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

Yes, John does speak of the "origin", but John does not describe the actual birth of Jesus in Bethlehem.

I just don't understand why some people are having such difficulty understanding that.

....In Matthew, Christ is presented as the Son of David, the King of the Jews, and everything in his narrative centers around this truth. This explains why the first Gospel opens with a setting forth of Christ's royal genealogy, and why in the second chapter mention is made of the journey of the wise men from the East, who came to Jerusalem inquiring "Where is He that is born King of the Jews?", and why in chapters five to seven we have what is known as "The Sermon on the Mount" but which, in reality, is the Manifesto of the King, containing an enunciation of the Laws of His Kingdom.
In Mark, Christ is depicted as the Servant of Jehovah, as the One who through equal with God made Himself of no reputation and "took upon Him the form of a servant." Everything in this second Gospel contributes to this central theme, and everything foreign to it is rigidly excluded. This explains why there is no genealogy recorded in Mark, why Christ is introduced at the beginning of His public ministry (nothing whatever being told us here of His earlier life), and why there are more miracles (deeds of service) detailed here than in any of the other Gospels.
In Luke, Christ is set forth as the Son of Man, as connected with but contrasted from the sons of men, and everything in the narrative serves to bring this out. This explains why the third Gospel traces His genealogy back to Adam, the first man, (instead of to Abraham only, as in Matthew), why as the perfect Man He is seen here so frequently in prayer, and why the angels are seen ministering to Him, instead of commanded by Him as they are in Matthew.
In John, Christ is revealed as the Son of God, and everything in this fourth Gospel is made to illustrate and demonstrate this Divine relationship. This explains why in the opening verse we are carried back to a point before time began, and we are shown Christ as the Word "in the beginning," with God, and Himself expressly declared to be God; why we get here so many of His Divine titles, as "The only begotten of the Father," the "Lamb of God," the "Light of the world" etc.; why we are told here that prayer should be made in His Name, and why the Holy Spirit is here said to be sent from the Son as well as from the Father.

http://www.ccel.org/p/pink/gospels/gospels02.htm

3 of the Gospels describe the birth of Jesus, John does not. There is no dispute in this statement. The fact that you're trying to pick this apart is just apalling[sic]! There's nothing to pick apart. I don't know why John didn't describe the birth of Jesus .. he just didn't. GOD knows and that's good enough for me.

Pick it apart? Appalling? Surely you didn't read what I actually wrote.

above: And that one source doesn't mention something that another source talks about doesn't mean that the first source is fictional. This writer is either extremely ignorant of the material in question or extremely motivated to undercut its message. I think it's probably the latter. The question to be asked is, "What's in it for him?".
you may have mistakenly concluded that I was referring to you rather than to the author of the piece that headed this thread.

Do any of you see something like a tribulation sorta brewing?

The Tribulation has been sorta brewing since Jesus was born, but yes, what is happening now is all a plot to discredit anything having to do with our Lord. Remember what is says in Daniel, the the Anti-Christ will "think to the changes the times and laws." Some people tranlate this to mean he will try change the calendar system so the end-time saints won't know how many years has passed since he took over rule.

Faith is important in the Christian religion but not necessarily blind faith; logic can be involved in our worldview. Historically the southern kingdom of Israel (Judah) was sacked in 586 B.C.and most of the educated were taken away to Babylon.(Persia, modern day Iraq). Daniel 3 tells us the story of Shadrach, Meshach & Abednego; Daniel 6 tells us one of many stories concerning Daniel. My point being that these men found the courage and integrity to stand before a king and refuse to bow, bend, burn or be breakfast for lions. Integrity has a way of being an honorable trait to wise men. Nebuchadnezzar was obviously wise and promoted these men and others, to positions of high authority, even above native Persians. In fact, Daniel was appointed the third highest ruler in all of Persia. This 'pre-history' is to set the stage for my main explanation. Logically, the following generations of the captive Hebrew children were educated in Persian schools, in the ways of their new 'home counrty' and became part of the fabric of Persian society; living as well as they could according to God's Laws but also in obedience to those in authority over them. Just as logically, we must believe that some enjoyed the same privileges and honors as Daniel and his friends. Given that the Bible was primarily (if not exclusively) a Jewish book it follows without too much of a stretch at all that the "Magi" were either devout men of God (Jews) or Persians who had come to believe, through association with these Jews, in the One True God. They knew very well, regardless of original nationality, the Scriptures and prophecies of the 483 years from the building of the Temple in Jerusalem (Ezra & Nehemiah)to the coming of the Messiah (Daniel 9:25)and were anxiously awaiting the 'sign' promised them in Numbers 24:17 & Isaiah 60:3. These educated scientists and astronomers were, in fact, looking for the star and were wise enough to discern the difference between it and the 7 B.C.conjoining of Saturn and Jupiter, (joined in 6 B.C.by Mars) comets, super novas or other celestial phenomona. Sorry this has been so long, history must be fully explained to be fully understood. There is much more to the history of these Wise Men, but this cursory start is enough to explain who they were.