Wise Men Denied Security Permit to See Baby Jesus (by Deanna Murshed)
So I don't know whether to laugh or cry about the latest progressive addition to the classic nativity scene: the separation wall.
Either way, I love it.
If you don't know what I'm talking about, check out Christian Peacemaker Teams' "No Way to the Inn" campaign. Or, to purchase your own little shocker, check out the UK-based charity, Amos Trust, online where you can purchase "A nativity set with a difference ... poignant, ironic, and made in Bethlehem. Available in two sizes." Just imagine what a great conversation starter such a display could be:
Uncle Al: "What is that wall doing separating Jesus from the wise men?"
You: "Well, this year, the wise men were denied security permits."
For more talking points, read my synopsis from last year. Join the campaign and tell us how it goes. Who knew Christmas could be so educational?!
(And sorry I waited so long to post this – since I last visited the site, Amos Trust has sold out of both nativity set sizes and are currently waiting for further supplies to come in from Bethlehem. And I learned they don't ship to the U.S. But you can still download a free " Bethlehem Pack" for prayers, reflections, and songs about Bethlehem.)
Deanna Murshed is director of integrated marketing for Sojourners.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Comments
Just to be even-handed here: has anyone ever added a suicide bomber to a nativity scene?
Look, I agree that the walls and checkpoints around Bethlehem are tragic, but they didn't pop up out of nowhere. They were a response to Palestinian terrorism. That's another reality that Amos Trust might want to reflect when they put together next year's "consciousness raising" Christmas decoration.
Wolverine
Posted by: Wolverine | December 18, 2007 12:15 PM
I wonder, has the Amos Trust ever considered putting together a nativity scene that shows the Holy Family in a refugee camp because they were displaced from Bethlehem?
After all, Wolverine, if we are going to talk realities, let's talk about all of them. The Palestinian terrorism didn't develop out of thin air.
Posted by: ds0490 | December 18, 2007 12:54 PM
DS,
How about a nativity in a concentration camp? Or under a rocket attack? Or being run over by tanks from neighboring Arab countries?
Or, (to be fair) how about an Israeli prison? Or maybe we replace one of the shepherds with a Mossad agent?
Ooh, I know, how about we replace one of the Wise Men with a tub-thumpin' American evangelical carrying a copy of "Left Behind"!
This is the kind of silliness that we get when we try to hijack the original gospel and use it to promote our little political agendas. The original story was that of a God who was willing to accept human suffering. Deanna Murshed wants it to be about how mean the Israelis are. But you could just as well use a nativity to make a statement about terrorism, or taxes, or economic redistribution, or the stupidity of the BCS. (Ohio State vs. LSU makes baby Jesus cry!)
And then someone else does a nativity taking the totally opposite point of view and we have dueling manger scenes. That way lie division and madness, not unity and peace.
Now maybe the Israelis really are everything she says they are. That doesn't mean that Jesus story isn't worth contemplating -- on its own relatively apolitical terms.
Wolverine
Posted by: Wolverine | December 18, 2007 1:26 PM
This article is so pointless. But - it fits the Sojo paradgyme. We know that Christ would not be born in Minneapolis because they would never find 3 wise men from the east - St Paul. (LOL - a little MN nice humor)
The wall is unfortunate, but in many cases it is needed. Maybe in a few years or decades it can be taken down like the Berlin wall, when it is no longer nessrary.
Blesssings -
.
Posted by: moderatelad | December 18, 2007 1:34 PM
I actually chuckled out loud while I read Wolverine's last post. Well done. Some things just shouldn't be turned into political statements.
Posted by: Eric | December 18, 2007 1:37 PM
I would say something, but Wolverine and moderatelad took my words!
Bravo to you both!
Posted by: MadHatter07 | December 18, 2007 3:08 PM
Um, moderatelad, do you mean to suggest that East Germany's construction of the Berlin Wall was "necessary," or that the fence/wall Israel is constructing is similar? I don't think I agree with either assertion, but I think you might have mis-spoken.
I understand the reason we celebrate the visit of the Magi, but ironically, the Holy Family would have been better off if a wall (or something
else) kept the Magi away. According to Scripture, the visit from the Magi alerted Herod to Jesus's presence, triggered the Slaughter of the Innocents, and turned the Holy Family into refugees. Not trying to take a political side here-- I'm just saying.
The sad reality is that the Holy Land is at war, as it has been so often through the centuries. In this season, let's put aside our political differences and pray for peace for ALL God's people.
Posted by: aquaman | December 18, 2007 3:24 PM
Inspired by the view of Bethlehem from the hills of Palestine at night in 1868, Rector Phillips Brooks wrote the words to "O Little Town of Bethlehem"
Inspired by the view I witnessed during my five journeys to the Little Town of Bethlehem: Occupied Territory between 2005 and 2007, I spin it for you this way:
O little town of Bethlehem:
Occupied Territory
Above the Apartheid Wall
The silent stars go by
Thy dark streets no longer shineth
For pilgrims filled with fear
Do not tread into Bethlehem's
Open Air Prison
Empty rooms abound in the Inn's there,
But, would Jesus, Joseph and Mary
Even be allowed to enter in?
