Is observing christmas and easter ok?

[Sultan]

Quote (seekingtruth @ Feb. 28 2006,05:24)

5One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7For none of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone. 8If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord. 9For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living. 10You, then, why do you judge your brother? Or why do you look down on your brother? For we will all stand before God's judgment seat. 11It is written: ” 'As surely as I live,' says the Lord, 'every knee will bow before me; every tongue will confess to God.' “[a] 12So then, each of us will give an account of himself to God.

seekingtruth,
I believe you have allowed the Lord to speak. Though we may be able to scripturally refute certain pagan customs, we cannot judge the heart, and though some practice these things, we should all remember how merciful Yahweh was to us when we were once in darkness. I believe your post was a reminder to us all to keep our intentions in line with the Word.

[OneoftheLordsGenerals]

What i am saying is to observe it, is to celebrate such a joyous occasion, seperate from the rest of the World. To observe the Last Supper(sacrifice of Christ) in which we partake in his sacrifice in remembrance of him.
I am not saying that celebrating christmas is part of our salvation, but observing(celebrating) his birth is.
Not that it has to be done in a grand stage of things with presents and such, but even to just gather with fellow believers and rejoice for his birth(from which we have salvation). Maybe observe was to vague of a word. Celebrate his birth. Rejoice as the angels do. Thats what I mean.
Aren't you happy for his coming, rejoice and celebrate his birth. Rejoice and celebrate his birth. God came down to sacrifice his life for our sins. That deserves celebration as believers.

[david]

Quote

I am not saying that celebrating christmas is part of our salvation, but observing(celebrating) his birth is.

If doing so is necessary to our salvation, why would not some mention of doing so be laid out in scritpure. Why is there absolutely no mention of something that is vital for salvation?
Why is Jesus' birth date not revealed in scripture?
Why did God leave it to man to pick a date at random and allow him to pick a date covered in paganism to celebrate his Son's birth, if he wanted his birth celebrated?
Why did none of the early Christians celebrate his birth?
Why did they refuse to take part in birthday celebrations at all?
Why was it only a couple hundred years later that “”Christians”” began celebrating his birth (coincidentally, around the time the trinity, hellfire, immortal soul, etc) were being conceived?

Quote

What i am saying is to observe it, is to celebrate such a joyous occasion, seperate from the rest of the World.

Jesus followers were to be “no part of the world,” separate, as you say. Yet, Christmas is very very worldly. It is celebrated everwhere. If you told someone you don't celebrate it, they look at you like you're from some other world. Would not celebrating a worldly holiday originating in paganism, marked by commericalism, and lies, and celebrated by the world over, make you part of the world?

Quote

Not that it has to be done in a grand stage of things with presents and such, but even to just gather with fellow believers and rejoice for his birth(from which we have salvation).

I was under the impression that it was the undeserved kindness of his sacraficial death (which we are commanded to memorialize) that makes possible our salvation.
Did you know that birthdays are presented in the Bible in a bad light?
Do you know the trail of bloodshed that birthdays have left through history?
Do you know the pagan connections, the cake, the candles, and why they are used on birthdays?
Perhaps these are reasons for the early Christians having nothing to do with birthdays or the birthday celebration.
Another thing that bothers me is this:
When most people picture them in their minds, I get the feeling they think of him as a weak man dying in agony on a cross, or as a helpless baby. He is neither of these things. He is a mighty king in heaven, second only to Jehovah, his Father. He is no longer a helpless babe, and we do well to see him as he is.

Quote

God came down to sacrifice his life for our sins. That deserves celebration as believers.

Well, his death which means so much and accomplished so much, certainly merits remembering, as he himself commanded: Keep doing this in remembrance of me. And another scripture says: “Therefore, when YOU come together to one place, it is not possible to eat the Lord’s evening meal…”
But we find no sciptures like like concerning his birth. And down to the fourth century, Christianity rejected the birthday celebration as a pagan custom.

