Yuku free message boards

Quote:

---

Christmas story contradictions not listed in SAB alphonseiam
I was just looking at the two Christmas stories in Matthew and Luke to see what the SAB had to say about the contradictions. I was surprised to see nothing said about the following:

---

Why should you be surprised? The so-called contradictions regarding the "Christmas stories" have been debunked.

Quote:

---

In Matthew 2:11 it is stated that the wise men came to a "house" in Bethlehem and found Mary and the young child. This implies that they lived in Bethlehem, not just visited for the taking of a census.

---

False. Matthew 2:11 says nothing about Bethlehem. In fact, the visit of the Magi suggests that Joseph and Mary were residing somewhere else besides Bethlehem (see verses 9, 12). If they had been residing at Bethlehem (which the text of Matthew does not say that they were), then the Magi would have likely had to go back through Jerusalem or near Jerusalem in order to find another way home... This is based upon geography and upon trade route maps...

The maps that I have seen of Palestine for the time of Christ have no trade routes heading East when leaving Bethlehem to the south (heading away from Jerusalem). Bethlehem is less than 10 miles to the south of Jerusalem. If the Magi had been in Bethlehem to see Jesus, and then decided to go "another route" home, then the only way that they could have taken a different route home would have been to either re-enter Jerusalem to find another Eastern route home (north of the Dead Sea), go around Jerusalem to the west to find another route, or go Southeast through the desert around the Dead Sea into Edom. There were numerous trade routes heading East which were north of the Dead Sea. However, to my knowledge, there were no major trade routes going southeast from Bethlehem. Even if they had gone to the southeast, then the new route would have taken them across the desert into Arabia, which is possible, but less likely. The Magi had to avoid Jersusalem on their return, and they possibly took one of the other trade routes heading home to the East on the east bank of the Jordan river, probably through Damascus.

There is strong evidence that the Magi were led by the star to another place, such as the house of Zehariah and Elizabeth in Judea (Luke 1:39, 56, 65), or even to their home in Nazareth in Galilee (Luke 2:39, Matthew 2:9), instead of a house in Bethlehem. This would have allowed an escape for the Magi back home by a different route. Nowhere in the text of Matthew does it say that the Magi found the child in a house in Bethlehem. The main connection that Joseph and Mary had to Bethlehem is that Jesus was born there. There is nothing to suggest that they had purchased or acquired a home there. Herod directed the Magi to go to Bethlehem, but the text does not even state that they entered Bethlehem. In fact, the text indicates that the star immediately led the Magi to the correct place (either another place in Judea, or possibly even their home in Nazareth). The star is what led them to the child, not Herod's directions.

Quote:

---

Young child does not even imply a newborn babe in my vocabulary either.

This is given further substance by the statement that Herod had all the male children age two and younger slaughtered, believing that the child could be as old as two.

---

Agree.

Quote:

---

The idea of a Bethlehem residence is given further weight by the story of the families return from Egypt in Matt. 1:20-23.

---

Disagree. Notice that the text specifically says "Judaea". It does not say Bethlehem. The text is silent as to exactly where in Judaea... perhaps because the family of Elizabeth lived "in a town of the hill country" (Luke 1:39). Joseph and Mary had close family ties in Judaea (Elizabeth, Zechariah, John).

Quote:

---

Since Herod's son was now on the throne, Joseph was afraid to return to Judaea, so turned aside into Galilee and settled in the city of Nazareth. This certainly implies that this was the first time they had dwelled in Nazareth

---

False.

See Luke 1:26-27, 56; Luke 2:4, 39.

Quote:

---

and supports the idea that they were native to Bethlehem

---

False.

See Luke 2:4-7... Verses 6 and 7 implies the opposite of your suggestion... "while they were there, the time came for the baby to be born, and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was NO ROOM FOR THEM IN THE INN."

The phrase "while they were there" suggests a relatively short period of time... If they had lived or had become "native to Bethlehem" as you have suggested, then there would have been no need to state the phrase "while they were there"... A better phrase would have been, "while living in Bethlehem..."

Also, Luke 2:3 implies that the trips made for the census were not designed for people to re-settle into another town. Although Jesus was born in Bethlehem, there was nothing to suggest in the text that Joseph and Mary were planning to move to Bethlehem. In fact, everything pointed to them returning to their hometown of Nazareth. See Matthew 1:24.

