Just to stir things up at this time of the year...I have some questions, which I hope you, the reader, can answer
1. Mary and Joeseph head off to to Bethlehem for the census, only to find there is no room at the inn. Surely there are no Inns in ye olde worlde Bethlehem?
2. While shepherds watch their flocks by night - tish and pish, I say. What are shepherds doing watching over lambs and sheep in December? Surely thats more of a job in the Spring time
3. Three wise men, my arse! Following a star on the off chance of finding a new born baby. Haven't they ever heard of maternity hospitals?
Full of glaring inconsistancies, that nativity story is.
Discuss......
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
44 comments:
1. From the Greek, "Kataluma" which means lodging place or inn. Yes, they had them then.
3. Doesn't say anything about there being 3 of them and they were called Magi, not really clear what this means, Eastern Kings? Astronomers? Wise Men? Who Knows. But they weren't going just on the off chance, but because of the star that they saw. And in those days, there weren't such thing as maternity hospitals, so they went to Herod's palace expecting to find the new king there...
As for 2, can't really argue with that one.
Merry Christmas!
I was playing devils advocate with question 1 actually. I heard that the proper meaning was lost in translation and that he they lodged with Joes family in Bethlehem. In translation it came out as Inn.
I don't think anyone knows anything about Joseph's family living there. Only that he would have originally come from there. The Jews trace there ancestry back a very long way, longer than us. It's quite unlikely that this would suggest he had any actual relatives living there.
Our equivalent might be Redrover having to go sign the census in Scotland because our ancestors came from there lol. There would probably not be any room at the inn for him there either for some strange reason.
LOL! That would be sooo funny!
Another thing that has always irked me about the nativity...what sort of bloke was Joe?
Imagine the conversation:
Mary: "Hey Joe, you know Im a virgin?"
Joe: "Yup"
Mary: "Well Im pregnant, but I haven't been unfaithful to you, oh no, its Gods child"
Joe: "Oh well thats perfectly fine and acceptable, and i totally believe you, lets walk hundreds of miles to bethlehem"
I can just imagine the same conversation in modern day times on the jeremy Kyle show or Trasha, and Joeseph not even insisting on a DNA test!
But that's not what happened. Joseph didn't just accept it. He was planning to divorce her quietly (because if he made a fuss, she would have to be stoned and he didn't want that).
But then the angel came for a chat with him personally. That sort of has an impact.
I used to tell a joke about poor old Joseph, who at the time felt that he could not trust anyone else but God - and then Mary has a word.
Well either way, I would find it very hard to swallow :-)
AND! If God had poked my bird and got her in the family way, I wouldn't want an angel coming to explain things to me, I'd want an explanation from the man himself
But God had not poked her. That's why she was still a virgin. Everything still intact etc. Hm, that would mean that Jesus himself technically took her virginity on the way out - semantics.
You wouldn't want God looking at you, it would kill you. And the preincarnate Son was otherwise engaged at the time so and Angel of the Lord was God being kind.
Heh isn't 'poking' a great verb!
Why would looking at God kill you? i thought God was love? (thats what it said on the wall of Olivers Twists Orphanage, anyway)
Because it is like looking at the sun. As Samson's dad said, ""We are doomed to die!" he said to his wife. "We have seen God!"" (Though he had not really seen God but an Angel)
Actually, it is possible to look at the sun by using a pin hole camera or other specialist telescope. That's a bit like Jesus' job. He allows us a way of seeing God safely whilst masking our own shortcomings and hence stopping our bodies for being burned up.
O righto :-) I expect God is quite busy these days too, so he would need a good secretary. What with smiting the enemies, moving in mysterious ways and screwing up insurance claims with his pesking 'acts of God'
:-D Merry Xmas Evo!
Lol, Merry Christmas to you too.
LOL! Explain that last comment Kevin!
