Christmas story is bunk?

The Archbishop of Canterbury thinks so.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=JHPSTTVO4EG5FQFIQMGCFGGAVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2007/12/20/nwise120.xml

The Archbishop of Canterbury said yesterday that the Christmas story of the Three Wise Men was nothing but a 'legend'.

Dr Rowan Williams has claimed there was little evidence that the Magi even existed and there was certainly nothing to prove there were three of them or that they were kings.

He said the only reference to the wise men from the East was in Matthew's gospel and the details were very vague.

Dr Williams said: "Matthew's gospel says they are astrologers, wise men, priests from somewhere outside the Roman Empire, that's all we're really told. It works quite well as legend."The Archbishop went on to dispel other details of the Christmas story, adding that there were probably no asses or oxen in the stable.

He argued that Christmas cards which showed the Virgin Mary cradling the baby Jesus, flanked by shepherds and wise men, were misleading. As for the scenes that depicted snow falling in Bethlehem, the Archbishop said the chance of this was "very unlikely".

In a final blow to the traditional nativity story, Dr Williams concluded that Jesus was probably not born in December at all. He said: "Christmas was when it was because it fitted well with the winter festival."

Even the gospels indicate that it is unlikely Jesus was born in December-the flocks are out grazing. As for the Magi-I always thought this was a nod to Zoroastrianism, or some prophecy from another religious school that a star would mark the coming of a great spiritual person.

You already have angels, the messiah, the Adversary, Heaven as an afterlife location, a solstice-born salvation-granting executed intermediary and a bunch of other "nods" to (ermmm..cough...outright plaigiarism from...) Zoroastrianism rolled into Christianity and now you want the Magi too?

I'm just saying that all that was said about this was old news, that the Magi can be explained as a nod to another religion that was powerful at the time of the writing of the gospels.

jlk

with me you need to use the sarcasm thingy. I'm a bit dense. :D

;k;

The majority of Christian theologians have thought about the Bible this way for a long time, but this approach continues to shock the average believer.

When even the A of C realizes the details of the story are bogus, why does anyone take them seriously. Since when were shepherds out on the hills with their flocks in December in Palestine (not a political comment - it was Palestine then)

For that matter, most of the ordering of the events in Mark, Matthew, and John were done for (sometimes competing) liturgical reasons. I'm not sure what my point here is, other than that early Christians don't seem to have thought Jesus was born in the winter, but very quickly incorporated pagan solstice festivals that had a similar theme -- the birth of a redeemer. I only mention these because these were conscious actions taken by the early church which didn't seem to bother people at the time, but which irritate a lot of people today greatly.

The more literate our societies get, the less we seem to use that literacy...

What bothers me is the political and social power in this country of thgose who either do not know this or wilfully seek to miseducate. Christianity was syncretic in both belief and practice, including such celebrations as Christmas and Easter. However there is still a sizeable and powerful group who wish to portray it as entirely original and unique. That's the only context I care about it in. Believers can celebrate what they want whenever they feel like it as far as I'm concerned - just don't pretend it's all based on unique and perfect truth.

I'm sure he "knows".

But they were the reason for the flight to Egypt ("Hey, Herod, where's this king that just got born in your kingdom?" "Wha - wha- whaaaa?"). In Matthew, they came to the family a few years after Jesus was born. The number three is only associated with the magi because three gifts were mentioned, yet the tradition of there being one African, one Mediterranean, and one Asian (in the ancient sense of the word) is very, very old.

They've entered into Christian symbolism as early arguments for the universality of the Christian ministry, and have also been popular as reinforcements of the idea that wisdom and contemplation would lead to the same result as faith. That they are popularly pictured as being three in number and appearing at the creche itself is irritating to someone with an interest in scripture, but hardly the worst example of an ascriptural popular belief about the bible.

to bother with the truth anymore.....

Some of us "pieced" this story together years ago for ourselves and wondered aloud how this ever got so far out of hand....

I've recently seen arguments among children and parents about the arrangement of the shepards, angels, Mary, Joseph and the wise men in a living nativity scene with enough vitrol to last several lifetimes over the correct "biblical" representation....of which the Arch Bishop was quite right...there is no correct biblical description.

sigh................

They say one was Asian, one White and the other African... but the pictures depict them as all sorts of colors and facial hair configurations.

