The Nativity

[George]

My dear friends, there is something which has been bothering me for quite some time that I would like to run past you and see what anyone else thinks.

In the story of the Nativity which is found I n Matthew and Luke there are two separate and distinct words used for the men who first visited Jesus. Immediately below you will find one of the verses from Matthew which refers to the men as “wise men.” I have included the verse and then the definition of the term “wise men.”

(Mat 2:1) Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,

G3097
??????
magos
mag'-os
Of foreign origin [H7248]; a Magian, that is, Oriental scientist; by implication a magician: - sorcerer, wise man.

In Luke the men are referred to as “shepherds.” I have placed one of the uses of the word “shepherd” below again along with the definition of the word.

(Luk 2:8) And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night.

G4166
???????
poime?n
poy-mane'
Of uncertain affinity; a shepherd (literally or figuratively): - shepherd, pastor.

If we look at this literally as I believe the Bible is written there is a vast difference between a shepherd and a wise man. My word, a wise man is defined as an Oriental scientist or Magian. If you look at the Young’s Analytical Concordance the shepherd is referred to as a keeper or feeder. Since when is an Oriental scientist a keeper of feeder?

My point is this; I believe these two accounts refer to two different visits by two different groups of men. Incidentally the Bible does not mention that there were three of them either. There is no mention of a specific number as has taken over modern folklore.

What say you all?

In Christ,
George

[Brother Tim]

Without question, these two accounts, Matthew and Luke, recall the events of two separate visits by two separate groups of men at two very separate times.

Luke tells the story of the visit by local shepherds on the day of Jesus' birth.

Quote:[bold underlining mine]
Luke 2:8 And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night.
9 And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid.
10 And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.
11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.
12 And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.
13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying,
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.
15 And it came to pass, as the angels were gone away from them into heaven, the shepherds said one to another, Let us now go even unto Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pass, which the Lord hath made known unto us.
16 And they came with haste, and found Mary, and Joseph, and the babe lying in a manger.

Matthew tells the story of the visit by foreign "wise men" (the scholars of that period), who were "from the east", very likely the area around Babylon or the even the Persian region. They did not come until some significant period of time later, as much as two years after Jesus' birth.

Quote:[bold underlining mine]
Matthew 2:1 Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,
2 Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him.
...
9 When they had heard the king, they departed; and, lo, the star, which they saw in the east, went before them, till it came and stood over where the young child was.
10 When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceeding great joy.
11 And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; gold, and frankincense, and myrrh.
12 And being warned of God in a dream that they should not return to Herod, they departed into their own country another way.
...
16 Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently inquired of the wise men.

Hope this clears things up.

[Brother Tim]

P.S.
The grouping of both shepherds and wise men in nativity scenes around Christmas time, as well as the linking implied (happening at the same time) by most Christmas plays is one of the "pet-peeves" that I have about careless misinterpretation of very plainly-worded accounts.

Arrgh!

[George]

Thank you Brother Tim. You have bolstered my thoughts and beliefs very well. It is amazing how reading the Bible will really mess up some people's theology!

In Christ,
George

[Brother Tim]

My father had a favorite phrase when one of his students wanted to debate a doctrinal point: He would always say, "But what does It {the Scripture in question] say!"

[Upholder]

I was writing a reply, but Brother Tim beat me to it! He is spot on. They are two seperate groups of men, and the visits took place at two separate times. It is amazing how much tradition has distorted the account of Christ's birth. Movies like "Ben Hur" have helped reinforce erroneous views. People have even come up with names for the wise men: Balthasar, Melchior, and Caspar (the friendly ghost?)! And where does it say in the Bible that there were only three wise men? In Matthew 2:3 it says that Herod was troubled and "all Jerusalem with him"! How would the presence of only three wise men trouble all Jerusalem? And would three wise men really come all the way from the east bearing expensive gifts without any kind of escort? That wouldn't be wise.
No wonder many people think it's all just a fairytale!

[George]

Again thank you my Brothers. As I said this has been troubling me for some time. I thought I was on the right track but as you can see I am still learning. Unfortunately or fortunately however one cares to look at it when thiis hit me again this moorning my Pastor is not available.

We are into Spiritual Emphasis week at our Christian School and we also have an Evangelist with us. So Pastor is a very busy man. Yet as you can see I knew where to go for reassurance.

Although we are a very small group until someone rolls in who wants to cause problems, I know that I am among men who love God's Word and do not attempt to privately interpret it. (I think I've heard that one before!)

I am really looking forward to tonight. I just love it when I get to go to Church every night of the week.

In Christ,
George

[Davo]

Upholderr, I think Herod was troubled about the news of the birth of the King of the Jews.

Where doe is say that Jesus was born in a stable?

[George]

Davo Wrote:Upholderr, I think Herod was troubled about the news of the birth of the King of the Jews.

