The Wiki entry is helpful here: ‘The first clear use of the term Palestine to refer to the entire area between Phoenicia and Egypt was in 5th century BCE Ancient Greece,[7][8] when Herodotus wrote of a “district of Syria, called Palaistinê” (Ancient Greek: Συρίη ἡ Παλαιστίνη καλεομένη)[9] in The Histories, which included the Judean mountains and the Jordan Rift Valley. But is this accurate? After Mary places the baby in the manger, Luke immediately draws attention to the shepherds, whom I am inclined to think were ‘outsiders’ of some sort even though they also had a significant biblical heritage. But as time went on, this term was used in a non-political cultural sense to refer to the culture of the region, especially in pre-modern times. …and yet there is not a single hint of all that in Luke’s text. On another one of your posts, a commenter asks “what then is Luke trying to say here?” and insists that he remains unmoved by the idea that Luke wanted simply to point out that he was born in common conditions – in a common room with the animals. I am glad you spoke up for shepherds (or at least sought to correct the historical record). That is why we cannot describe these things as ‘Jewish’ culture. I like it. The only reason for them to travel to Bethlehem for the census was because he had family there and if he did, the customs of first-century Palestine required him to stay with relatives and not with strangers. Was Jesus born in a stable or a cave? (I promise, not a word about your Great-uncle Vlad…. We get to a point where what you/men say has no meaning nor value for us. For some reason I have never been invited again to preach in Advent. I understand your point on this being Joseph’s home town. The shame question is I think a cultural/contextual rather than a textual issue (and can be readily seen even today in GB amongst immigrant subcultures such as that in which my wife works). Nice to see that one part of a traditional Christmas is intact in 2020 – this post! Interestingly, none of Jesus’ critics respond, ‘No I don’t touch animals on the Sabbath’ because they all would have had to lead their animals from the house. In the Bible, Jesus’ birthplace is identified as Bethlehem. I think it is hard to overstate the shame that out of wedlock pregnancies would have engendered in the time of Jesus. I have tried to not let it bother me but I find so many wholes the the carol services and carols now. Given the time frame above a quite substantial building, rather than a “hastily built annex” could have been built. I wish it were not so, but there we are. So why has the wrong, traditional interpretation persisted for so long? Critics of the historical accuracy of the Bible often find what they believe are contradictions among the writers of the gospel accounts because there are differences. This objection also assumes that the events in Matthew’s Gospel take place immediately after Jesus was born. One reason is because God wanted to show us that Jesus Christ came to bring salvation to everyone — not just the rich and powerful, but the poor and downtrodden. He looks in detail at the phrase often translated ‘there was no room for them in the kataluma‘ and argues that the Greek phrase ouch en autois topos does not mean ‘there was no room for them’ but ‘they had no room.’ In other words, he thinks that they did stay in the kataluma, but that it was not big enough for Mary to give birth to Jesus in, so she moved to the main room for the birth, assisted by relatives. Jesus) was born. He also denies the view that Jesus was born in a stable or barn. I heard the line “shepherds were disreputable outcasts” in my teenage years, and I believed that for a long, long time until a few years ago when I began to question it and check it out for myself. But is there any ancient evidence of this? I accept that it was probably part of the house (as you suggest) and that the ‘inn’ was not a public hotel in the way tradition suggests (though it is interesting that the ESV continues to use the word ‘inn’). Ian then posted a research position about women being risk averse. Bailey amusingly cites an early researcher: Anyone who has lodged with Palestinian peasants knows that notwithstanding their hospitality the lack of privacy is unspeakably painful. I regularly interview women scholars, and I invite guest posts from women and men—though the women more often decline, and the men more often accept. It blew my mind, and I wanted to see if this was something more people knew. This discussion was wonderful and illuminating and challenging and exciting and thought-provoking! The hastily built annex is a bit small so the birth happens in the family room and Jesus is laid in the manger. But it smacked me right across the face. It is about the region and its culture, not the province and its religious distinctiveness. Broadly speaking, because of Roman use, ‘Palestine’ has been used for the culture of the area, even by Jews. I was assigned Luke 2:7, and I came across another page with a study disputing the whole stable notion. If it happened in an isolated stable, “that just shows that the descent was from a respected human to a disrespected human,” he argues. Matthew : “she was found to be pregnant..”