I'm wondering why you think the early Christians refused to celebrate his birth?
What did they know, that you don't?

[Sultan]

Jesus being born did not save anyone. It was His death, burial, and ressurection. There are only three birthdays mentioned in scripture; Pharoahs and Herods (2). Personally I don't mind celebrating certain holidays, but if a holiday claims to be Christian then I have to “prove all thing and hold fast to what is good”.

The problem with Christendom today is that we no longer go to the Bible to shape our beliefs, but instead we shape the Bible according to what we already believe. This kind of manipulation is wicked and self seeking (James. 3:15-16).

Then we try to justify it with ridiculous rationilizations (i.e the Bible doesnt say don't smoke). So in the end lying about Santa, Bunnies having eggs, materialism, and being conformed to the world is acceptable. Maybe this is why 90% of Americans claim to be Christians and our nation is falling apart. In actuality there realy is no distinction to draw the line. Hey the Bible doesn't say that homosexuals can't be Pastors. Right? Let's get back to the Bible teaching us, and not us teaching the Bible.

[david]

“Your twisting my words for your gain. I am saying that without acknowledging his birth we have no death and resurrection of Christ, in which we have no salvation. We are to be joyous for this day, celebrate it. Not as the World does but as Christians should. You know what i mean, yet continue to point out that my words of choice are bad. Stop ridiculing me.”

Hi OOTLG,
(You have a very long name)

No, apparently I don't know what you mean.

My question is: Where does the Bible tell us to celebrate his birth, if we are to, if that is needed for salvation, as you earlier said?

Here is another question I would really like an answer to:
Why did the early Christians refuse to celebrate his birth?

“We are to be joyous for this day, celebrate it,” you say.
What day? Dec 25th? That's definitely, without question, not the day he was born on. What you appear to be celebrating is the dies natalies solis invicti (birthday of the invinicble sun). Sun god worship is wrong. The festival of the Roman Saturnalia also coincided with this day, leading up to it. The practices connected with what you call Christmas are really part of ancient pagan worship. And you are doing these things on the date of the birth of the sun god, not the birth of the Son of God.

Since we don't know the exact day of his birth…hmmmm, I wonder why the Bible left it out if it was that important, then perhaps we could be joyous that Jesus came to the earth, as this was necessary for his sacrificial death, but the Bible doesn't indicate at all that celebrating his birth is needed.
The Bible is extremely specific when it comes to festivals, things to celebrate, commemorate. The Israels had their festivals outlined in detail. The one thing that we are commanded to memorialze in the Bible is Jesus' death.

Being Joyous that Jesus empitied himself, took on a slaves form and came to the earth for our benefit is one thing, and it's a good thing. But Christmas, which has very little to do with Jesus, is a completely different thing.

Sultan wrote:

Quote

There are only three birthdays mentioned in scripture; Pharoahs and Herods (2)

The Bible tells us:
2 TIMOTHY 3:16
“All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness,”

So, what do these two birthday celebrations in the Bible tell us? They were both by enemies of God. They both involved bloodshed. At the very least it can be said that the Bible paints a dark picture of the birthday celebration.

[david]

Threre's quite a bit more on easter in this thread.

[david]

Someone raised this point to me:
“I understand the holiday thing (Easter, Christmas, Birthday…)but I address that with Romans 14: let those who celebrate those days unto the Lord do it as unto the Lord and those that don't for the Lord's sake, not do it. Am I missing something?”

You may have missed this verse:
ROMANS 14:21
“It is well not to eat flesh or to drink wine or do anything over which your brother stumbles.”
I would tend to be stumbled if someone who was actually a Christian decided to adopt paganism and celebrate it, or to promote lies and myths.

I believe you are quoting this verse:
ROMANS 14:6 (NIV)
“He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God.” (Compare Col 2:16,17)

Are you missing something, you ask?
I think so. Let’s insert what I think is an obvious example:

“He who regards one day [Halloween for example, or let’s say, Devil’s Night], does so to the Lord. . . .and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God.”