Jews are not allowed beyond The Wall
That divides Jerusalem from her sister
O Little Town of Bethlehem:
Occupied Territory
Encroaching on all sides are illegal colonies and
Christians are denied permission to build
On their legally owned
And if they do;
The Military Occupation destroys their homes
But construction in illegal colonies continues on,
Supported by cultish USA Christians
Without a clue or care
That The Little Town of Bethlehem is
Occupied Territory.
The Christian EXODUS has reduced their witness
From 20% of the total population of the Holy Land, to less than two!
Forty years of occupation and lack of economic opportunities,
A Wall that is three times as long and twice as high
As the wall that fell in Berlin,
Divides the Christians from their land, resources, families and holy sites;
What an abomination this is!
In the Little Town of Bethlehem:
Occupied Territory
Angels proclaim thy holy birth
And praises sing to God the King
And Peace to men on earth
How silently, how silently
The Occupation is allowed to continue on.
May God impart to human hearts
His righteous anger
In this world where arrogant men
Deny human rights and international law.
O holy Child of Bethlehem
Descend to us, we pray
Cast out all ignorance and apathy
That we may hear the angels sing
And with great glad tidings tell,
That the Apartheid Wall will fall
The Occupation will end
And next year in Jerusalem,
Will be a year acceptable to the Lord.
e
http://www.wearewideawake.org
Posted by: eileen fleming | December 18, 2007 3:35 PM
actually this is rather amusing... except for it being wrong... the nativity, I mean...
In the nativity scene when Jesus is born the wise men don't come to visit him until he is a "child" (check your Greek on that one)... PLUS... the Greek also makes it clear that Mary gave birth in the "lower room" of the family home... because the "upper room" was full (in middle eastern homes of that time animals were kept in the lower "barn-like" room to be kept safely indoors for the night)... that is where Jesus was born... they came to stay with their family for the census... they were NOT kicked out of the home to find an "inn" or such nonsense... have you been to the middle east? their family & community hospitality is AMAZING...
Sorry... just my little nativity pet-peeve! :)
Posted by: e-dubya | December 18, 2007 3:46 PM
The Wall in Hebrew is called the Hafrada Wall,
In Afrikkan it is called APARTHEID
In English we say Separation!
"The Israeli government has successfully marketed the Apartheid Wall as a security barrier. But it is all about segregation, separation and ethnic cleansing.
"Although Israel marketed the Wall as a security barrier, logic suggests such a barrier would be as short and straight as possible.
"Instead, it snakes deep inside the West Bank, resulting in a route that is twice as long as the Green Line, the internationally recognized border. Israel chose the Wall’s path in order to dispossess Palestinians of the maximum land and water, to preserve as many Israeli settlements as possible, and to unilaterally determine a border.
"In order to build the Wall Israel is uprooting tens of thousands of ancient olive trees that for many Palestinians are also the last resource to provide food for their children.
"The Palestinian aspiration for an independent state is also threatened by the Wall, as it isolates villages from their mother cities and divides the West Bank into disconnected cantons.
"The Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem conservatively estimates that 500,000 Palestinians are negatively impacted by the Wall.
"As with Apartheid South Africa, Americans have a vital role to play in ending Israeli occupation - by divesting from companies that support Israeli occupation, boycotting Israeli products, coming to Palestine as witnesses, or standing with Palestinians in nonviolent resistance.
"Negotiations alone will not secure freedom for the Palestinian people. During the negotiations of the so-called Oslo Peace Process from 1993-2000, Israel simply imposed its will on the Palestinians, using its overwhelming military and economic power, and US support.
"During seven years of supposed peace, Palestinians saw 200,000 new Israeli settlers arrive in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, the same number of settlers that had arrived there in the previous 26 years.
"Faced with a history of suffering, Palestinians have no alternative but to struggle. The only question is how? Killing diminishes our humanity, and Israel’s occupation, which has killed thousands of Palestinians, shouldn’t be our teacher. It is time for both sides to refuse killing.
"We are confident that Israeli occupation will one day be defeated, as were other US government supported repressive regimes - Apartheid South Africa, Pinochet’s Chile and racial segregation in the United States.
"There is no price to high to pay for freedom, equality and universal rights. Without justice there can be no peace."--Yonothon Pollak, Israeli spokesperson for Anarchists Against the Wall, a NONVIOLENT civilian resistance group led by Palestinians in solidarity with Israelis and International Justice and Peace seekers.
Anarchy is best understood as Rebellion against UNJUST laws.
The Yang [male positive force] of anarchy resists authority and causes disorder and is socially and politically incorrect by the norms of the status quo for it seeks the higher ground of justice.
