Showing posts with label manger. Show all posts
Showing posts with label manger. Show all posts
Monday, December 21, 2020

736 - Part 2: What's Left Unsaid Is ...

Spirituality Column #736

December 22, 2020

Common Christianity / Uncommon Commentary

Part 2: What’s Left Unsaid Is …

By Bob Walters

“The shepherds returned [to their flocks], glorifying and praising God for all they had heard and seen.” – Luke 2:20

These gleeful shepherds who had just seen the baby Jesus would have been horrified shepherds if the popular Christmas birth-of-Jesus narrative were true.

Not horrified or fearful of the angel who spoke to them, nor of seeing, well, God in a feeding trough. No, if they knew Mary and Joseph had been refused hospitality and then left alone in a stable or cave to fend for themselves in childbirth? Impossible.  Even these poor shepherds would not have let that happen, or let them stay alone in a stable.

That would not have happened anywhere at that time in that culture: not in Bethlehem, not among the rich or the poor, and certainly not to a family of “the house and lineage of David” in “the town of David.” (Luke 2:4).  In that town Joseph, basically, was a royal and would have been welcomed into any home in Bethlehem.  Likely, he had a plan to stay with family or friends … the Bible doesn’t tell us if he did or didn’t.

Let’s take a brief, issue-by-issue look at the words of Luke 2 and the birth of Jesus through the lens of Middle Eastern cultural expert Ken Bailey’s book, Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes.  Cultural context answers (and poses) many questions.

- The Trip (v4): “Nazareth up to Bethlehem…”  That’s a 91-mile trip south though farmland but “up” into the Judean hill country, not far from Hebron where pregnant Mary had traveled 90 miles to visit Elizabeth for three months, then returned home. (Luke 1:39, 56). I notice nowhere does the Bible say Joseph and Mary traveled to Bethlehem alone, so perhaps others from Nazareth went, too.  I’d have organized it for Mary to stay with Elizabeth and meet Joseph in Bethlehem 1. to hide her pregnancy from Nazareth and 2. to save Mary, basically, two 90-mile trips in late pregnancy.  Nobody asked me.

- Birth time? (v5): “While they were there the days were accomplished …” We mentioned this last week.  Very plainly, Jesus was not born the night they arrived.

- The “Inn” (v6): “no room for them in the inn…”  “Inn” here means an extra room in someone’s home (Greek word katalymati is a spare room, not a hotel), adjacent to or above a home’s main living area.  The “stable” would be a lower, open area on one end of the house where animals at night were kept inside for protection from thieves and the warmth for the family. A manger would have been in there; warm and well-attended. The home’s “spare room” evidently was already occupied.

- Manger (v7): – That’s an animal eating trough, either a stand or possibly a bowl dug into the floor of the main room adjacent to where the animals were kept at night.

- Birth attendants: As was custom nearly everywhere in the world, local women would have taken care of the pregnant Mary.  Men would have been cleared out of the main room of the house where the birth took place while various women attended to Mary and the newborn. Then, as was every baby of that time, Jesus would have been swaddled – v7 says “[by] Mary” and, in that circumstance, laid in the warm hay of the nearby manger because “there was no room in the inn [guest area]” of the house.

- Born at night? (v8): The Bible says the angel visited the shepherds at night, not that Jesus was born at night.  However, in v11, the angel says Jesus was “…born this day …” which could very well imply nighttime, since Jewish “days” started at sundown.

- The Shepherds 1 (v8-15): The lowliest of peasants, the shepherds were the first to be visited by the angel.  Note that it was not the Jewish leaders who were notified.

- The Shepherds 2: The shepherds (v9) were “terrified,” then the angel says “fear not.”  Why is that important? Because, as St. Jerome in the fourth century pointed out, when you are terrified you do not understand what somebody is trying to say to you.  The angel wanted the shepherds to calm down, listen to his message, and understand.  That “glory of the Lord” display (v9), I’m sure, would likely take anyone’s breath away.

- The Shepherds 3: They were first to learn, and it’s critically significant, that “a savior has been born unto you … he is Christ that Lord” (v11). “Unto you” is personal.

