Luke 2:1-20 - And it came to pass in those days...

[Mendalla]

So here it is Christmas Eve. I had planned to post this earlier, but life happened. And, let's face it, this is the classic reading for today. I've broken with my usual precedent and used the KJV. This is one of those passages where its majestic, poetic verses seem to be just right. And it's the version Linus used.

Bible Gateway passage: Luke 2:1-20 - King James Version

And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed. (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.) And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the...

www.biblegateway.com

So we have Augustus decreeing that all should be counted for tax purposes. Quirinius is governor of Syria. This seems to contradict Matthew's dating (Quirinius' tenure came after Herod's death in 4BCE and the census under Quirinius took place in 6-7 CE) which once again points up the basic notion that these stories are about what makes Jesus special, not about the facts of his life. Apparently, the scholarly consensus leans to Matthew's dating, putting Jesus birth around the end of Herod's reign, perhaps somewhere between 6BCE and 4BCE. There are some references to Jesus' age, e.g. Luke 3:23, that are used to support this dating.

Instead of Magi from the East, we have local shepherds coming, following an epic pronouncement from angels that they witnessed. Somehow, this more down-to-earth version resonates more than educated "wise men" I find. After all, these are illiterate shepherds who were no more looking for a "king" than anyone else on the streets of Bethlehem that night. They were just "watching their flocks by night" and keep a wary eye out for predators and rustlers. A modern version might be old school cowboys. And, yet, it is to them that the big revelation comes.

And what do we make of "And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn."? I have heard so many spins on this seeming temporary homelessness over the years. One of the first services I led in my old UU fellowship was a Christmas service on a theme of hospitality with this as the text (I also read it for another UU service a few years later).

So what are your thoughts on this text that many of us will be hearing read tonight and tomorrow?

 

[Mendalla]

For those who prefer a more modern translation, here's the NRSVUE version:

Bible Gateway passage: Luke 2:1-20 - New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition

The Birth of Jesus - In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered. This was the first registration and was taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. All went to their own towns to be registered. Joseph also went from the town of Nazareth in...

www.biblegateway.com

 

[Luce NDs]

We all love light stories ... even if we refuse the illumination and associated illuminatii as stimuli ... those stimuli are deeper than many would go in the myth and thus enigma erupts ... leads to blackout and other mental collapse ... if you believe in the conversion of matter into energy and vice vera!

On such flips the population is greatly stuck ... thus th pining of the talus ... great for sizing various media ... fabric velum, etc. outside of the cow as hide? There are complications if you are more into the Ba'aL ... higher bowls? Mortal understanding will not even approach the resolution ...

Defines what's beyond the populace ... right? I remain stunned by some realizations ...

 

[unsafe]

And what do we make of "And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.

There was never suppose to be a room at the Inn ------Jesus is the Lamb of God and was suppose to be born in a stable and laid in a feeding trough that the animals ate their food out of to show us that Jesus is our bread of life --He feeds us Spiritual food in this world and will continue to feed His Sheep Spiritual Food in our next life ------it was in God's plan from the very beginning ------now the wrapping in swaddling clothes was also important ---this identified to the Shepard's that Jesus was The Lamb of God ---this was a Sign to the Shepard's---- why --because ---when a lamb was born that was used for a Blood Sacrifice the Shepard's would wrap the new born Lamb in swaddling Cloth to protect them from becoming bruised or damaged in any way as the Sacrificial Lambs had to be without spot or blemish --So when the Shepard's saw Jesus in the feeding trough swaddled in swaddling cloth they knew that this was the Messiah sent by God ------

Luke 2:12

Berean Literal Bible
And this is the sign to you: You will find a baby wrapped in swaddling cloths, and lying in a manger."​

 

[Redbaron]

A Christmas Myth? Pushing "Evidence" Beyond the Christmas Story

" Shepherds Delight " by Neal Fowler is licensed under CC BY 2.0 M emes are circulating faster than ever. Stories "go viral" in a matte...

christian-intellect.blogspot.com

Seems that the idea of wrapping lambs is not well substantiated.