I believe regarding Satanic days has nothing to do with the Lord. And I believe giving Satanic or pagan or days covered in lies a Christian name, does not make them alright. On the contrary, it pollutes Chritianity. Mix mud with clean water, and you do not have clean water. Mix paganism with Christianity, and you no longer have true Christianity. You have all the things foretold by Jesus and his early disciples.
I do not believe that verse (Rom 14:6) can be applied to Christmas, Easter, Halloween, etc, as they are based in paganism. The scripture in question was referring to days that were held as special by the Israelites, days that at one time were necessary to celebrate.

In Romans 14, the apostle explained that certain things, such as the eating of meat or vegetables, the observing of certain days as above others, even the eating of meat that had been offered to idols before being put up for regular sale in the marketplaces, were matters of conscience.

A Jew who had accepted Christ but who in the past had given longtime obedience to the law of the Sabbath, might feel qualms of conscience in doing any laborious work on a Jewish Sabbath day. It might be cooking, carpenter work, or traveling a considerable distance. Even if it was a work of the congregation, something that other members of the congregation expected him to do for them or with them, on that day he might refrain because of conscience. On any other day he would be glad to do it. But he observed that day as special “to Jehovah,” that is, he felt that it was Jehovah’s will he was doing by observing that day as especially sacred. And in eating, he thanked God that he could be absolutely clean and separate from idol worship because God had clearly outlined his view on such matters in the Mosaic law.
The general body of Christians esteemed all days as belonging to God equally—all as sacred—and none as especially so. They ate meat with a clean conscience, knowing that, if it had formerly been presented before an idol, this did not change the meat itself, because idols actually had no power. They thanked God that they could eat the food that he had provided and were grateful for the freedom that he had given through Christ.

david

[truebelief4u]

Unless I am mistaken the only thing Jesus told us to celebrate was communion.

1.  “Christmas” is not even his birthday, anyway…and there was no command to celebrate his BIRTH. Not to mention the “Christmas tree” is purely a pagan symbol and a “no-no!”
http://www.gotquestions.org/Christmas-tree.html

2.  What makes you think “Sunday” was the day of the resurrection?  He was resurrected BEFORE daylight rolled around, making it still SATURDAY according to the Hebrew reckoning. (OK, OK, I know, picky, picky…it was our “Sunday.”)
Quote from: http://www.religioustolerance.org/resurrec1.htm
   Although essentially all Christian faith groups believe that Jesus was resurrected on Sunday morning, the Gospels are somewhat vague when identifying the day of the week and the time. His resurrection occurred sometime before the woman/women visited the tomb on Sunday morning. The writer of the Gospel of John says that Mary Magdelene visited the tomb before sunrise on Sunday; the authors of Mark and Matthew say that the visit at about dawn; Luke is vague. So the resurrection could have happened on Sunday morning, in the daytime just after sunrise. Alternatively, it could have happened during the night before Sunday sunrise, or even on Saturday. Mark 16:9 states specifically that Jesus rose early on Sunday morning; however verses 9 to 20 are generally regarded as a later forgery, added onto Marks' writing at a later date. [End quote.]

Hmmm…..wonder if it was actually Saturday, or Sunday, even according to the Hebrew reckoning, since there appears to be some discrepancy here…….comments?

[Anonymous]

Quote (david @ Feb. 27 2006,21:04)

The 3 wise men are actually an unspecified number of astrologers who visited the “house” where Jesus was by then, not the manger.  More lies. ?

Yeshua was laid in a manger. The manger is simply a feeding trough not a stable. If we pray read or phrase read the account in Luke 2 we see Joseph went up from Galilee into Judea to David's city, Bethlehem. Verse 6 states…. while….. they were there the ……days…. were fullfilled. Joseph had to have family there for he was of the house and family of David.

The next verse speaks of the birth and says she wrapped him in swaddling clothes and laid him in a manger; because there was no room in the inn???

