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?

[hellinahandcart]

So, to sum up:

The Gospels are not four duplicate posts, so Christ wasn't real. Christians are stupid. It is not what one believes, but belief itself, that is the problem, so Christianity is as bad as Islam. But since you stupid people DO believe, you HAVE to believe that Jesus would have hated America as much as I do.

[hellinahandcart]

He's a LAPSED PRIEST?? Stunning.

But it's always good news for the flock, when an incompetent shepherd decides to hang up his staff...

[Moosilauke]

I think you've just written the "executive summary" of his article. Wish you had posted this first...would have saved time reading the rantings of an unlearned Boston Globe hack.

[DeathfromBelow]

Maybe agnes, because the Romans ordered it under penalty of death. They were worse than the irs. The requirement was for all people to be present and register. You couldn't send a power of attorney.

[martin gibson]

So are the scriptures infallable?

(he reaches and takes the bait...) - Joe - The word of God revealed in scripture is infallable.

[Gritty]

Unfortunately, we get these sorts of crap articles every year, with some wise-guy thinking he has (Eureka!) discovered the 'key' to debunking The Bible and Jesus. Well, that debunking has been tried for centuries by a lot smarter people than this clown, and nobody has yet succeeded in blowing holes in the veracity of either.

In the early 21st century, religious fundamentalism has shown itself to be a danger to peace... But most Christians are effectively fundamentalist in their beliefs, with little capacity for critical thought about sources, doctrines, and theology.

This ignoramus is merely trying to tar and feather "fundamentalist" Christians by equating them with Islamics and then "proving" their knuckle-dragging ways by using long-discredited Biblical criticisms.

It pathetic, really.

But, there are some people who don't know any better (including some on this forum) who hang on every word out of hacks like this. It confirms their prejudices and disbeliefs and gives them reason not to investigate further.

[CyberAnt]

Yes I can.

Matthew was a Jew, and his account of the life of Jesus was written for the Jewish people and has over 60 references to the Old Testament scriptures (which the Jews would know and understand).

Mark's account of the life of Jesus was based on Greek influences. Mark showed how Jesus was the epitomy of strength and might. He equated Jesus as being a "Mighty God", vastly superior to the Greek gods.

Luke's account of the Gospels was geared toward Mary's viewpoint of the events, as well Luke's view of Jesus as the Healer.

John's account was focused on the diety of Jesus.

Each Gospel was written for a specific reason and for a specific group of people. Matthew and John were the only ones who used Old Testament references, because Greeks and Romans would not have known what the references meant. It was 4 different views .. but they had a purpose to be so. As with everything GOD says and does, there is a purpose to it.

[joesbucks]

Thank you for a well research, well reasoned and well tempered response. Especially the latter. Your response was a good lesson and something to consider when revisiting those chapters.

[CyberAnt]

Thanks for the kudos. I always wondered why there were 4 Gospels. When I found out .. it facinated me so I studied it out. It wasn't just 4 witnesses to the life of Jesus.

And .. if you will notice, John does not talk about the birth of Jesus at all, but the other 3 do.

[freedomcrusader]

John does not talk about the birth of Jesus at all

Unless you count "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

[sauropod]

I would point Mr. Carroll toward "Evidence that demands a verdict" by Josh McDowell if he is serious about finding the answers to these questions.

[IronJack]

Crucify me.

Why waste a perfectly good tree?

[PJ-Comix]

I read a book by this author. Carroll used to be a wacko Roman Catholic priest. In his book he basically told the Church what they needed to do to improve. Basically he wanted a whole new religion. Also Carroll is a wacko. After he left the priesthood and married he had some kids. They were visiting Berlin when the kids saw an open park-like area where they went to play. Carroll realized this was where Hitler's FuehrerBunker was once located and he went screaming after his kids because he was scared that Hitler's ghost would cast an evil spell over them.....Like I said, a WACKO!

[chesty_puller]

Why waste a perfectly good tree?

Don't ever change IJ! Take a lap.

[Campion]

He's not. Serious about finding an answer, I mean. He's serious about trying to make you lose your faith, like he lost his.

[IronJack]

Hark! A voice from the past. How ya doin', Chester?

[CyberAnt]

Excuse me .. I'm talking about John describing the Nativity. John did not .. but .. the other 3 Gospels go into great detail about it.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" does not qualify as a description of the Nativity.

[ladyinred]

How could Jesus be at war with the Jews when he was one?

[ladyinred]

Sorta, kinda, ah, yeah! It becomes more obvious almost daily doesn't it?

[AnAmericanMother]

Catholics have historically refrained from placing the wise men figures into their nativity scenes until the Epiphany (Jan. 6, the "twelfth day of Christmas") when we celebrate this very visitation as a seperate occasion.

Us too! Our Three Kings start out over at the far end of the mantelpiece, and the kids move them towards the manger step by step until Three Kings' Day.