The Yin or feminine passive force of anarchy births a new order out of the chaos and chaos is creativity in action.
Excerpted from Chapter 5, "MEMOIRS OF A NICE IRISH-AMERICAN 'GIRL'S' LIFE IN OCCUPIED TERRITORY, by eileen fleming
Posted by: eileen fleming | December 18, 2007 3:57 PM
I have and will continue to pray for the Peace of Jerusalem. With the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 - I look forward to the future. It is written that a generation shall not pass after Israel becomes a nation till Christ's return. The Bible also says that the life of man is three score and 10. That is 70 years if memory serves. So - 2018 should be the drop dead date. The future could be scary but I will not fear. (I will do my best, I mean come on - I'm humanm)
Blessings -
.
Posted by: Moderatelad | December 18, 2007 4:21 PM
e-dubya -- Right on.
Something else not mentioned -- the unnumbered "Wise Men" came from Persia, and they had heard the prophecy passed down from and through Daniel several hundred years before. The point of the story was that even Gentiles would recognize the Messiah even though many of the Jews wouldn't.
Posted by: Rick Nowlin | December 18, 2007 4:35 PM
I normally don't post but this one got my attention. I personally wouldn't want a nativity scene like that because I don't like conflict, and that could easily cause disagreement and conflict with friends of mine who think differently. The wall in that scene is certainly making a bold statement, and it's not my style.
The holocaust was atrocious, and the Jewish people had for a long time had no land to call their own. But it doesn't justify stealing somebody else's land and giving it to the Jewish people, does it? (I strongly disagree with 'Biblical' Zionism but am not going to comment about that here)
What Israel has done to the Palestinians has been terrible and unjust. But it doesn't justify bombing buses of civilians, or shooting rockets, does it?
But put yourself in the shoes of a Palestinian. Imagine your house is bulldozed and you are told you have to move (like a Palestinian immigrant I know), that your land is no longer yours. This would certainly be considered an illegal act and you would expect law enforcement and/or the army of your nation to respond accordingly. But let's say your country doesn't have an organized army (like Palestine). Wouldn't there be informal town hall meetings about how to "fight back" against the injustice? Some would promote violence, but there would be differing opinions. Militias would form and begin fighting. Some radicals might be willing to die fighting for this cause, even go on a suicide mission if they thought they would be a hero in somebody's eyes. This isn't the response that I would promote, and maybe not you either, but is it really unexpected? Perhaps after a few years of fighting back and forth, the occupants put up a wall to protect themselves from your peoples' militias. This wall might make your life more difficult and you would probably resent it as well as the people who put it up. Perhaps after too much of this, you would say, in the words of a Palestinian man I went to college with, "I can understand the 'terrorists' and suicide bombers. I don't agree with what they are doing, but I understand them."
I think it's pretty obvious to say that killing civilians is wrong. But let's admit that both sides have done wrong, and let's admit that the United States has done wrong by supporting Israel so one-sidedly, giving them weapons and cash.
How to bring peace is a complicated issue, I pray that God's kingdom will reign and that his Spirit will cause people to forgive, to lay down their weapons, and to do good to their enemies. I don't have many answers.
Posted by: Charlie | December 18, 2007 5:02 PM
Rick - yep... good stuff
Each Christmas I try to avoid getting frustrated at our really incorrect picture of the nativity scene in western Christianity... I try... sometimes I fail...
my friend just got her child a Hasbro play set of the nativity scene with a blond baby Jesus and the whole "barn out in the middle of nowhere" thing and the THREE wise men (each of a different ethnicity for "politically correct" reasons... forget being "biblically correct"!)... I had to HOLD MY TONGUE... and sing a happy Christmas song in my head :)
Posted by: e-dubya | December 18, 2007 5:37 PM
"But put yourself in the shoes of a Palestinian. Imagine your house is bulldozed and you are told you have to move (like a Palestinian immigrant I know), that your land is no longer yours. This would certainly be considered an illegal act and you would expect law enforcement and/or the army of your nation to respond accordingly. But let's say your country doesn't have an organized army (like Palestine). Wouldn't there be informal town hall meetings about how to "fight back" against the injustice? Some would promote violence, but there would be differing opinions. Militias would form and begin fighting. Some radicals might be willing to die fighting for this cause, even go on a suicide mission if they thought they would be a hero in somebody's eyes. This isn't the response that I would promote, and maybe not you either, but is it really unexpected? Perhaps after a few years of fighting back and forth, the occupants put up a wall to protect themselves from your peoples' militias. This wall might make your life more difficult and you would probably resent it as well as the people who put it up. Perhaps after too much of this, you would say, in the words of a Palestinian man I went to college with, "I can understand the 'terrorists' and suicide bombers. I don't agree with what they are doing, but I understand them.""
If you go back a few years ago to a mini-series on TV named "Amerika" you will see what would likely happen if a foreign nation invaded a portion of our country, or if a foreign power (such as the UN) declared a portion of the midwest to be a new homeland for Sudanese refugees.