Very wise.
its a story made up so that primary schools have something to do at christmas in staging a nativity play. and if you cant argue with marks question 2 that must mean that there are inconsistancies in the story, another being, would a baby actually be able to break through a virgin from the inside?.........a small question for you what existed before the creation of the universe?
Merry Christmas Mark!
Not being religious myself, I have little to contribute to the conversation, and what I might add may offend some people; which isn't really in the Christams spirit (and in complete juxtaposition)
I do think Joseph is the most tragic character of the story though. Poor sod
i will put you out of your misery evo, i will help you with the answer to question 2 seeing as you seem unable to look at the bigger picture, the answer is either christmas was not at this time of year and has just landed here over the years, ..............or, and this is the killer, could it possibly be the fact that all this took part in bethlehem, which isnt in england, and spring may just be at a different time of the year there?
and surely, if joseph and mary were married, as you say he was going to divorce her quietly because he didnt want her stoned, im taking it that the reason for the divorce, before the "angel had a word" would have been adultery? well surely all he had to do to spare her was get it annulled on the grounds of non consummation if she was still a virgin, hence saving the stoning? like i have said all along, bollocks.
Parasites......
Lets face it when you steal or repackage other religions celebrations, including 25th December (pagan Roman holiday), you can only be doing it for one thing.....
Money - and how well they do that. It's the longest running scam in history.
The next is good ole Labour......
Yes Anon, and another good scam is..."See how long you can borrow your workmates post digger before he gets annoyed and wants it back" :-D
Oh dear oh dear. Well, since I've never been one to miss an opportunity to play bash the thicko, allow me to respond to Phil's comments. You never know, if he listens, he might just learn something.
I didn't argue with Mark cos I took his question as more of a jesting remark. Sheep have to be looked after the whole year around, I agree with Mark, I would rather only be doing it in the Spring. (there is no mention of lambs). Mark you, I don't think we actually know what time of year this was happening anyway, Dec 25 is just the time in the calendar chosen - no one is claiming it is actually Jesus' birthday - just like no one claims the queen really was born on two different days (though you may well like to argue that). Lighten up Phil, it's Christmas.
If you want me to answer more about the baby breaking through a virgin, you're going to have to structure your question a little more lucidly. Happy to help, but I do need a certain amount of clarity I'm afraid.
What existed before the creation of the universe? God of course. Next... (Quick one for you, how is my answer to this question infinitely more informative than current scientific knowledge?)
Lol to you putting me out of my misery, would be a long time before that might happen. But all the same, I feel it my duty to point out that "all of this" did not happen at the same time. The wise men, (though the bible says nothing about wise men, but I use the term so that you might keep up) visit Joseph and Mary in a house rather than the stable, so definitely not at the same time as the Shepherds and possibly quite a while afterwards.
And as for the divorce thing - sun reader sun reader sun reader. Not everyone's culture is the same as yours. Mary and Joseph were not married, they were betrothed. It appears that they were still not married by the time the baby is being born. But, in those days - and I know this is hard for you to grasp - for Jews, betrothal was almost exactly the same as being married. In fact, I think it was common for them to have sex before marriage to their betrothed. But Joseph didn't because the angel told him not to - though the angel did tell him to take her as his wife - and so live with her no doubt.
He could have broken off the engagement but he would have had to give his reason. By marrying her, and then having a quiet divorce after the baby was born, she would not have been punished.
You really could become a London cabby you know.
woo hoo the birth of christ according to evo. lol. so lets get this straight, when the story says mary was josephs wife, they werent married really but in those days it was like them being married, the three wise men didnt visit mary and joseph in the stable but in a house,we dont actually know the date of the birth so as stated in a previous comment it was nicked from the pagans,an angel had told joseph to live with mary!
and you tell me to lighten up? lol.
so why then does the church put across a false view of all this when they tell the story of the nativity? shouldnt it tell it as it really happened and not, to use an analogy, gloss it up so it makes a good hollywood plot.
ive nothing else to add. lol. except to say, can you let me have a copy of the new evo bible when you have finished writing it to your version cos itll be a howl, are you going to stick with the original ending or is he going to die from the jewish star being hurled at him by some mad kung fu fighter............nah stick to the cross. bye. this is phil signing out OVER AND OUT.
hm, I think the nativity is sort of a snao shot for sun readers. The birth is only in Matthew and Luke. One of them tells us about shepherds, the other about the Magi (and it says nothing about there being three of them).