- The Shepherds 4: Their sign (v12) that the shepherds would find their savior in a manger wrapped in swaddling clothes, was also critical. Why?  Because this told the shepherds that the savior / Christ / Lord – anticipated by the whole Jewish nation – was humbly one of them. The fact they could go visit the Messiah in a common home in a common manger among common people would bring the shepherds great joy; it meant they were not separated from God by their lowly station in life.

- The Shepherds 5: That the shepherds visited Jesus and then (v17-18) “spread the word about Jesus’s birth, the angel’s visit to them, and all they had “heard and seen” is rich with meaning.  They had understood what the angel told them.  On the authority of that angel, the shepherds told “others” what Mary and Joseph likely would have been reluctant to tell them: that the baby Jesus was the Messiah.  It was only the shepherds who the Bible identifies as the initial spreaders of this news.  Even Mary “pondered [these things] in her heart” (v19).  And the fact that the shepherds had “others” to tell suggests strongly that Jesus, Mary, and Joseph were not alone.

- The Shepherds 6: The shepherds returned to their flocks in the fields, “glorifying and praising God for all they had heard and seen” (v20). These shepherds had just been trusted with telling the truth of Jesus’s mission to fulfil God’s salvation of mankind, and whether they understood the full impact of that is hard to say.  But what we can say is that not only were they rejoicing to God; they were satisfied that the village had provided adequate and maybe even laudable care and hospitality amid this birth.  Culturally, that’s something the shepherds would have insisted on and understood,

What’s left for us to understand is to rejoice and praise God, too. What’s left unsaid is that we aren’t meant to be Jesus; we are meant to be shepherds

Say what you will, I’m pretty sure that is the true meaning of Christmas.

Walters (rlwcom@aol.com) notes a few other things: 1. Some Bibles say they went to Bethlehem to be taxed (KJV), for a census (NIV), or to be registered (ESV).  It’s all the same Greek root word “apographe.” 2. Jerusalem was also known as the City of David. 3. Nobody knows the exact date of Jesus’s birth; but everyone agrees it was not December 25, and not the year “0000.”  4. The Wise Men showed up months later (Matthew 2:1-12).  5. Everybody tries to explain the Star in terms of astronomy (like the Saturn-Jupiter confluence this week); maybe God just put it there … like the Bible says. 
Monday, July 9, 2018

608 - Cage Match

Spirituality Column #608
July 10, 2018
Common Christianity / Uncommon Commentary

Cage Match
By Bob Walters

Critical thinking took a religious, political, and media holiday last week when an Indianapolis church put caged figures of Joseph, Mary, and baby Jesus in its front yard.

Most of the world sees Holy Family figurines like these only in Christmas displays. But when an opportunistic, tone-deaf, cynical liberal political point arises – such as, “Let’s blame our government for the spectacle of foreign children separated from irresponsible, criminal, or nefarious alien adults who have put them at risk” – then those who typically ignore or repress Jesus are suddenly thrilled to play the “Jesus-in-a-cage” card; biblically, historically, and contemporarily incorrect …and slanted as can be.

My prayer would be that these “Jesus as a political news prop” folks had as much enthusiasm to read their Bibles and understand and know Jesus, and maybe show up for true worship and Christian fellowship once in a while.  Perhaps then they’d understand the deep folly of this particularly mismatched protest.  What’s so wrong?

Oh my.  Where to start? Luke 2? Taxes? Bethlehem? Wise men? Herod? Egypt?  Never mind modern politics; the Christmas baby Jesus was not a refugee.

The short course is to simply read Luke 2:1-7, the first stanza of the Bible’s  famed “no room in the inn” Christmas story that ends in v14 with “Glory to God in the highest, and on Earth peace, good will toward men” (er, “persons,” but not the point).

Anyone who truly understands the first two chapters of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke – the story of the birth of Jesus – knows that Joseph and his family, from the line of David, were called on official business (census and taxes) from their home in Nazareth to the City of David (Bethlehem) where, with their Davidic lineage, they would have been received as honored family members.  And Mary being near-term pregnant?  The women of the village would have gathered to midwife and assist with the birth in any way they could.  It’s the Semitic way.  Mary and baby very likely were well cared for.