Midwestern farmers, factory workers, and business people would turn into armed terrorists seeking to regain the land that was taken from them. There would be guerrilla warfare because the national army or invading army would be much larger and better supplied. Perhaps a foreign nation would provide support (as France did during our revolution against English rule). If the fight lasted 20 or 30 years our sons and daughters would pick up the weapons we put down in death and continue the struggle.
In other words, we would be pretty much in the same place as the Palestinians...fighting for land taken from them.
Posted by: ds0490 | December 18, 2007 6:37 PM
Wolverine wondered,
"Just to be even-handed here: has anyone ever added a suicide bomber to a nativity scene?"
Samson wasn't at the nativity.
Posted by: Hali | December 18, 2007 8:24 PM
"Moderatelad" wrote,
"Maybe in a few years or decades it can be taken down like the Berlin wall, when it is no longer nessrary."
The Berlin Wall was necessary?
Posted by: Hali | December 18, 2007 8:26 PM
Charlie, what a wonderful post! I hope that you will continue to share your thoughts with us from time to time.
Posted by: Hali | December 18, 2007 8:45 PM
Hmmm, those appear to be Shepherds on the outside, unless the Magi were bringing sheep as gifts. Whether or not they are wise depends... But I fear they are literally "block"heads.
Fast forward to our own sad century: If they are on the Israeli side of the wall, at least they'd be able to vote (and, if female, get a driver's license). Not to say that Israel is even close to perfect, but they do get some things right.
Posted by: Witness for Peace | December 18, 2007 9:14 PM
Whoever said that the wall was used for ethinic cleansing is completely false and mistaken. Unfortunately due to the polarization from both sides, many liken Israel to be Nazi Germany, which is COMPLETELY false and dangerous. In terms of Palestine becoming apartheid, that is very understandable as the Israeli occupation as severely undermined the dignity of the Palestinians, but is the intention ethnic cleansing? Hardly. Instead, it's about "security," but in addition, many colonizing Israelis have settled illegally, and through this barrier, they are not enforcing their security - instead they have trapped the Palestinians where they cannot even move around in their own country. This needs to stop, and many Palestinians are ready to move forward for peace.
Regarding divestments from Israel - the problem I have with this is that nobody seeks divestments from any other country. The far-left has taken divestments of Israel in a campaign against capitalism, but why don't these people seek divestments with any other country? What about China? How are the state of Coptic Christians in Egypt? What about Saudi Arabia, which illegalizes any form of worship outside of Sunni Islam? How are the treatments of Christians and Shi'ites? This is an issue between the Palestinians and the Israelis and many people make the mistake in associating Israel with the terrorism of its surrounding countries, which have hated Israel right from the beginning due to the Jews. Why do I state this? Have any of you heard of Haj-Amin al Husseini? He was the mufti of Jerusalem and became leader of the Supreme Muslim Council under 1922. He led a notorious effor to rid Palestines of the Jews, conspired with Hitler, and even murdered fellow Arabs who dissented with him. This bedrock of anti-Semitism became rampant due to the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" which depicted Jews drinking the blood of children. In 1948 after the Jews come through the Holocaust and the U.N formally partitioned Palestine into the Jewish homeland of Israel and the Arab land of Palestine, the Arab nations in the midst could not accept Israel and they waged a war, which screwed over the Palestinians from the getgo. Legitimate criticism of Israel is valid for the 1967 War, however as it was a unilateral pre-emptive strike. You go to a protest nowadays and you will find many people on the far-left walking alongside Palestnian activists who state deflammatory things about the Jews including posters such as "What if Hitler won? No more Israel, No more Jews." (not to say that hard-core Israel activists who say that "Palestinians don't exist" is much better - both sides should be condemned). People have taken legitimate criticism of the Israeli occupation and abuses and gone as far as to being anti-Semitic. At an Amnesty Conference in Miami regarding the Israeli-Palestinian crisis, afterwards a professor from Dallas came up to me and said, "Here the Jews own everything from the New York Times and Wall Street and the Media. The Jews may have been the chosen people but they f***ed it up. All the way from the golden calf to today."
Israel is a the ONLY liberal democracy in the Middle East, in which Christians, Jews, Muslims, and anyone of any faith can coexist in peace. The occupation of Palestine can definitely be constituted as apartheid, but Israel Proper is not even close to apartheid. That's why we need people like Jimmy Carter who affirm the sovreignty of Israel while condemning Israeli occupation. Muslims and people of Palestinian descent can hold office in Israel - Israelis themselves hold themselves up to higher standards by criticizing a bill as "racist" on Israel's own independence day. Try finding that in Saudi Arabia or any surrounding Arab country.