 

[Redbaron]

My big takeaway from the passage that the first ones who hear of the birth are shepherds, out in the field. Not the local magistrates, not members of the dynastic family, not high priests or Temple officials; but the lowest and humblest of people. Matthew's gospel has Magi from the east, offering expensive gifts; Luke has shepherds, who seem to come empty-handed, but leave full-hearted.

 

[Waterfall]

My big takeaway from the passage that the first ones who hear of the birth are shepherds, out in the field. Not the local magistrates, not members of the dynastic family, not high priests or Temple officials; but the lowest and humblest of people. Matthew's gospel has Magi from the east, offering expensive gifts; Luke has shepherds, who seem to come empty-handed, but leave full-hearted.

I wonder whoever decided shepherds were the lowest of people or that only the poor would "get" Jesus?

 

[GordW]

There was never suppose to be a room at the Inn ------Jesus is the Lamb of God and was suppose to be born in a stable and laid in a feeding trough that the animals ate their food out of to show us that Jesus is our bread of life --He feeds us Spiritual food in this world and will continue to feed His Sheep Spiritual Food in our next life ------it was in God's plan from the very beginning ------now the wrapping in swaddling clothes was also important ---this identified to the Shepard's that Jesus was The Lamb of God ---this was a Sign to the Shepard's---- why --because ---when a lamb was born that was used for a Blood Sacrifice the Shepard's would wrap the new born Lamb in swaddling Cloth to protect them from becoming bruised or damaged in any way as the Sacrificial Lambs had to be without spot or blemish --So when the Shepard's saw Jesus in the feeding trough swaddled in swaddling cloth they knew that this was the Messiah sent by God ------

Luke 2:12

Berean Literal Bible​

And this is the sign to you: You will find a baby wrapped in swaddling cloths, and lying in a manger."​

THat is a ... unique... approach

 

[GordW]

I wonder whoever decided shepherds were the lowest of people or that only the poor would "get" Jesus?

The prominence of the poor/outcast/marginalized is a defining feature of Luke's Gospel as a whole (so in this case Luke decided?)

 

[unsafe]

Shepherds and swaddling clothes

By Linda Littlefield Guest columnist On the night of our Savior’s (Baby Jesus) birth, there were shepherds watchingtheir flock. And Angels appeared to them announcing that a child was born. T…

www.southplattesentinel.com

Shepherds and swaddling clothes

These shepherds were extraordinary shepherds. They were called “Levitical Shepherds”. They had been chosen and trained to attend the flock of sheep that were to be used as sacrificial lambs in the Temple.
Sacrificial lambs had to be “spotless and without blemish.” They required special treatment and observing. According to the laws of the time, the sheep that were used for the offerings had to be a one-year-old male sheep that had been outside for 365 days (one year). When they were ready, they were taken to Jerusalem to be sacrificed on the Sabbath in the Temple.

When the mother ewe was preparing to give birth, she was taken to a special birth place, or to the only cave designated, to give birth to the sacrificial Iambs.
This cave was kept sterile and clean for the arrival of newborn sacrificial Iambs. The newborn lamb was immediately wrapped in clean swaddling cloths to protect them and keep them from blemish and danger.

Swaddling clothes described in the Bible consisted of a cloth tied together by bandage-like strips.

When the declaration was made to these Levitical Shepherds that watched their sheep in a special field full of sacrificial lambs, they apparently knew exactly where to go to discover that Baby. There were apparently many places that held mangers, but they comprehended immediately where to go to find the babe… to their cave, where their sacrificial lambs were born and wrapped in “swaddling clothes.”

 

[Redbaron]

Reading the article you cite, I note there are no Biblical, archeological, or historical citations to support Ms. Littlefield's assertions. None. She seems to be rehashing something she has heard, rather than researched.

There is no reason to think, Biblical or historical, that the shepherds of Luke 2 are 'levitical' shepherds. None. If thyy were guarding their sheep, why would they be out in the fields at night, where their potential sacrificial lambs could be attacked by wolves, or stolen by rogues? No, they were simply shepherds, watching their flocks. No more, no less.

