Reforming the Popular Version of the Christmas Story, Part 2: The Manger & the Inn

[Dr. Bob Gonzales]

There are two questions to consider: Where was the manger? and What was the Inn? The traditional Christmas story portrays Christ lying in the manger (feeding trough) of a stable or a barn. The phrase “no room in the inn” has come to mean that the inn had a number of rooms and all of them were occupied: “No Vacancy,” therefore, is what Joseph and Mary were told, in this view. But is this really how we should interpret the Gospel narratives? The post below suggests that the traditional nativity story needs to be reformed and explains why. For Part 1, click here.

Reforming the Popular Version of the Christmas Story, Part 2: The Manger & the Inn

 

[Peairtach]

Some rather "simple" Qs on a slightly different area.

In the Matthean account it says that the wise men went "into the house". Does this at all indicate a different dwelling place to where Christ was born?

Do the time indicators in Matthew 2 indicate that Jesus was about two years old when the wise men arrived in Bethlehem and that it had taken the wise men about two years from first seeing the star to reaching Bethlehem?

Is this some minor indication that they had travelled from the Far East?

Maybe Joseph, Mary and Jesus had remained in Bethlehem for two years?

 

[johnreuther]

When did the Magi Come?

Dear Richard, I will answer your question by pointing you to what Kenneth Bailey says about this. Here it is: "Matthew informs his readers that the wise men entered THE HOUSE where they saw Mary and the child (Mt. 2:1-12). The story in Matthew confirms the suggestion that Luke's account describes a birth in a private home." (p. 36 of Jesus Through Middle-Eastern Eyes.)

The vist of the magi therefore was not a visit to a different dwelling place where Christ was born - it was the place where Christ WAS born. I do not think that there are any "time indicators" pointing to Jesus being near two years old when the Magi came to Bethlehem. In fact Luke says that Jesus was brought to the Temple at eight days of age, in nearby Jerusalem. It would not work chronologically for them to visit Jesus in Bethlehem when he was two years old, for then He would surely have been back in Nazareth. Matt. 2:1 only says "AFTER Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod, magi from the east arrived in Jerusalem....." This can be understood at face value as meaning that they had been prepared for this long journey as long in advance as was necessary for them to arrive in Bethlehem at the precise time of His birth. Hope this helps.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

Welcome to the board John; please fix your signature per the link in mine. Thanks very much.

Dear Richard, I will answer your question by pointing you to what Kenneth Bailey says about this. Here it is: "Matthew informs his readers that the wise men entered THE HOUSE where they saw Mary and the child (Mt. 2:1-12). The story in Matthew confirms the suggestion that Luke's account describes a birth in a private home." (p. 36 of Jesus Through Middle-Eastern Eyes.)

The vist of the magi therefore was not a visit to a different dwelling place where Christ was born - it was the place where Christ WAS born. I do not think that there are any "time indicators" pointing to Jesus being near two years old when the Magi came to Bethlehem. In fact Luke says that Jesus was brought to the Temple at eight days of age, in nearby Jerusalem. It would not work chronologically for them to visit Jesus in Bethlehem when he was two years old, for then He would surely have been back in Nazareth. Matt. 2:1 only says "AFTER Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod, magi from the east arrived in Jerusalem....." This can be understood at face value as meaning that they had been prepared for this long journey as long in advance as was necessary for them to arrive in Bethlehem at the precise time of His birth. Hope this helps.

 

[Peairtach]

Quote from John

It would not work chronologically for them to visit Jesus in Bethlehem when he was two years old, for then He would surely have been back in Nazareth.

Thanks for the reply John.

Why did Jesus/Ye'shua have to be back in Nazareth by the age of two?

Herod seems to have believed that Jesus by that time could be two, that's why he got all the baby boys of two and under killed?

 

[Zenas]

I didn't know they made a Christmas Story: Part 2. Is Ralphie grown up?

 

[Christusregnat]

I didn't know they made a Christmas Story: Part 2. Is Ralphie grown up?

You'll shoot both eyes out kid!

 

[johnreuther]

Rich - I've been thinking further about this question, and my son-in-law and I were talking about it last night. You are right in that there was no need for them to be back in Nazareth as I implied. And certainly the magi could have arrived some time after the birth. This would mean that Bailey's comment on p. 36, that the arrival of the magi gives credence to the view that Jesus was indeed born in a house and not a stable in a commercial inn, would be irrelevant. He could have been at the same house, or a different house when the magi arrived.

I recommend you look at a PowerPoint presentation from a former prof. of mine Dr. Robert C. Newman, astrophysicist and NT scholar, found at this link: PowerPoint Presentation - The Star of Bethlehem

You can also download the audio for this presentation on the IBRI website.
But he reconstructs the events surrounding the star of Bethlehem and comes up with 17 June 2 BC when the magi set out, and 28 Aug 2 BC when the magi arrive. This would mean that Jesus would have been about 2 months old. The fact that Herod killed all the baby boys 2 years old and under may simply be related to his insane fear and attempt to make sure that no baby who might be this dreaded Messiah was missed.

Thanks for the dialogue, John

 

[Skyler]

I did some calculations at one point and, based upon the average speed of a camel caravan, concluded that the magi could have traveled from as far as China or Russia in two years' time.

I suggested to a friend of mine that perhaps Caspar's real name was actually Kasparov.

 

[Peairtach]

I don't know if the Magi were Chinese. If they were it would cause even more of a stir in Jerusalem, unless they were used to seeing "yellow men".

This book suggests that some of the Chinese, at least, may have had more remains of special revelation descending from the time of Noah than other nations, but whether that's relevant or not is a Q. The book is somewhat interesting but also puzzling:-

Discovery of Genesis: Amazon.co.uk: Nelson: Books