If we're seeking divestments or boycotts from Israel (which is not wise as it breeds polarization rather than peace), make sure we apply the same consistency to our other allies or countries we do business with who have participated in far more corrupt actions than Israel, such as Saudi Arabia, China, and Russia. Just a thought - consitency counts.
Posted by: Drew | December 19, 2007 12:40 AM
In addition, regarding 1948, many of you believe that the Jews came in and just stomped on their land. Many perceive them as the alien usurpers of Palestine. This is not the case - Jews have always been in Palestine, but they have been ruled by the majority Arabs. In the advent of World War I, the Ottoman Turks sold land to the Zionists against the wishes of the Palestinians - high profiled Arabs telegraphed Turkish parliament, but their cable was ignored. During World War I, Britain helped the Arabs defeat the Ottomans by allying itself with the Arabs - at the end of the War, the Britians had control over Palestine and agreed to partition it to the Arabs, but with the Balfour Declaration (as a result of increasing spiteful attacks against the Jews in Europe - remember the czar forgery of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion?"), the promised land became the twiced-promised land and the Muslims have accused the West of treachery ever since. But this betrayal towards the Jews came before Israel was a state (as stated earlier with Haj Amin al-Husseini who drove Croatian orphans into the sea or back to concentration camps). At the end of the war, the U.N partitioned Palestine for the Jews and the Arabs, and also remember the majority of Jewish land was located in the Negev Desert, the least fertile areas of Palestine. In the 1948 War, the Arabs could not handle Israel in their midst (due to anti-Semitism that has become ingrained in contemporary Islam partly due to "Protocols"), and many Palestinians went with the Arabs as they perceived them to be the victorious - they moved on their own wishes and because the Arabs lost the war the refugee problem got serious. Khaled al-Azm, former prime minister of Syria, stated in his 1973 memoirs that "we have caused them [the Palestinians] to become barren and unemployed."
Israel has a right to exist, and to say that the Jews are the alien usurpers of Palestine is as equally ignorant as to say that Arabs have no place in the land of Israel.
Posted by: Drew | December 19, 2007 1:11 AM
Posted by: Hali | December 18, 2007 8:26 PM
The Berlin Wall was necessary?
A - yeah. It was necessary by the communists. People were leaving east Berlin in droves. If the communists were going to keep their source of cheap labor - they had to prevent their exit. NOW - least anyone think wrong, I do not believe that the Berlin wall was a good thing. It was not built for protection but for containment.
I see that the wall(s) built in Israel are for protection, not containment. Wasn't it Ben Franklin that said something about good fences make good neighbors. If the Palestinians could control the marginal radical groups that are causing the problem - maybe the walls would not be needed.
Blessings -
.
Posted by: Moderatelad | December 19, 2007 8:44 AM
My main beef with nativity scenes is that they never include the ox poop!
Posted by: I and I | December 19, 2007 9:02 AM
....or baby poop! I love Christmas carols, but "the little Lord Jesus, no crying he makes" is ridiculous. Yes, he was Lord, but also fully human!
Posted by: Witness for Peace | December 19, 2007 9:11 AM
Baby poop?
That might be a little too much authenticity.
Wolverine
Posted by: Wolverine | December 19, 2007 9:23 AM
I love all the carols of Christmas - everyone. But the theology in them, in a word, sucks. I really like singing them in Swedish at 6:30 AM on the 25th. I mean, when else can you sing that wonderful old carol, 'When Christmas Morn is Dawning'. There is nothing like hearing Luke 2 read in the mother tongue. I mean, Jesus in the Swedish Name I know. (rim-shot)
Blessings to all
.
Posted by: Moderatelad | December 19, 2007 9:59 AM
Yeah, I think that was a rhetorical device intended to bring up the real subject of Christmas, a real baby in a real manger. Certainly the various sufferings Jews and Palestinians endure are part of why Jesus came. But I must also disagree: there's a lot of good theology in "Mild he lays His Glory by,
Born that we no more may die"
....born to give us 2nd birth"
and my favorite stanza, Wesley's
"Adam's likeness now efface,
stamp thine image in its place"
Which forces us to think: is God's male and female image in us eradicated by sin, or merely made unrecognizable? Either way, Wesley, unlike too many of today's Methodists, is right about the solution, the real, incarnate-from-creation, Jesus! One day he indeed will rule "the world, with TRUTH and grace, and make the nations prove the glories of His Righteousness."
Posted by: Witness for Peace | December 19, 2007 10:28 AM
Heyyy, my dad's Swedish!
Here's more on Mr. Wesley and friends:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2007/decemberweb-only/150-52.0.html
Posted by: Witness for Peace | December 19, 2007 10:38 AM
Yeah, and how do we know that it was a "silent night" in which "all was calm" given that there was a full hotel very close by (perhaps even upstairs, as someone pointed out), and there was a birth and an afterbirth and braying animals and a baby lying among straw and animal saliva? Not to mention the stench of the aformentioned excrement and the body odor and presumable tired grouchiness of a family who had been riding on a donkey for days...