Quote:

---

So, we have a major contradiction in the two Christmas stories,

---

False.

There is no major contradiction... The only major contradiction here is in your imagination.

Quote:

---

with Luke suggesting a trip to Bethlehem since Joseph was of the house of Judah

---

False.

Luke was not suggesting a trip to Bethlehem. Luke stated it as fact. See Luke 2:1-4.

Quote:

---

and Matthew implying that they lived in Bethlehem in a house, and only went to Nazareth to avoid being found by Herod's son.

---

Matthew did not imply that they lived in Bethlehem for the reasons given above. You are the one implying that they lived in Bethlehem, not Matthew.

Quote:

---

Isn't it great how the church has neatly integrated the two stories, with the wise men visiting the babe in the manger shortly after the birth of Jesus

---

False.

The Church has not integrated wise men visiting the babe in the manger. The text of the Bible does not indicate such a scene. Such scenes are false.

Quote:

---

making it appear that it's all one neat story, rather than two totally unreconcilable stories.

---

It is you and others who do not read the text carefully who are misrepresenting the textual reading regarding the early days of the life of Jesus Christ.

Quote:

---

Makes a much nicer Nativity scene with the camels and wise men, don't you think?

---

Such scenes are false. There is nothing "nice" about such falsehoods.

Quote:

---

Really surprised me that the SAB did not point these matters out as contradictions.

---

Actually, this so-called set of contradictions regarding the "nativity" and the Magi has been dealt with before on the SAB. Diskeyezed promoted this rubbish for quite some time until he was called on it. Have not heard from him in months. Many of these so-called contradictions are nothing but figments of the imaginations of skeptics. There is no substance to them.

Quote:

---

Notice that the text specifically says "Judaea". It does not say Bethlehem. The text is silent as to exactly where in Judaea... perhaps because the family of Elizabeth lived "in a town of the hill country" (Luke 1:39). Joseph and Mary had close family ties in Judaea (Elizabeth, Zechariah, John).


Why would they be going anywhere but home on their return from Egypt?

---

Because the angel of the Lord instructed them to go "into the land of Israel" (Matthew 2:20). The text indicates that the angel did not specify an exact town or homestead.

Quote:

---

The angel did not say go to Judaea, but just to "the land of Israel." Pretty broad statement.

---

Correct.

Quote:

---

If Nazareth was already their home, why would he not just go there to begin with?

---

Because the angel did not specify Nazareth. Joseph and Mary did as the angel commanded them.

Quote:

---

Herod, and presumably his heir, probably thought they had taken care of the problem, which was in the Bethlehem area. Why not just go off to Galilee, far away from Jerusalem and Bethlehem?

---

Again, the angel did not specify an exact town or homestead.

Quote:

---

Matthew says that he turned aside, which means diverted from his planned course

---

Actually, the text of Matthew says that God warned Joseph in a dream to turn aside into the parts of Galilee. This occurred after Joseph had heard that Archela'us was reigning in Judaea. It is not surprising that God would instruct them to "turn aside" because Judaea is in the southern portion of Israel... Going through Judaea is inevitable when entering Israel from the south. Another way of saying "turn aside" is to "go to the side of"... In other words, God was instructing them to avoid Judaea. This does not mean that they had established a home in Judaea or Bethlehem beforehand (and were turning aside from a previous home)... it simply means to go away from Judaea because of the political climate.

Quote:

---

And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: Is that the way one describes a return to their home city? Come on, now, don't say yes.

---

Your question is irrelevant... particularly because the re-entry into Israel was low key (to avoid detection). The statement simply tells the facts... "And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth".

Quote:

---

that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene. So, if Joseph and Mary already lived in Nazareth, wasn't that probably already true before their "return" home, especially if that may have been where the Magi found them to begin with?

---

No, it was not true in the sense that he was "known" to have been from Nazareth up to that point. The exact location of where the child was when the Magi arrived cannot be determined from the text. To assume that the child was in Bethlehem is an error because the text does not support such an assertion (it actually implies that the child was NOT in Bethlehem). The verses in Luke suggest that the location was Nazareth, but this is only inferred. The location was probably kept secret for very good reasons. After the political climate changed, then the threat was diminished or over, and therefore, Jesus could be known or "called" a Nazrene.