The word translated in here for inn is katalyma which is a guest room. Luke uses the same word in 22: 11 when Yeshua sent Peter and John to prepare the passover. He told them to say to the master of the house, the teacher ask where is the guest room where I may eat the passover with my disciples.

Seems to me if the word in Luke 2 was to be translated inn then He would have used the same word that is used in 10:34, where the topic is the good samaritan story.

In Luke 10:34 the word used for inn is pandocheion which means inn.

Where's the donkey??the cattle lowing????The inn keeper?……Kinda what Hollywood does to a bible story or a book when they make a movie. They embelish it to make it more commercial or appealing.

The houses in those days had a room where the animals were kept and there was a feeding trough in this room. I invision it like a garage since animals were a mode of transportation. Maybe the donkey was there. Since Joseph probably had other family members who had come to their home city for the census the guest room was probably crouded. Thus the most private room available was where they kept their animals.

Just to throw in another consideration: I was reading in one of the post where the Passover was referred to as a holiday.
Not trying to be to picky but I believe the Passover is a Holyday. That is another interesting play on words. The world celebrates holidays. The festivals of the Old Testament were called Holydays.

[david]

Quote

Yeshua was laid in a manger. The manger is simply a feeding trough not a stable.

Sorry. You're right. I”ve corrected other people on this so many times. It's just at Christmas time we are fed these things in songs in malls and on the radio and everwhere until they stick in our head.

Quote

Yeshua was laid in a manger. The manger is simply a feeding trough not a stable. If we pray read or phrase read the account in Luke 2 we see Joseph went up from Galilee into Judea to David's city, Bethlehem. Verse 6 states…. while….. they were there the ……days…. were fullfilled. Joseph had to have family there for he was of the house and family of David. The next verse speaks of the birth and says she wrapped him in swaddling clothes and laid him in a manger; because there was no room in the inn??? The word translated in here for inn is katalyma which is a guest room. Luke uses the same word in 22: 11 when Yeshua sent Peter and John to prepare the passover. He told them to say to the master of the house, the teacher ask where is the guest room where I may eat the passover with my disciples. Seems to me if the word in Luke 2 was to be translated inn then He would have used the same word that is used in 10:34, where the topic is the good samaritan story. In Luke 10:34 the word used for inn is pandocheion which means inn. Where's the donkey??the cattle lowing????The inn keeper?……Kinda what Hollywood does to a bible story or a book when they make a movie. They embelish it to make it more commercial or appealing. The houses in those days had a room where the animals were kept and there was a feeding trough in this room. I invision it like a garage since animals were a mode of transportation. Maybe the donkey was there. Since Joseph probably had other family members who had come to their home city for the census the guest room was probably crouded. Thus the most private room available was where they kept their animals. Just to throw in another consideration: I was reading in one of the post where the Passover was referred to as a holiday. Not trying to be to picky but I believe the Passover is a Holyday. That is another interesting play on words. The world celebrates holidays. The festivals of the Old Testament were called Holydays.

I've never consideredt his before. It actually fits with everything the Bible says and makes sense. Thankyou.

david

[Ramblinrose]

The following may be of interest:

Quote

Most people have been influenced by their upbringing and things depicted in stories, children’s books, Christmas cards, etc. Many understand, from these influences that: •Mary rode on a donkey to Bethlehem. The bible does not say what mode of transport was used, only that both Mary and Joseph travelled to Bethlehem. It is reasonable to assume that they may have travelled with others who were to register and that Mary’s mode of transport was something other than riding on the back of a donkey. •Joseph knocked on inn doors looking for a room for himself and Mary. The current interpretation of Luke 2:7 has produced the above fabricated story as there is absolutely nothing written in the bible about Joseph knocking on inn doors. The word ‘inn’ can also be translated as ‘guest chamber’ as it was on each other occasion in the NT. This verse is covered further in the article. •Mary gave birth the night she arrived in Bethlehem. It appears more likely that they were there for a short period of time before the birth as the bible states, “while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered” (Luke 2:6). It is reasonable to assume that they arrived in Bethlehem some time before her due date. •Yahshua was born in a stable. The word stable is never used in the pages of the NT. Just because he was laid in a manger does not mean that he was born in a stable. •Three kings riding camels came to visit at Yahshua’s birth. The bible does not say that any kings or camels visited baby Yahshua, it does report that wise men (magi) came, but it does not say how many, that they were kings, what mode of transport they used or what country they were from – only that they were from the east and that they presented him with gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh (Matt 2:1-10) …… ………The words ‘while they were there’ indicate that they hadn’t just arrived in Bethlehem but had been there for a period of time before the baby was delivered. 7 And she brought forth her firstborn Son, and wrapped Him in swaddling cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn. Reinterpretation: And she brought forth their firstborn son and wrapped him in swaddling cloths and laid him in a manger for there was no place for him in the guest chamber. Translator bias is obvious here as the underlined can justifiably be translated to show that the newborn baby was that of Mary and Joseph by using ‘their’ and not ‘her’. Is there also an error in the translation of the last part of verse 7? He was laid in a manger, as there was no other suitable place for a newborn child in the guest chamber. Guest-chamber (Easton’s Bible Dictionary) The spare room on the upper floor of an Eastern dwelling #Mr 14:14 #Lu 22:11 In #Lu 2:7 the word is translated “inn” (q.v.). Was Yahshua born in a stable? The word stable is never used in the whole of the NT. I believe that Mary and Joseph travelled to Bethlehem and stayed with relatives. They stayed in the guest chamber and placed Yahshua in a manger when he was born, as they had no other place to put their newborn son. A manger with soft straw as a mattress would suffice as a small cot for a baby. Would Joseph be that uncaring of his very expectant wife, to pop her on a donkey and travel a long distance with nowhere to stay when arriving? I don’t think any loving husband would do this. Luke 2:44 shows that when travelling to Jerusalem for the feast of Passover they travelled with kinsfolk and acquaintances. As others from the House of David would be travelling to Bethlehem to register they could have travelled in a group and then stayed with relatives when they arrived. Whilst they were there Mary delivered baby Yahshua and they placed him in a manger, as this was a perfect makeshift cot for a newborn baby to lie in.

Whilst many mangers were carved out of stone other were made of wood.

[david]

I still can't get over the fact that I missed this. I've spent hundreds of hours studying Christmas and everything connected with it. My Bible has “lodging room” and “guest room” in the footnote. There's nothing anywhere that really suggests it wasn't a house where Jesus was born. I've never really thought about that. I spent too much time thinking about the magi and the fact that he was in a “house” later when the magi arrived. I knew that the Christmas story scene was quite wrong, but it appears it may be even more wrong than I suspected. Thankyou dclegg and Ramblin rose too.

david.

[Ramblinrose]

Hi David,

From researching the subject of the birth of Yahshua I have also come across the following which may interest you – hope you can follow it:

I believe that Mary and Joseph stayed with relatives when they went to Bethlehem and that they stayed in a guest room.

You will notice that the shepherds came to see them. The only clues they had to know the child was that it was to be:
1.in Bethlehem
2.wrapped in swaddling clothes and
3.lying in a manger
no mention of a stable at all.

Quote

Luke2:8 Now there were in the same country shepherds living out in the fields, keeping watch over their flock by night. 9 And behold, an angel of the Lord stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were greatly afraid. 10 Then the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid, for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy which will be to all people. 11 “For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. 12 “And this will be the sign to you: You will find a Babe wrapped in swaddling cloths, 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, goodwill toward men!” 15 So it was, when the angels had gone away from them into heaven, that the shepherds said to one another, “Let us now go to Bethlehem and see this thing that has come to pass, which the Lord has made known to us.” 16 And they came with haste and found Mary and Joseph, and the Babe lying in a manger.