. But if you are going to claim there is a pattern here, you are going to have to demonstrate it a bit more convincingly. First, to understand the Bible we should try to pare away 2,000 years of traditions that have accumulated as we read the Bible through the perspective of our own culture and time. If any one thing has defined most Jews post-AD 70 it is that the vast majority have been urban dwellers, not pastoralists. Yes, it is, if you think that what people need to hear is the actual story of Scripture, rather than the tradition of a children’s play. While the Bible doesn’t use the word “stable,” it does say that the baby Jesus was laid in a manger—in other words, a feeding trough, which tells us they were in an area where animals were fed (Luke 2:7). Does anyone sell a ‘Palestinian house’ like you describe that can be used in a nativity set? Jesus was not born in a stable. Thanks for this discussion. Yes, though it is important to distinguish between the story as recounted by Luke and Matthew, compared with the ‘story’ described in fond traditions and slushy carols! Much of my work is done on a freelance basis. I think we all must give a huge Thanks to Katie being the ‘risky’ one even if she was ignored. There are various examples of good preaching following this approach elsewhere on the blog. Can you? Time has passed in no one will calculate the exact age of the child so they should be safe from the religious zealots there. (Answer: not necessarily!). It is the term for the private ‘upper’ room where Jesus and the disciples eat the ‘last supper’ (Mark 14.14 and Luke 22.11; Matthew does not mention the room). “I am sorry to spoil your preparations for Christmas before the Christmas lights have even gone up,” Rev Paul, a theologian and former Dean of Studies at St John’s theological college, Nottingham, has written on his personal blog. Our problem is constantly imposing modern estimations of value on the ancient context. – “the spare or upper room in a private house or in a village […] where travelers received hospitality and where no payment was expected” (ISBE 2004). The three wise men, along with their caravan, and angels gather around the child. This is a beautiful story retold countless times at Christmas time. In fact, no-one knows who the person on whom the biblical character of Jesus was based even was. On the theme in Luke, I would push back again: unlike in the Fourth Gospel, the theme in Luke is of both rejection *and* acceptance. Ian nor the rest of the men on this blog don’t even see the pattern. December 9, 2016 by Ian Paul. Don't view debate as a conflict to win; address the argument rather than tackling the person. Worth also noting that the Jewish newspaper based in Jerusalem was called the Palestine Times, reflecting the pre-1948 use of the term in cultural, rather than political terms. 2. Why was this? In typical Lucan fashion the good news comes to those who are the last and the least (even though Luke writes to the privileged Theophilus). I believe it is because Western Christians are obsessed with the idea that Jesus must have been rejected by everyone, right from the very start. The easy answer is, "In Bethlehem." To call first century Iudaea/Judea “Palestine” would be as anachronistic as referring to “Roman England”. It was small, and there was certainly no room to give birth in it! Jesus was not born in a palace of gold; He was born in a stable. I think suspect that there is a deep anti-Semitism that drives this entire train of thought. The term has only very recently been politicised. My Hungarian isn’t very good…, Oh, you are too modest, Ian …. If this is true, in addition to depressing women’s commenting rates overall, gendered disparities in commenting should be stronger where risk to career is more salient, such as when authors do not have a permanent position. The actual name that Herodotus used for the region was “Suria he Palaestinè” or ” Palestinian Syria” and this was Romanised in AD 135 as “Syria Palaestina”. People generally want to cling to what they they find comforting (familiar), especially during this difficult time we have been through over the past several months. I believe it is much more than simply an historical misunderstanding, or a materialistic attachment to our adorable little creches! It seems to me that the following is both credible and consistent with the Biblical narrative: Where do you keep animals? But maybe this asking too much. Kenneth Bailey’s very interesting (and to my mind persuasive) exposition of the parable of the prodigal son to answer the Muslim assertion that the cross is not referred to in that parable is an extended case in point. Rev Ian Paul writes on his blog that birth of Christ story is based on a misreading of the New Testament, A 15th