Where doe is say that Jesus was born in a stable?

I can answer that one. It is in the New Testament. Four times in the New Testament and particularly 3 times in Luke it is written that He will be found in a stall. Let us take a look at the definition of that word:

Stall
STALL, n. [G., to set, that is, to throw down, to thrust down. See Still.]

1. Primarily, a stand; a station; a fixed spot; hence, the stand or place where a horse or an ox is kept and fed; the division of a stable, or the apartment for one horse or ox. The stable contains eight or ten stalls.

There you have it.

In Christ,
George

[Mongol Servant]

Good study, Bro George! Two events. Modern roman catholic tradition has distorted much Biblical truth.

On another note, the "wise men" are not necessarily "oriental scientists". After reading much of Riplinger's new book, Hazardous Materials, on the corruption of lexicons, concordances, and the men behind them; I don't trust most (if not all) Hebrew/Greek word definitions. Strong, Liddel-Scott, Thayer, Schaff, and a host of others, were caught up in much Greek philosophy, which distorted (tainted) their reasoning and focus. A concordance may be useful in finding an English word in a particular verse in the scriptures, but not the definitions in the back. Since the Koine Greek language died out over 800 years ago, these lexicon producers utilized the word definitions as they were found in Greek philosophy books and crafts, available at the time of publication. "Oriental scientist" would fit right in with a Greek philospher's ideas!

You've heard of the old fellar that lives out in the country, who has common sense, also called "horse sense"? I believe that's what these "wise"men were - very common herders, that were wise in their common sense.

Just my 2-cts worth!

[Upholder]

Davo Wrote:Upholder, I think Herod was troubled about the news of the birth of the King of the Jews.

Yes, that is true.
It is astounding to think that Herod thought he could kill the Lord Jesus Christ. The chief priests and scribes read to him Micah 5:2 which says: "yet out of thee (Bethlehem) shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." Why did Herod believe this verse enough to send the soldiers to Bethlehem, and yet still think that he could kill the "everlasting" Christ?

Davo Wrote:Where does it say that Jesus was born in a stable?

I don't recall saying that Jesus was born in a stable. The Scripture doesn't give the exact spot of Jesus' birth, but we are told that he was lain in a manger. The wording of Luke 2:7 strongly suggests that Jesus was put into the manger immediately after his birth. Now, according to Webster's, a manger is "a trough for holding fodder for cattle". In French, the word "manger" means "to eat". The manger would most likely have been located in a place where animals were kept - possibly a stable. Jesus was born either in the stable or somewhere nearby, and then placed into the manger.

It was a strange place for the Son of God to lie. I strongly suspect that it was very different from the idyllic "nativity scene" that people try to portray today.

George Wrote:I can answer that one. It is in the New Testament. Four times in the New Testament and particularly 3 times in Luke it is written that He will be found in a stall.

That sounds quite interesting, Brother George. Can you provide those references? I had a look for the places where the word "stall" is used in the Bible, and I could only find Amos 6:4, Malachi 4:2, and Luke 13:15. Perhaps you were thinking of something else?

[Brother Tim]

These "wise men" were students of the Scriptures. It is very likely that they were trained in a "university" established by Daniel, the wisest of the wise men of the east. There was often a gathering of writings by the kings of that era for understanding of world events. Daniel clearly shows that he had the writings of Jeremiah, and most likely much of the rest of the previous and contemporary prophets. We know by the book of Daniel that there existed a training program for counselors to the king. It is very possible that the wise men of Matthew 2 were educated in a very similar way.

Sadly, the "scholars" of Jerusalem knew the answer to the question of the wise men, but did not have the heart to seek the one of whom they read.

[George]

I apologize Brother. I got a little ahead of myself. I took the use of the word "manger" and applied it to the word "stall".

The reference I like to use most often is the Noah Webster's 1828 Dictionary of the American Language. It does not distort the meaning of words.

In Christ,
George

[Upholder]

George Wrote:I apologize Brother. I got a little ahead of myself. I took the use of the word "manger" and applied it to the word "stall".

The reference I like to use most often is the Noah Webster's 1828 Dictionary of the American Language. It does not distort the meaning of words.

In Christ,
George

Ah, yes; I understand now. I was scratching my head there for a bit!

The Webster's Dictionary I have is a modern edition. I would like to get an 1828 edition, though. I dare say it would be a lot less "politically correct" that most modern dictionaries.

[Brother Tim]

Actually, "stall" and "manger" are translated from the same word. The place were the animals were kept and the specific location where they were fed were likely so interrelated that the context is needed to distinguish them.

The newborn baby would not have been put on the floor, but in the feeding trough. Thus, "manger" is used as opposed to "stall". In the verses where "stall" is used, the word "manger" could not fit the context.

The Holy Spirit controlled every word written by the KJB translators and later editors so that His exact intention and precise meaning would be preserved.