Quote:

---

You give me references from Luke to prove that my interpretation of the Matthew account concerning Nazareth can't be true. In other words, the bible is inerrant.

---

Correct.

Quote:

---

Therefore, one account, Matthew's, cannot be interpreted to conflict with Luke's, right?

---

No. People make such interpretations frequently, but such interpretations are in error.

Quote:

---

But, if who you are trying to convince believes in the possiblity that one of the writers could be in error, that type of argument/reasoning has no positive effect for your effort.

---

Correct. If the person I am trying to convince does not believe that the Bible is true, then there is nothing that I can do or say that will convince them otherwise.

However, I can help such persons see that their presuppositions are in error or are very weak. Such a process may be part of what God has ordained that would represent a part of His plan in converting that person.

Quote:

---

It would only work if you are trying to convince another fundamentalist, who would probably already agree with you anyway.

---

You may actually be one of those persons and not realize it yet!

The apostle Paul was very much like one of those persons who initially did not believe... And then God made him see the light.

Quote:

---

The Church has not integrated wise men visiting the babe in the manger. The text of the Bible does not indicate such a scene. Such scenes are false.

I have been in church for 29 years and I have never even heard this discussed, but I bet not a lot of people in the church would be offended by a stable scene that included wise men and camels.

---

There are many people within the Church who are offended by such scenes, you just do not realize it yet. Ask other Christians about it... those who do not understand what you are talking about do not carefully read their Bibles... some of these persons may be false professors of Christianity.

Quote:

---

Diskeyezed promoted this rubbish for quite some time until he was called on it. Have not heard from him in months. Many of these so-called contradictions are nothing but figments of the imaginations of skeptics. There is no substance to them.

So I guess you frightened him off by the pure power of your arguments.

---

I doubt it. Who knows why he has not been around?... perhaps he has other more important things to do.

Waterrock handled many of his arguments handily, but Waterrock also did not press him far enough in many of his arguments.

Quote:

---

I didn't want you to think you had frightened me off, so I came back. I , actually, would prefer that the contradictions not be there, but just because you say they are not there does not make it true.

---

Why would you prefer that the contradictions not be there? What difference would it make to you?

Quote:

---

Your last two sentences in the above quote kind of sound like John Hagee, and he is in Texas, too. Hmmm, are you John Hagee?

---

No.

Quote:

---

A member of his church?

---

No.

Quote:

---

Just one more thing I noticed while looking at the story of the wise men just now:

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,
2:2 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.

The wise men came from the east to Jerusalem, so they were going from east to west, right?

---

Correct.

Quote:

---

If they saw his star in the east, and were following it, shouldn't they have been going toward China?

---

No.

I interpret what they said is something analogous to this...

"This past summer, I saw the lights in the north (Northern Lights) when I visited Alaska".

In other words, the "star in the east" simply means that the Magi were in the east when the saw the star. Notice how Matthew 2:9 puts it... "After they had heard the king, they went on their way, and the star they had seen in the east went ahead of them until it stopped over the place where the child was." (NIV)

Quote:

---

Or, did the star only go before them when they were traveling from Jerusalem to wherever they found the child, but definitely not in Bethlehem?

---

No. The Magi reported to Herod that they had seen the star in the east, which presumably prompted them to go to Jerusalem. Apparently, they had been aware that the star was very important, and that it signified the birth of the King of the Jews...

Quote:

---

And how was it that God revealed to them that this star they saw in the direction of China signaled the birth of a king of the Jews in the opposite direction, whom they needed to go worship since he was not anything to them since they were not Israelites anyway?

---

First of all, it is unlikely that the star they saw was "in the direction of China" for the reasons described earlier (lights in the north, the Northern Lights).

Second, the text does not explain how they knew that the star signaled the birth of the King of the Jews. However, it should not be a surprise that Magi or wise men in Eastern cultures would have been anticipating the event... Many of them were probably familiar with some of the writings of the Jewish prophets... (the Jews had been in exile in Babylon) centuries beforehand... Or were the Magi Zoroastrians, perhaps?

Quote:

---

Oh, well, I have a life, a business, a family, and I have spent wayyyy too much time here tonight. If I don't bother to post again, it's because I value sleep and the aforementioned things.

---

I completely understand.