century nativity scene by Paolo Schiavo. I’m okay with that being a part of the Christmas story. I have spoke to a number of Pastors, and speakers who have said that they agree with this interpretation but there would be such an uproar from many of the people attending that it wouldn’t be worth it. I find it impossible to believe that Palestinian Jewish women in the first century would have been any different. So where has the idea come from? It further suggests to me that Jesus’ birth was in a peasant’s setting very unlike our own. Simeon foresees this will happen (2.34), but there is nothing in these chapters to match Herod’s murderous intent. If you enjoyed this, do share it on social media (Facebook or Twitter) using the buttons on the left. People might even start asking questions about how we read the Bible and understand it for ourselves! I suspect that this obsession with shame is precisely the reason that the stable narrative has endured for so long. One last comment on this. Though the gospels do use some of these terms, they often refer to the land of Israel, especially Matthew and Luke, which of course is a term drawn from the OT (see eg Matt 2.20, 8.10, Luke 1.80, 7.9). Any problems? First, let’s address the place of Christ’s birth. This interpretation is hardly new. If we’re trying to read our Bibles correctly, surely we notice that the location is never given as Palestine in any of the gospels? A similar question on the out of wedlock theme had occurred to me on reading your post (though I have been persuaded by KB’s case for some time). It seems to me that having a baby (Jesus) “out of wedlock” would only be shameful if it were actually true. And could that be a reason why there was ‘no room’ for them? If you want to press that point, you will need to offer something more systematic. They took refuge in a barn or stable where Yeshua of Nazareth (a.k.a. If he were, that would obviously count against my reasoning and in favour of yours! This makes no sense unless everyone lives in the one room! Bailey cites William Thomson, a Presbyterian missionary to Lebanon, Syria and Palestine, who wrote in 1857: It is my impression that the birth actually took place in an ordinary house of some common peasant, and that the baby was laid in one of the mangers, such as are still found in the dwellings of farmers in this region. I’m not a Biblical scholar, but I have a question in response to the threads regarding the shame Mary and Joseph may have experienced among relatives in Bethlehem. Mac user; chocoholic. D. What happens to virtue in an age of social media? Watch out for snipers. Or are they the elite who are handling the sacrificial sheep as some argue? I am afraid I do not know enough to be able to say whether Luke’s primary reader (Theophilus as he is described) was, given his Greek name, actually unlikely to be someone who was culturally Middle Eastern. This scene from the Arena (Scrovegni) Chapel in Padua by the Italian artist Giotto shows Mary, Joseph and Jesus in the Bethlehem stable. The term Palestinian would have had no meaning to the people at the time since it only referred to the Philistines who were long gone by then. The gospel tradition makes it abundantly clear that there were some who followed Jesus and there were others who rejected him, but an anti-Semitic Christianity needs for Jesus to have been rejected by ALL the Jews, right from the start. Quite startling. Thirdly, there is simply no evidence that shepherding was anything shameful; in fact, in that part of the world quite the opposite. If the term wasn’t used in the first century, it shouldn’t be retrojected. Just like to point out that a woman menstruates every 4 weeks or so. Couldn’t we also assume that they told the truth about the situation to the relatives and been accepted to stay in the house? C. Mary and Joseph had arrived in Bethlehem too late to find a room at the inn. I’d agree with you that it is a very general term, which I think its etymology points to. And a study here from the Guardian. British Palestine also denoted a huge area, including present day Jordan. I think there are two main causes. The Kataluma in Luke 22 also has a genitive possessive “mou”—Jesus claims the room as his, a word that is conspicuously absent in Matthew. He was placed in a manger. Adjunct Professor, Fuller Theological Seminary; Associate Minister, St Nic's, Nottingham; Managing Editor, Grove Books; member of General Synod. Surrounded by farm animals, the Christ child is laid within a manger, a stable that was likely made of wood with hay on the ground. Is you thesis available online at all? In Matt 5.15, Jesus comments: Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl.

1 Bhk Flat In Kharghar Upto 30 Lakhs, Carrier Mobile App, Musc Careers Login, Barbie Jet, Set And Style Ds Game, Stranger Sounding Than 21 Crossword Clue, Louisiana Sales Tax Registration, Touch Sensitive Lamp Turns On By Itself, Tool Set Home Depot, Airbrush Kit Bunnings, Where Is Giant's Grove In Skyrim,