I love this thread:) Reminds me of the logic that used to get me into trouble with church elders:) Ahhhh... those were the days.

:shrug:

the dates are intentionally chosen to be in direct conflict with pagan holidays

That's the way I see it, especially in Northern Europe.

Imagine a huge winterfest, the hall is full of people, drinking, dancing, singing, partying. Even the Bishop is there, surrounded by a gaggle of flirty women and a few pretty young men.

Then the Cardinal unexpectedly walks in on the party... Everyone thought he was in Rome.

"What Is Going on Here???!!!" he bellows.

There is an uncomfortable silence in the room.

"Um, um, um... we're celebrating Christ's Birthday!" claims some drunken wag, as he picks himself carefully up off the floor..

There are enthusiastic nods all around. "Yes, yes," everyone quickly agrees, "It's Christ's Birthday!"

The Bishop hastily hands the Cardinal a big tankard of ale that some cute buxom lass has just placed in his hands.

The Bishop, who is figuring he's toast no matter what happens next, holds up his arms and announces "Merry Christmas, Everyone! Merry Christmas!"

The Cardinal looks around, frowning, and people are looking at him expecting the worst. After a long pause the Cardinal partakes of the ale, holds up the tankard, smiles and calls out, "Merry Christmas!"

Bringing some sense to the church.

flying around in the sky

"oh crap it doesn't really mean virgin after all" that they'll get around to admitting in the next 100 years or so (they being the more reality-world European denominations that is - the fundy group still doesn't admit there are any contradictions or errorsat all in the KJV, so we can't expect...well...miracles.

with a compass in the stock?

Talk about your War on Christmas!

:sarcasm:

:)

It's symbolism.

And what the fuck is myrrh?

And "Heaven" is just a fancy cruise ship resting on the bottom of the sea.

"Santa doesn't make misfit toys," Archbishop Williams concluded in a speech Thursday. "Santa is, by out doctrinal teachings, inerrant in all matters of gift giving. I blame the creeping incursion of secular humanistic propaganda into our Christian traditions. Santa Claus is empowered by God with the ability to know whether all juveniles are good or naughty and thus has no need or callling to make toys that are malformed or undesireable. Children around the world either get good wholesome toys because they're good or lumps of coal because they are bad. Except, of course, for bad children who live in the Newcastle area. For some reason, Santa is unable to bring coal there."

"And finally," the Archbishop concluded, "Santa doesn't employ elves. His toys are manufactured by dwarves, since elves give him the creeps."

:applause:

:)

I don't have a guardian angel or a Leprechaun living under the birdbath in my garden.

A Heathen is merely someone who has not or does not believe in the god of the bible.

A Heretic is one who talks about it!

The OP and the Archbishop are clearly being heretical.

BTW, you clearly have a Leprechaun under your birdbath. I can see him from here.

Your guardian angel is actually a gnat.

My Leprechaun sends his best wishes. :hi:

of a lot of old gods, including Osiris, Krishna, and Mithra. I guess it was used in the Christian mythology to help assimilate worshipers of other religons.

Well, this took longer than I thought it would...http://www.wikiality.com/Breaking_News#Archbishop_of_Canterbury_Says_Nativity_Is_Fake.21

enjoy.

The 'three kings" refer to three stars in alignment with the brightest star "sirius". If i'm not remembering this correctly, my apologies.

"When a druid isn't a druid" (BBC 8-6-2002)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2173194.stm

and to His believers Jesus Christ is the Son of God, Amen.

That alone was worth wading through this thread.

is that story true? That's what I want to know!

adam and eve
noahs ark

none true - just stories. he told that to my entire 4th grade class.

and various Christmas carols. He did not debunk the narrative as told in the Gospels. There is no mention in the Gospels of an ox, an ass nor are the wise men from the East numbered or identified as Kings. The suggestion that Jesus was born in the spring because that was when shepherds spent the nights with the flocks to assist with lambing has been around at least 40 years.

















Also, the Drummer boy? Not in the canonical Gospels.

I've come to literally hate headlines for how misleading they are.

the first third is a real eye opener of legendary borrowed lies about Xmas.

See "The God Who Wasn't There" instead.

I'm not a theist even though I don't believe in god

"And lo, Mary did ride on Joseph's ass all the way to Egypt."

Old seminary joke...

And that man calls himself a Christian!

Christian?