But as I survey my bible, I think I see the problem for a sun reader, there are no pictures.
Funny how people can mock without ever having read for themselves.
The "story" never says that Joseph and Mary are married.
Matthew 1:18 "This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit."
Luke 2:5 "He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child."
But of course, if you would like to argue with me once more about things you know nothing about, that would only be par for the course. Friendly advice, give up while you are behind.
lol. sun reader lol. i nearly pissed myself lol. religion "dumbing down" the nativity story. lol.whose the sun reader? at least i dont believe everything i read in the papers, maybe you shouldnt in the bible. lol. youll be telling me next david icke isnt the second coming lol. lol. lol. lol.
"lol. sun reader lol. i nearly pissed myself lol."
Yes, that is kind of my point. You can get special pants for that you know.
and what point would that be? what has incontinence got to do with anything here, come on your just making yourself look rather silly, a man with your intelligence. lol. lol. lol. lol.
david icke wont look on you favourably if you stoop to childish remarks like that.
Yada Yada Yada,
You really should take that friendly advice.
to coin a modern phrase.......WHOTEVA. lol
Wow - thank you for enlightening me on this!! I found it very interesting to read :-)
Although I do find it amusing the little side swipes taking place.... interesting that religion is the number one reason for world war - although reading the comments, one can see how it would escalate to that point :)
Wanna make something of it ;)
Haha!! No no!! *backs away slowly* I'm good, thanks :-)
i have just come back to this post after a break and i have read it again, evo, i think an apology is in order, i said the shepherds were watching the sheep in december because it may have been spring there as we live in a different part of the world. you said there was no mention of lambs, well read marks question 2 again, he did say lambs and sheep, funny how you never picked up on that
I am never one not to apologise when one is in order. But I don't think one is in order here.
As you will note from my response regarding Mark's No. 2, you will see that I thought he was simply jesting which is what illicited my affirmatory responsive jest when I said I had no argument with the fact that I wouldn't want to look after sheep of a winters eve.
Hence, I would disagree with you that my replies to Mark where less than substantive given this context.
But I appreciate your appeal.
(Just in case, when I said there was no mention of lambs, I was referring to the actual bible story rather than anything dreamed up in the heads of the playwrite.
you have spelt playwright wrong
Cheers, you have missed a full stop out. :P
(Ever get the feeling its a bit of a slow news day in the Evo/Phil conflict?)
surely i must have just missed a full stop, not actually missed a full stop out? i might be wrong but when you think about it, it sounds rather bad grammar. We talk that way because we do, but to be grammatically correct im sure you are wrong............wanna argue about it or are you going to surrender? lol.
Hm, I am geting fed up with this lol business I have to tell you. I am as guilty as the next man but this as an abbreviation of "laughing out loud" and as such, each letter really needs its own punctuation. It should be l.o.l.!
I will take that as a surrender then L.O.L
Not a surrender.
I wonder about the word "out" and its validity.
I tell you something that bugs me. If you have a problem, it needs to be sorted out. It does not need to be sorted. That's lazy American in my book. But maybe not. I think you are championing the cause for lazy American speech. I will never surrender to that!
(And you missed out another .)
should you have not put an . after the brackets to close your sentence? as the . inside the brackets was just there to show me what i had left off my piece, and anyway if it was your . to close your comment it comes outside not inside your brackets.
Oh no it doesn't, any sentence fully encapsulated in parentheses should be terminated within said parentheses. Elementary Phil, elementary.
Post a Comment