1025 brefov brephos bref’-os
of uncertain affin.; TDNT-5:636,759; n n
AV-babe 5, child 1, infant 1, young child 1; 8
1) an unborn child, embryo, a foetus
2) , an infant, a babe

It would appear from the above that the shepherds visited shortly after the birth of Yahshua as they visited a ‘new born’ baby.

Now we come to the Magi who visited Yahshua in a house.

Quote

Matthew 2: 8 And he sent them to Bethlehem, and said, Go and search diligently for the young child; and when ye have found him, bring me word again, that I may come and worship him also. 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.

3813 paidion paidion pahee-dee’-on
from dimin. of 3816; TDNT-5:636,759; n n
AV-child 25, little child 12, young child 10, damsel 4; 51
1) a young child, a little boy, a little girl
1a) infants
1b) children, little ones
1c) an infant
1c1) of a (male) child just recently born
1d) of a more advanced child; of a mature child;
1e) metaph. children (like children) in intellect

Reflecting on the different use of words for baby or young child it would appear that the shepherds came and saw a newborn baby yet the magi visited a slightly older child but not necessarily of two years.

If we wish to try to put Matthew and Luke together we always have a problem as to when the Magi came.

I would suppose the following:

The shepherds came and visited just after the birth. But I suggest the magi came some time after the 40 days of purification. I suggested this because of the offering that is required after having a child.

Quote

Leviticus 12:8 ‘And if she is not able to bring a lamb, then she may bring two turtledoves or two young pigeons—one as a burnt offering and the other as a sin offering. So the priest shall make atonement for her, and she will be clean.’”

From Luke we can gather that Mary and Joseph brought a pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons, and not a lamb.

Quote

22 Now when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were completed, they brought Him to Jerusalem to present Him to the Lord 23 (as it is written in the law of the Lord, “Every male who opens the womb shall be called holy to the LORD”), 24 and to offer a sacrifice according to what is said in the law of the Lord, “A pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons.“

It would appear that they did not have the means to purchase a lamb. If the Magi had already been to visit they would have received the gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh and would have had the means to purchase a lamb.

I suppose that Mary and Joseph went to Bethlehem and stayed with relatives. Baby Yahshua was born whilst they were there and they were visited by shepherds shortly after the birth. They remained in Bethlehem until after the days of purification at which time the Magi came to visit. It was after this visit that they left for Egypt and the gifts that the Magi had offered them would have given them means to survive in Egypt for a period of time.

Hope you have found that of interest.

Shalom

[Mercy]

All I do is read the bible, work hard and give everything to the poor. I have come to realize that everything else is of the devil and I am probably accidently doing something pagan as I type this.

[kenrch]

Quote (Mercy @ Nov. 01 2006,12:52)

All I do is read the bible, work hard and give everything to the poor. I have come to realize that everything else is of the devil and I am probably accidently doing something pagan as I type this.

I try to do what I can. What the Lord shows me I will do. Nowhere does the bible say to keep Christ birthday and if the bible did then I'm sure we would know when that day was and wouldn't have to guess.
What is associated with the holiday (not Holy day). Drunkness, materialism and false religion. It is a worldly holiday that so happens to be on a pagan holiday. That's enough for me NOT to keep it!

[NickHassan]

Thanks RR,
The Jewish people missed the promises about the timing of the coming of Messiah but the astrologers did not. God had written these things in the heavens too as promised in Genesis 1
” 14And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: “

Such signs are shown in the endtimes too and we should not ignore their significance.

Rev 12
“1And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:

2And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.

3And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.

4And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.”

Such an alignment of constellations with the moon occured in 1997 apparently.

Rev 15
“1And I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvellous, seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is filled up the wrath of God. “

Could this relate to Pleides-seven sisters?

[david]

Quote

Reflecting on the different use of words for baby or young child it would appear that the shepherds came and saw a newborn baby yet the magi visited a slightly older child but not necessarily of two years.