Posted by: I and I | December 19, 2007 12:36 PM
"The ox and ass kept time, Ba....."
If there's a YouTube video, PLEEEEEZ don't make me watch it.
At least Drummer Boy is set in a stable: my nomination for "Bottom of the Pit" is "Santa Claus knows we're all God's children and that makes everything right." Ummm, nice try, but, but..........
Posted by: Witness for Peace | December 19, 2007 2:05 PM
So, Mod-lad, Swedish is the language of heaven? I thought it was Welsh, or Hungarian, or ...
I guess it depends on who one asks.
D
Posted by: Don | December 19, 2007 2:21 PM
Posted by: Don | December 19, 2007 2:21 PM
Maybe we will all of the give of interpitation.
Or maybe - we will all speeck the language of love. (someone slap we quick - I think that spirit of Christmas sap and taken over me)
Blessings on you and yours...
.
Posted by: Moderatelad | December 19, 2007 3:18 PM
e-dubya,
You got some things right but missed on others.
"the Greek also makes it clear that Mary gave birth in the "lower room" of the family home..."
This may be the case but is not stated in the Greek. The word for "inn" is the common word for a lodging place whether that be a guest room or what we see as an inn. Most times it is used to indicate an inn. It is most likely the inn mentioned in Jeremiah 41:17, since the verse indicates "the" inn. The Khan of Bethlehem was "the" inn of Bethlehem.
Tradition as early as the second century places the specific inn (Khan of Bethlehem). And the place where the animals were kept. A cave carved into limestone. An early pagan source (also second century) also places the birth place as the cave (grotto).
Not that it really matters. But if someone sources the Greek I feel compelled to check. Your view is possible, but so is the grotto view and it also has history to back it up.
Jeff
Posted by: Jeff | December 19, 2007 3:41 PM
Funny, a couple of weeks ago my wife set up our nativity set. I pointed to the wise men and said, “Those guys look like terrorists – and what’s that they are carrying?” Zeitgeist.
A friend of mine told us this one a few years ago. A guy stops for gas around Christmas and noticed that the wise men in nativity set were wearing firemen’s’ helmets. The guy asks the gas station attendant why the wise men were wearing firemen’s helmets. The gas station attendant said, “You Yankees don’t know nothin’ ‘bout Scripture – don’t you know the wise men come from afar?”
My father-in-law has a sermon about the Magi in which he points out that nowhere in the gospels is there any indication of how many Magi came to see the Christ-child. There were three gifts named, but the number of Magi is never specified. Also, there is no indication that the Magi visited Jesus, Mary, and Joseph the night that Jesus was born. I don’t know his sources, but my father-in-law speculates that the Magi may have come months after Jesus was born, that they probably came with a large entourage, and that their appearance probably stirred up a lot of fear.
Perhaps as we ponder the modern day problems in Israel & Palestine we should remember that at the time of Christ’s birth, Israel was an occupied land, and by all accounts, ruled by despots who heavily taxed the people and murdered large numbers of them – and yet this was were God chose to bring His son into the world.
Just a few thoughts.
Peace!
Posted by: neuro_nurse | December 19, 2007 7:59 PM
Neuro!!!! You've repented of abandoning us truth-sayers and returned!?!?!?!? And tell your father-in-law to stop dismantling the traditional Christmas story that we learned ex cathedra in Sunday School. Next thing you know, he'll be trying to remove "Climb, Climb, Up Sunshine Mountain" and "If You're Saved and You Snow It" from the hymnbook!
Posted by: canucklehead | December 19, 2007 8:23 PM
"The ox and ass kept time, Ba....." ... At least Drummer Boy is set in a stable...
I love all the carols of Christmas - everyone. But the theology in them, in a word, sucks. I really like singing them in Swedish...
Maybe we will all of the give of interpitation.
This is all off topic, I know. But maybe there's a connection between nativity displays and Christmas hymns.
A lot of them are, yes, sentimental and such. But many are not. Last time I checked the words of, say "Adeste Fidelis," "Hark the Herald Angels," or "Joy to the World," I didn't find them wimpy or sentimental. Further, "Little Drummer Boy," from what I recall, was sort of written as a popular tune, not a Christmas hymn to be sung in church. Sure it's sentimental. But it's no worse than "secular" Christmas songs like "Chestnuts Roasting.." or "White Christmas." And it does have the advantage of actually being about Christ, something the secular songs ignore.
Modereatelad, I don't know "When Christmas Morn is Dawning"--either in Swedish or in English. But two of my favorite hymns that we sing at this time of year are of Swedish origin. And they're both far from wimpy: "Rejoice, Rejoice, Believers" and "Prepare the Royal Highway." Check them out. They're in the Evangelical Lutheran Worship hymnal, nos. 244 and 264 respectively.