From Mr. Fowler's article:

First of all, DeYoung uses Alfred Edersheim, a 19th century scholar who relied on late source material for many of his deductions. Since Edersheim's time the Dead Sea Scrolls and Nag Hammadi library have shed new light on the 1st century life and thought. Still, I wanted to be generous and thorough, so I pulled a copy of Edersheim's The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah to see what he actually wrote. His claim that Migdal Eder was linked in Jewish expectation to the Messiah finds it's source in the targum (translation/commentary) Pseudo-Jonathan on Genesis 35:21. However, current scholarship dates this targum to the 4th century A.D., so this doesn't necessarily tell us what 1st century expectation was.

Edersheim makes a case for priestly shepherds based on a couple of passages from the Mishnah (Shekalim 7:4 and Bava K. 7:7). These seem to check out and reputable scholars, such as Keener, have allowed for the possibility.

However, Edersheim says nothing about the structure of Migdal Eder (and neither do the Biblical texts Genesis 35:21; Micah 4:8), nor does he say anything about these priestly shepherds swaddling newborn lambs. So, I referred to all reputable sources in my personal library that might speak to Migdal Eder or priestly shepherds or swaddling. My conclusions have led me to believe that...

Mr. DeYoung, secondly, seems to use anecdotal evidence or pure conjecture to make this theory more appealing.

Seems Edersheim's evidence is open to question. And Luke says NOTHING about 'levitical' shepherds. In fact, as GordW points out, such high-falutin' recipients of the message would have been antithetical to one of the Lucan gospel's ,main thrusts.

 

[Waterfall]

The prominence of the poor/outcast/marginalized is a defining feature of Luke's Gospel as a whole (so in this case Luke decided?)

True, but......

 

[Redbaron]

As an introduction to Luke's telling of the story, the mention of the shepherds sets a tone for the kind of people Jesus will become involved with (fishers and lepers and other outcasts) as well as some of the people who will pop up in the parables (Samaritans, runaway younger brothers, and Lazarus the beggar.) It makes sense, and sets a trajectory.

 

[jimkenney12]

I read in one commentary that the word translated as inn meant a guest room in a house, implying Joseph's relatives in Bethlehem already had other relatives staying with them

 

[Mystic]

From Eminent New Testament scholar, NT Wright on the correct translation of Luke 2:2:

It depends on the meaning of the word protos, which usually means 'first'. Thus most translations of Luke 2.2 read 'this was the first [protos] census, when Quirinius was governor of Syria', or something like that. But in the Greek of the time, as the standard major Greek lexicons point out, the word protos came sometimes to be used to mean 'before', when followed (as this is) by the genitive case.
A good example is in John 1.15, where John the Baptist says of Jesus 'he was before me', with the Greek being again protos followed by the genitive of 'me'. I suggest, therefore, that actually the most natural reading of the verse is: 'This census took place before the time when Quirinius was governor of Syria.'
This solves an otherwise odd problem: why should Luke say that Quirinius' census was the first? Which later ones was he thinking of? (Who Was Jesus pp. 88-89)

In his massive magisterial book "The Birth of the Messiah," Raymond Brown points out that evidence for Egypt supports the view that the Romans conducted a census every 14 years. This would imply that there was an earlier census of Palestine in 7 BC, the year (as Brown points out) of the best scholarly candidate for the "Star" of Bethlehem. The triple conjunction of Jupiter, Saturn, and Mars in that year would mean that a great world leader was born in the Palestinian region--a tradition independently supported by Josephus.

4 Related matters:
(1) How would the shepherd find baby Jesus? In his pre-Christian boyhood in Samaria (c. 100 AD), Justin Martyr learns the tradition that Joseph "took his quarters in a certain cave near the (Bethlehem) village (Dialogue 78)." The shepherd would encounter the cave manger en route to Bethlehem (Luke 2:16). The ancient Church of the Nativity is built over this cave. Origen already reports Christian pilgrimages to this cave.