The faux Christmas Crèche “Holy Family as refugees” narrative emanates not just from modern liberals and progressive globalists but from a very, very old and mostly non-factual, extra-biblical legend developed in the late second century that comprises most of what modern culture thinks it knows about the nativity of Jesus.

The Bible mentions no Bethlehem innkeeper.  The Wise Men didn’t show up for another year or so.  Jesus was not born in a lonely stable or cave but in someone’s home, with the “inn” (Greek word katalymati, which means lodging place, not hotel) being the home’s main area and the “stable” being a barn-type room on one end of the house where animals were kept inside for protection from thieves and the warmth of the family. A manger, or feeding trough, would have been in there; warm and well-attended.

Yes, the Holy Family members were refugees in Egypt, briefly, a year or two later when Herod tried to kill Jesus (read Matthew 2), but Jesus then was no infant in a manger.  As an adult, the wandering Jesus was a missionary, not a refugee.

A fascinating book, Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes” by Kenneth E. Bailey wonderfully describes the cultural details of Jesus’s birth.  No, that birth didn’t make international headlines, but back then the faithful weren’t trying to make political hay.

Walters (rlwcom@aol.com) figures modern liberals expressing political “outrage” at caging baby Jesus would have defended Mary’s right to abort Him.
Monday, December 30, 2013

372 - Wrapping Up the Christmas Story

Spirituality Column #372
December 31, 2013
Current in Carmel-Westfield-Noblesville-Fishers-Zionsville

Wrapping Up the Christmas Story
By Bob Walters

Another chapter of annual Yuletide festivities is pretty much closed.
 
Along with the lights, ornaments, trinkets and leftover giftwrap, we mostly shelve our personal Christmas stories until next year.  Baubles sit silently in boxes while memories marinate softly in our subconscious.  Emotions endure and details blur.
 
‘Til next year.
 
We’ll soon enough revisit the sublime mystery of the season’s peaceful reflection and holy meaning.  We’ll soon enough marshal the strength and fortitude necessary to outflank the mayhem of the season’s preparatory demands.
 
But that is months hence.  For now, for the most part, our stories rest.
 
As our emotionally-charged, tradition-rich, personal and family Christmas stories go dormant, it’s as good a time as any to take an academic look at the real story of Christmas.  Just as holiday memories are often leavened by emotion, many nativity facts don’t line-up with traditional Christmas hype.  The truth, now, is less likely to disturb anyone’s sternly personal seasonal “feelings.”
 
As for the basics, we know that Christmas celebrates the birth of Jesus Christ.  Regardless, a huge swath of today’s culture downplays, disparages and is often downright hostile to the “Jesus” thing.  Of course, plenty of people were hostile to the “Jesus” thing 2,000 years ago, too.  Nobody imagined mankind’s salvation would emanate out of a humble peasant manger.
 
Were Mary and Joseph really turned away at the “inn” and left alone in a stable or cave?  Not likely.  Kenneth Bailey’s fascinating book “Jesus through Middle Eastern Eyes” discounts that narrative as an errant confluence of long-standing biblical mistranslation (“inn” actually means “extra room”), cultural misunderstanding (ignoring routine Middle Eastern hospitality) and spurious ancient legend (second-century folktales).  Jesus likely was born in a peasant home where at night animals were “stabled” inside for warmth.
 
Even if Mary and Joseph arrived in Bethlehem unannounced, being “of the line of David” they would be received as near-royalty in the “City of David.”  Any pregnant woman would have been aided by local mid-wives.  The shepherds being “glad at what they saw” (Luke 2:20) tells us the baby Jesus they visited was well-attended to.
 
And Christmas Day that we celebrate, December 25, is not the actual birthday of Jesus.  Nobody knows the true date but scholarship suggests early spring of 3-4 B.C. based on known political leaders (Caesar Augustus, Herod, etc.) mentioned in the Bible.  Celebrating Christ’s incarnation (John 1:14) on December 25 was a church-mandated over-write of the post-solstice Roman pagan feast of Saturnalia which celebrated the lengthening of days: in other words – fittingly – increasing light.
 
More light, of course, wraps up the best part of the Christmas story.
 
Walters (rlwcom@aol.com) prays that the light of Christ will shine brightly on you and yours throughout 2014.

Archives

Labels

Enter your email address to get updated about new content:

Popular Posts