Posted on 12/23/2011 6:28:11 AM PST by marshmallow
I like Appendix 179 the Companion Bible I. Parallel Datings of the Times of our Lord. II. Dates of the “begetting” and the Nativity, &c. III. The Course of Abia
Given the element of time -and the habit of man to forget- or to rearrange memory that modern telling of the tale would be a mix of the elements remembered and not a mirror image.
The important point is the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us.The account in Luke’s gospel adds eyewitness detail common to the Christian Bible. And Luke suggests Mary visited Elizabeth prior to the Nativity. I have heard -and find credible the idea that the Jews ,certainly in Jesus time, told their accounts with focus on
what happened -not always in exact chronological order- and I believe that ethnocentrism , time, and location all affect the telling of a tale. So this makes sense. That Matthew and Luke each told essentially the same story,differently—and that this supposed Syriac telling from point of view of one of the wise men from the East all differ in certain detail and yet all appear to tell of the same event poses no
difficulty. Unless this Syriac telling can be proven to be
based upon known autographs of much earlier date. A fragment—or as with the Dead Sea Scrolls a library — I find the Gospels of Matthew and Luke more reliable.
I infer from this that they had some fairly precise conditions for the star or else, over a thousand years some other astronomical event would have triggered it. I would think location, in X constellation. This would also limit the time of year it could occur. I'm guessing it would have to be a comet or super novae.
I wonder if this document includes any new information on this that can be used to help determine what it could be.
Good one!
Isn’t this the document wherein the Christ Child is the star?
Very cosmic. Also probably very pseudo-historic.
An early date of composition (perhaps within a century of the canonical Gospels, as the article states) does nothing to add any credence to this documents’ veracity (IMHO).
The Infancy Gospel of Thomas has been dated to as early as the end of the first century, but that gospel’s stories of a young Jesus who, among other stories, curses a playmate who then falls down dead, point to an author who was doing nothing more than writing to satisfy a marketable curiosity on the details of the Christ not included in the canonical books themselves. It seems obvious to me that this supposed account of the Wise Men’s journey was written in the same vein.
This is indeed an interesting connection with China. Chinese astronomers recorded a new star in the constellation Capricorn in March--April of 5 B.C.E. which was visible for over 70 days. This new star could have been a nova (short for the Latin nova stella = ``new star''). A nova is caused by a white dwarf gathering enough material, usually from a nearby companion in a binary system, onto its surface to raise the surface pressure high enough for a thermonuclear explosion. The white dwarf's increase in brightness may be a factor of 10,000 to over one million. The increase to peak brightness is very rapid, within a few days, while the fading away to invisibility usually takes a few months. The new star observed by the Chinese would have appeared in the east several hours before sunrise (remember Matthew 2:2 ``...we observed his star at its rising''). However, Matthew 2:9 implies that the object was later visible in the south when the wise men headed south toward Bethlehem after their visit with King Herod. A nova would not have moved that much. The constellation Capricorn is well away from the galactic plane (by 30--40 degrees), where most stars in our galaxy (the Milky Way) are found. A nova occurring in Capricorn would be a very rare event.
I am aware that the wise men found Jesus at home. He was most likely born in a first century Judean home (though not in the home’s guest room; see the word kataluma.)
I think the assumption that Christ was two years old is a bit of a stretch. Mary and Joseph, after completing the census requirements and the time of her purification, would have been more likely to want to return to Nazareth, where they both had nearer kin.
Furthermore, if you study the Scriptures, the Greek word used in Matthew 2 can be used of an infant or child. The word even has attested usage of a newborn child.
No, Herod was acting thoroughly. He couldn’t trust the wise men’s word that they would return, therefore, he couldn’t trust their estimation of the child’s age. Better (in the mind of an insane king who did not fear God) to be safe and eliminate all baby boys two and under than to be sorry and deposed by a rival king when the babe became a man.
No, it’s oil and tar.
The Bible says that there was no room at the inn, therefore, Jesus was born in a stable. This makes sense since there were animals on the scene. You can twist the Word any way you like, but, that doesn’t make it truth. The facts remain that the wise men were NOT at the stable at the time of Jesus’s birth. And, since the scripture isn’t clear, it is also quite possible that the magi told King Herod they had been following the star for 2 years - therefore, the whacked out king had all boy babies under the age of 2 killed. That also makes sense.
The Bible says there was no room in the kataluma.
The word “kataluma” is used in Luke 2:7 and Luke 22:11 (also once in Mark 14:14, but for purposes of discussion, let’s limit ourselves to Luke’s more relevant use of the term.
Now, since we all can agree that words have meanings, why would the same word mean the *guest room* of a private house and a *commercial inn*? What textual evidence can you produce to establish that those words are used of both?
Jesus was born in a stable. During that time period, mangers were also used inside the home, as well as animals which were brought in over night to keep them from the elements. Also, the manger might have been made of concrete and not wood.It’s also possible that Jesus was born in a stall.
I’ve done some research and find that only lambs which were destined as sacrificial, and female ewes were kept in this special room, and were wrapped in “swaddling clothes.” Thus, our Lord being the sacrificial lamb was also wrapped in swaddling clothes. How appropriate that he be born in this cave or room where the spotless lambs were kept.
Our western concept of the Nativity is all wrong. Midgal Edar was the place where sacrificial lambs were birthed, and also where our Lord was born. God does nothing by chance.
So, I stand corrected on this fact.
Jesus was born in a stable. During that time period, mangers were also used inside the home, as well as animals which were brought in over night to keep them from the elements. Also, the manger might have been made of concrete and not wood.It’s also possible that Jesus was born in a stall.
I’ve done some research and find that only lambs which were destined as sacrificial, and female ewes were kept in this special room, and were wrapped in “swaddling clothes.” Thus, our Lord being the sacrificial lamb was also wrapped in swaddling clothes. How appropriate that he be born in this cave or room where the spotless lambs were kept.
Our western concept of the Nativity is all wrong. Midgal Edar was the place where sacrificial lambs were birthed, and also where our Lord was born. God does nothing by chance.
So, I stand corrected on this fact.
Explains why Herrod looked confused and said " aw hell kill anything 2 and under ".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.