to stay, possibly to avoid the embarrasment aof what would have been considered by neighbors a scanalous birth.

The baby was born shortly after they arrived and was placed in a manger because there was no room in the inn. The shepherds came immediately; the wise men arrived much later and found them living in a house in Bethlehem (Matt. 2:11). (No wise men were by the manger - sorry, the nativity scenes are definitely NOT infallible.)

Shortly after that, Joseph, Mary, and Jesus fled to Egypt to escape Herod, who was having all boys under the age of 2 killed - that age was selected based on the age Jesus would have been at the time. They stayed in Egypt for about two years, until after Herod's death. (Note - our calendars aren't infallible either. It is likely that Jesus was born a little more than 2003 years ago. There have been sveral revisions along the way that make it difficult to detemine exactly when He was born (and when Herod died.)

They intended to return to Bethlehem, but when they heard that Herod's brother was ruling there, the went back to Nazareth instead.

This narrative comes from a combining of the two accounts of the birth of Jesus. (Mark and John make no mention of his birth.) It wasn't very difficult.

The Globe reporter is a clueless hack.

[StonyBurk]

The error is in our failing to interpret Scripture by
allowing it to detrmine the interpretation. Paula is wrong
her interpretation errs in facts she has not yet learned.
May be her understanding of the time or place-or audiance.
May be ethnocentric -May even be a misreaidng of historic
fact-such has happend many times before.Those who claim
the Bible is rife with error and contradiction are
simply as those described by Paul ( formerly known as Saul of Tarsus) In his letter to the believers at Rome in
what we commonly refer to as Romans Chapter 1 verses 18-32)

[Gil4]

But most Christians reporters are effectively fundamentalist in their secularist beliefs, with little capacity for critical thought about sources, doctrines, and theology. Church leaders Editors and scholars have kept it this way for the sake of their own power, but in a new era of inflamed religious conflict,(which is basically the same old conflict) childish passivity by a broad population in matters of the secularist faith is irresponsible.

I have examined the claims of Christianity fairly critically - that's a big part of how I became a Christian. Generally (with rare exceptions) whan I ask skeptics if they have read the Bible, the answer is "no." They just reject it uncritically.

[Roberts]

Was he at war with "the Jews"? Or was he a fierce opponent -- as a Jew -- of empire? What empire would he oppose today? Has the author even read the Gospels? Jesus made clear that he was not here to battle the authority of this world (i.e. "Give to Caesar that which is Caesar's"), but to save mankind for God's kingdom in Heaven.

[johnny7]

Crucify me.