Hi RamblinRose,
I believe the astrologers arrived much later than the shephards based on the fact that to be sure Herod got Jesus, he had all the boys in the area of bethlehem killed “from two years of age and under, according to the time that he had carefully ascertained from the astrologers.”–Mat 2:16
We know that Herod wanted to “destroy” the child. (Mat 2:13) And basedon the time that he carefully ascertained from the astrologers, he did something terrible–having all the boys two years and under killed.
If Jesus was just a newborn infant, why take such drastic measures?

david

[Ramblinrose]

Hi David

A few things I have pondered.

Herod had asked the Magi when they had first seen the star.

The discussions with the Magi do not reveal that the star was only appeared after the birth of Yahshua.

The Magi came to where the star was but it doesn't say that they did that immediately upon seeing it.

Stars change in brightness depending on their position to the earth – maybe it was at its brightest when they came to Bethlehem.

Is it possible that the star first appeared from the conception of Mary? If the star had first appeared at the conception of Yahshua, and based upon my thought that the Magi visited Mary after her 40 days of purification, that would mean the star would have first been seen around a year earlier.

This would work well with Herod, a cruel man, who then killed boys two years and under. He chose an age by which he would have been sure to have the child killed.

An interesting subject.

[david]

Some other things. These magi, there is a lot of indications that they were astrologers. I will go into that if asked. There are at least a few Bibles that translate that word as “astrologers.”

There is no indication or mention of anyone other then them seeing the star.

The star didn't bring them directly to Jesus, but first to Jersulem where they came in contact with King Herod who wanted to “destroy” Jesus. (I realize that the direction they came from and the main road would have lead them first to Jerusalem, but it didn't necessarily have to.)

Quote

This would work well with Herod, a cruel man, who then killed boys two years and under. He chose an age by which he would have been sure to have the child killed.

Notice that the scripture says: “from two years of age and under, according to the TIME THAT HE HAD CAREFULLY ascertained from the astrologers.”–Mat 2:16

He based the age of the children he had killed on the time that he had carefully ascertained from the magi. I think this seems to suggest that jesus would have been at least several months old when this happened, when the magi arrived at the “house” where Jesus was staying.

If these men were astrologers (and I think the word “magoi” and history make it clear they were) and if God's word Condemns astrology, then it seems there was something else at work here.
Remember, the star lead them first to king herod who wanted Jesus dead.
I think Satan was behind this. Remember too that they had to be warned by God in a dream to return another way.

Yes, Ramblin Rose, this is an interesting subject. I like this subject because the story we are told over and over again does not match the Bible in the least. The nativity scene is just wrong. The magi and the shephards were never together. The magi came to the “house” where Jesus was, quite some time later. They weren't 3 wise kings, but an unspecified number of astrologers most likely. They weren't there to worship Jesus as God's servants, but were there to honour the one born to be king of the Jews. They most likely represented paganism, not God.

Quote

If the star had first appeared at the conception of Yahshua, and based upon my thought that the Magi visited Mary after her 40 days of purification, that would mean the star would have first been seen around a year earlier.

I do agree with you that it took them quite some time to get there. But I feel strongly that based on the time that Herod had “carefully ascertained,” it was much longer before they arrived.

david

[NickHassan]

Hi,
So the Magi arrived in Jerusalem AFTER the birth of Jesus[Matt.2.1] and met with Herod who consulted with the Chief Priests and scribes, and with travel being slow it was unlikely they would have found the child for some days or weeks.  

They found the child WITH his mother, rather than being held by his mother, and presented him with gifts so perhaps he was walking by then? Again it would have taken some time for Herod to have been sure he had been tricked so perhaps it would have been some months anyway.

Since he killed all the children less than two I would have thought the time span till then from the birth of Jesus would have been at least a year or so.

From a footnote
Magi.
Pronounced may-ji, a caste of wise-men specializing in astrology, medicine and natural science.

God used urim\thummin, which is sometimes referred to as divination, in the OT, and the replacement apostle was chosen by drawing lots and so we should not ignore these and the signs in the heavens He gives us to help reveal His will. Prov 16.33

[Author]

Posts