(2) How might the Magi find the baby Jesus?
First, let's clear up some misconceptions.
(a) Many interpret "from the East" as a reference to Persia. In fact, horoscopes have been found at Qumran. So the Magi may have come from the much closer Essene community "east" of Jerusalem. The Magi know about the Messianic prophecy about Bethlehem in Micah 5:2 and would not need to "follow" a "star" to get there. They would encounter Jesus in the cave en route. Ancient Jews often used caves as a "house."
(b) Matthew need imply no more than 2 magi providing one small gift between them of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. Popular legendizing reads 3 wealthy Persian Magi, each bearing 1 of the 3 gifts.
As for Herod's slaughter of Bethlehem baby boys, recall 2 facts:
(i) Herod became insanely paranoid in his later years and murdered many family members he suspected of scheming to replace him (so Josephus).
(ii) When you visit Bethlehem, the first thing that strikes you are the huge ruins of Herod's palace (the Herodium) that tower over the landscape there.

(3) Were shepherds poor? No, ancient rabbis report that shepherds were considered immoral because they were constantly on the move, and so, had no fixed address for censuses and could thus evade tax payment.

(4) Why would Luke exclude the Magi story?
In early Christianity "magic" and "magi" were considered immoral (Didache 2:2) and astrology was considered a form of magic.

 

[GordW]

I read in one commentary that the word translated as inn meant a guest room in a house, implying Joseph's relatives in Bethlehem already had other relatives staying with them

THe NRSVUE makes the choice to use "guest room" rather than "inn" in verse 7

 

[Mendalla]

(4) Why would Luke exclude the Magi story?
In early Christianity "magic" and "magi" were considered immoral (Didache 2:2) and astrology was considered a form of magic.

So why did Matthew include it? He and Luke are generally thought to be fairly close datewise so it does not seem likely that this attitude would have changed in between them, even if Matthew was a bit earlier.

(2) How might the Magi find the baby Jesus?
First, let's clear up some misconceptions.
(a) Many interpret "from the East" as a reference to Persia. In fact, horoscopes have been found at Qumran. So the Magi may have come from the much closer Essene community "east" of Jerusalem. The Magi know about the Messianic prophecy about Bethlehem in Micah 5:2 and would not need to "follow" a "star" to get there. They would encounter Jesus in the cave en route. Ancient Jews often used caves as a "house."
(b) Matthew need imply no more than 2 magi providing one small gift between them of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. Popular legendizing reads 3 wealthy Persian Magi, each bearing 1 of the 3 gifts.
As for Herod's slaughter of Bethlehem baby boys, recall 2 facts:
(i) Herod became insanely paranoid in his later years and murdered many family members he suspected of scheming to replace him (so Josephus).
(ii) When you visit Bethlehem, the first thing that strikes you are the huge ruins of Herod's palace (the Herodium) that tower over the landscape there.

I will try to remember to bring this forward when I do the next BPoTW, which will deal with the Epiphany story. If I forget, maybe you can repost these comments there.

And, yeah, Herod the Great was a bit mad, rather like some of his Roman buddies.

THe NRSVUE makes the choice to use "guest room" rather than "inn" in verse 7

Had not caught that, but I did not look that closely at the NRSVUE translation. It does change the picture as Jim suggests, eh.

 

[Mystic]

Mendalla: "So why did Matthew include it [the Magi story]? He and Luke are generally thought to be fairly close datewise so it does not seem likely that this attitude would have changed in between them, even if Matthew was a bit earlier."

Since you plan to post Matthew's text about the Magi, it's probably best that I postpone my answer until then. I note here that there were Essene horoscopes and therefore Magi at Qumran and that, around 100 AD, a Jewish Christian sect called the Elchasaites, which embraced astrology, flourished in Apamea, Syria, close to the presumed place of Matthew's origin.

 

[Luce NDs]

After the flash of Chrismas ... it all got fuzzy and dense as in a Romantic rise in the myth ... seen only by the omniscient ... that beyond mortal!

Some call it an ep is fanny! it follows ...