Peace,
Posted by: Don | December 20, 2007 8:23 AM
Posted by: Don | December 20, 2007 8:23 AM
Those are fav's of mine too. I learned 'Royal Highway' when I worked as a choir director back in the 80's at a Lutheran Church in North Mpls.
Two moderan hymns that I enjoy but are not sung too much from what I can see are...
Christmas Has it's Cradle, melding the Christmas and Easter story in one him.
The Hands that First Held Mary's Child, one of two hymns I know of that deal with Joseph.
Blessings to all this Christmas Season!
.
Posted by: Moderatelad | December 20, 2007 8:38 AM
canucklehead,
Yeah, I've missed you too!
(Oops, previous response removed - I used the "c" word)
Peace!
Posted by: neuro_nurse | December 20, 2007 1:34 PM
Bizarre! I read your first response and don't recall the c word - you were talking about your studies; oh yes, it's all coming back now in a rush of St. Peter's Square-like inspiration...
Posted by: canucklehead | December 20, 2007 7:43 PM
canucklehead,
I was in St. Peter's Square back when I was a lapsed Catholic. John Paul II was going to address the crowd and I left.
I'm much more impressed with Benedict anyway.
Peace!
P.S. the "c" word = conservative, or maybe it was Catholic...
Posted by: neuro_nurse | December 20, 2007 9:11 PM
Drew,
I think you have made many points that are, not surprisingly, completely absent in the above Sabeel version represented above in this propaganda.
But note that in the McMahon/Faisal correspondence during the war against the German/Austrian/Ottoman Imperial axis it was agreed that a lot of 'Syria' and 'the Levant', all of the coastal literol in fact, were not and had never been 'Arab lands'. This was before the Balfour Declaration of 1917 stating the support of the British Cabinet for the principle of a Jewish National Home in an undetermined area of 'Palestine'. Churchill still had to get it through the Lords which took a lot of work to overcome rampant British antisemitism, like that of Lord Balfour's, but also that of the Labour movement and the still typical Jew-hatred of both the wider Arab-Islamic world and Christandom.
It was only Hitler and the Nazis that gave antisemitism a bad name amongst Christians - after the War was over and then not all. 'Abu Ali' and his colleague the Mufti 'Final Solution' Husseini are still honoured in the Islamic world and by PalArab Nationalists, just as they were before the outbreak of WW2 and after. If the British & Anzac/Commonwealth forces had not stopped Rommel at El Alamein then no Jews at all would have been left alive in Christian Europe or the Islamic Middle East and North Africa.
So it is all the Brit's fault, I am glad to say.
Once the League of Nations Mandate was established, with a Jewish Homeland as its main provision, the British administering for the LoN held the San Remo and Cairo Conferences and partitioned off nearly three-quarters of the Mandate area to Arab sovereignty (East Palestine or 'TransJordan' was created) with a Jewish Homeland to be split off from the remaining 1/4.
So not 'twice-promised' land at all especially as the majority of that remaining land was state-owned by the Ottoman Empire becoming Crown property during the Mandate period.
Neither was the Christian Maronite state or 'Lebanon' twice-promised.
This article also conveniently forgets who, exactly, has been murdering Christians and making their lives impossible in the Levant and the ME generally, this year as in every year.
And it ain't the Jews baby.
Posted by: Godfearer | December 21, 2007 6:25 AM
Headline News
Tuesday, December 04, 2007 by Staff Writer
Scholar decries apathy toward Palestinian Christians
A leading Israeli human rights lawyer on Monday criticized Western governments and the mainstream media for largely ignoring the systematic persecution of Palestinian Arab Christians by their Muslim neighbors and rulers.
Speaking at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs where he is a scholar in residence, Justus Weiner presented yet more evidence of the harassment, discrimination, intimidation, religious intolerance and physical violence Palestinian Christians in Judea and Samaria (the so-called "West Bank") are regularly subjected to.
Weiner presented several specific cases of recent intimidation, physical abuse and murder of Palestinian Christians, but said those were merely the tip of the iceberg. Most of the Palestinian Christians affected by this persecution dare not open their mouths, and when they do are careful not to further upset the waters.
If the situation continues, Weiner warned that in another decade there will be but a handful of Arab Christians remaining in the Holy Land. Already, the once Christian-dominated town of Bethlehem now has a population that is less than 20 percent Christian. Most of the Christian exodus from Jesus' birthplace has come after Israel handed control of Bethlehem over to the Palestinian Authority.
The answer, said Weiner, is for Western "Christian" governments, the mainstream international media and human rights organizations to intervene and demand the Palestinian Authority begin protecting the rights of Christians living in areas under its control.
But international concern for Palestinian Arab Christians dried up with the creation of the Palestinian Authority in 1995 out of a desire to not paint that regime in a bad light and risk scuttling the process of extracting territorial and security concessions from Israel in return for "peace."
Posted by: S. Neimark | December 21, 2007 2:13 PM
I was interested to see that most of the comments dealt with the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. As a dual citizen--American-Canadian--I think the proposed fence along the U.S.-Mexican border is worth mentioning here. I find it dismaying that more Americans are not protesting a wall that keep
poor people (many of whom are Christians) out of the U.S.
Vancouver, B.C. Canada
Posted by: Gail Berger | December 23, 2007 7:28 PM
NB. All this is in my humble opinion naturally albiet one I suspect shared by others & meant with respect and compassion as well as logic :
--------------------------------------------
Truth is, by any objective standard, the Palestineans are far more sinned against than sinning.
Zionism was a Jewish political movement originating in Western Europe - and only really gained ground because of Western persecution with Hitler in favour of removing Jews from Europe to .. anywhere else. Only when Hitler found other nations didn't want the refugees did he decide on the mass murder that the Jews call the Shoah and the rest of us the Jewish Holocaust.
Yes, the Jews suffered terribly - but so too did many others, the Kurds, the Chechens, the Chinese ad nauseam .. Historically, in terms of numbers and relative %~ages of people and culture lost the groups that have suffered worst are the indigenous peoples of North Amercia, South America and Australia. Yet they get very little in the way of museums or unquestioned "right to exist" as separate ethically based nation states.
So while yes the Shoah (Jewish Holocaust) happened - and was indeed a horrendous, appalling inexcusable part of history but ... well I do have to say it has been over-emphasised when you consider what other less wealthy and influential ethnic grousp have endured - it may soudn awful but its the stark truth.
Morevoer, Israel not only gives Hitler what he wanted -Jews out of Europe and somewhere else it also puts the Jewish people in a very perilous position : An alien culture & minority religion within a region that is overwhelmingly hostile and unlikely to ever welcome them. All the Jews (well a lot of them anyway - more actually live in the USA than Israel I think) gathered together conveniently into a self-made ghetto and forced to take soul-destroying steps to protect their nation that,frankly, shouldn't have been created.
Moreover Israel continues to exist only by taking unethical actions such as collective punishment, economic blockading and, yes, ethnic cleansing -many extremist Jewish fundamentalists openly recomend "transfer" of the Palestinean populace out of all Palestine-Isreal entirely.
Does Isreal have a right to defend itself? Yes of course but don't others like the Iranains and Palestineans _also_ then have that same right?
& does that right include the "right" to Pre-emptibve atatck defences" like invading other neighbouring nations such as Lebanon and ocupy the land of other nations and having WMDs, ad naseam .. Notinmy view but if so - again, don't other states have that same "Hit them back ..first!" right??
Does _*any*_ nation-state really have a "right to exist?" That idea is, in my view highly dubious and debatable.
The suffering of the Palestineans is a direct consequnce of Western nations past anti-Semtism and colonialism and present biased foreign policy and corporate neo-colonialism. Israel's behaviours is Nazi-like in many respects (if not -yet - all) and it doesn't seem likely to bring Jews or the world much hope and joy into the the immediate future ... but rather quite the reverse :
Israeli conduct against its neighbours (in both senses of the word & esp. incl the Palestineans) inspires terrorism, anti-semtism and, ironically, the Jewish state's persecution of their Palestinean Semitic population makes Israel itself arguably the worlds most (last?) anti-semitic nation.
Perhaps, dare I suggest, its time to face thsi relaity and for the USA and Jewish movements themslves to call for Israel's evacuation from the SW Asian region & re-establishment somewhere else? Not holding my breath of course!
-----
Couple of minor corrections with respect to earlier posts :
Israel is only arguably "democratic" with so many of its Israeli Arab and Palestinean minorities treated as second -class citizens and even its own secular population discriminated against in certian areas (eg. Marriage, what they can do on Saturdays, etc ..) its perhaps best described as atheocratic rather than democratic state.
Also there _are_ other at least equally democratic nations nearby that are Muslim or mixed : Turkey, Lebanon, Kuwait & Dubai , United Arab Emirates to name a few. & if you believe Bush's war is working you can add Iraq to that list too ..Or not they've at least had several electiosn as have the Palestineans.
Oh, & in answer to a question asked wa-aay above, yes I've heard of the Haj Ammin -have you heard of the massacre at Deir Yassin or the Jewish Terrorist cell tahtplotte dtodestroy the Al Aqsa Mosque? Or Irgun and Stern gangs which attacked Britsh and Arab and Jewish civilans in their goal of creating Israel to begin with? No side in this struggle has spotless hands.
But one side of this complex issue is currently occupying, brutalising and persecuting the other -and it ain't the Palestineans. The side that is doing the harm is the side most in need of stopping - that side, (to the shame of Jews all around the world - who deserve and, in many cases, _are_ vastly better than the nation founded in their religions name & claiming to represent them ) is Israel. & Israel is, currently, simply in the wrong here.
Sad but true.
Posted by: StevoR | December 24, 2007 9:28 AM
Post a Comment
Are you aware of our Rules of Conduct?