Are the Nativity Narratives really historical or allegorical

[polonius]

Since it is approaching Christmas, perhaps it would be a good time to review Matthew’s and Luke’s Nativity Narratives which comprise the first few chapters of their gospels.

We understand that the earliest stratas of Matthew, used by the very early Palestinian Ebionite Christians, who remained obedient to Mosaic Law, did not seem to include such a nativity narrative suggesting that it was added later (perhaps to both Matthew and Luke).

Each narrative describes the birth of Jesus but involves serious contradictions. Let’s begin with the date of Jesus’ birth as given by each.

[polonius]

JW posted:

#QUESTION: Why do the genealogies of Jesus Christ as given by Matthew and by Luke differ?

Luke traced the line through David’s son Nathan and evidently follows the ancestry of Mary*, while Matthew traces Jesus ancestry from Solomon through to Joseph (his legally father). (Lu 3:31; Mt 1:6, 7).

OBSERVATION: Jewish genealogies and tribal affiliations NEVER went through a female member because she did not produce seed (sperm) and only nourished the offspring.

Nathan was never a king of Israel.

The messiah had to be a biological offspring of BOTH David and Solomon, not Nathan.

[oldbadger]

RESPONSE: You raised an interesting point but didn't see where it led. WHEN did this event occur, ie. the pregnancies of both Mary and Elizabeth? Were these overlapping in time?

In Luke's account, John was about 6 months older than Jesus, and his mother Elizabeth was Mary's cousin!
However, John never knew of Jesus until the baptism scene about 27-30 years later, and when John was arrested and imprisoned down in Perea he sent his disciples to Jesus to ask, 'Are you the one?'

All very odd.....

[polonius]

RESPONSE: You raised an interesting point but didn't see where it led. WHEN did this event occur, ie. the pregnancies of both Mary and Elizabeth? Were these overlapping in time?

In Luke's account, John was about 6 months older than Jesus, and his mother Elizabeth was Mary's cousin!
However, John never knew of Jesus until the baptism scene about 27-30 years later, and when John was arrested and imprisoned down in Perea he sent his disciples to Jesus to ask, 'Are you the one?'

All very odd.....

QUESTION: How did you arrive at the figure that John was about six months older than Jesus?

And hadn't John heard a voice from heaven at Jesus' baptism saying
Mark 1-11 "And a voice came from the heavens, “You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased.�

If Jesus had said or implied that he was the messiah, wouldn't the voice from heaven on the occasion of his baptism have confirmed that he was? Why would John afterwards ask disciples to find the answer?

[polonius]

I can show many problems with the nativity stories....

There are no real problems with the nativity stories - any perceived problems arise from an improper reading. The gospel accounts do not all resport the same aspects nor do they all concentrate on the same events but they are in no way contradictory.

JW

RESPONSE: Matthew establishes Jesus' descent according to the prophecy that the kinship would pass from David to Solomon and then from Solomon's offspring. (See II Samuel and Chronicles)

Nathan was NOT of Solomon's lineage (not a son "of the loins" or "seed" of, and neither he nor any of his offspring were kings of Israel. Therefore, he lineage established for the messiah was not fulfilled by claiming that Mary's lineage came through Nathan.

And Solomon, not Nathan, built the Temple.

Moreover, tribal lineage never came from a woman who only nourished the offspring of the father's "seed".

Therefore Matthew or Luke is contradictory (so one must be in error) on this point.

JW posted

"The gospel accounts do not all resport the same aspects nor do they all concentrate on the same events but they are in no way contradictory"

http://www.sharefaith.com/guide/Christi ... f-god.html

“When your days are fulfilled and you rest with your fathers, I will set up your seed after you, who will come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for My name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his Father, and he shall be My son.� (II Samuel 7:12-14)


1 Kings 6: Building of the Temple.[a]" 1 In the four hundred and eightieth year after the Israelites went forth from the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel, in the month of Ziv (the second month), he began to build the house of the LORD."


Thus the Bible contradictory on this essential point.. Messiahship does not pass through a woman (Mary) nor through a non-biological father(Nathan)

It's interesting that some insist on the literal (rather than a figurative) and error-free interpretation of the Bible. That leads to so many historical problems.

[oldbadger]

QUESTION: How did you arrive at the figure that John was about six months older than Jesus?

Here it is:

LUKE: {1:24} And after those days his
wife Elisabeth conceived, and hid herself five months,
saying, {1:25} Thus hath the Lord dealt with me in the days
wherein he looked on [me,] to take away my reproach
among men. {1:26} And in the sixth month the angel
Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named
Nazareth, {1:27} To a virgin espoused to a man whose
name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s
name [was] Mary.

....so I reckon that John was about 6 months older than Jesus.

[oldbadger]

Some more:-

Matthew tells us:-
MATTHEW {2:13}.................... Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt........................... {2:15} And was there until the death of Herod:

......... obviously we don't know how long Joseph, Mary and Jesus lived in Egypt, maybre 6 months or maybe 5 years...? So according to Matthew Jesus was born somewhere between about 9BC and 4BC. Obviously that makes a mockery of Luke's tale.


...and more. Your point about God'#s words after Jesus's baptism are interesting. In the same way, so is this:-

Matthew: {2:19} But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the
Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, {2:20}
Saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and
go into the land of Israel........

....... but the angel never warned Joseph that Herod Archelaus was in power, which Joseph perceived as a great danger, thus causing him to flee onwards, northweards, into Gallilee...

[oldbadger]

This is Luke's idea of truth:-
LUKE: {1:30} And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou
hast found favour with God. {1:31} And, behold, thou shalt
conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call
his name JESUS.

...not Yeshua, or Yahoshua, but.......... good old Greek 'Jesus'!

Yeshua probably only spoke Eastern Dialect (Galilean) Aramaic, which is how folks figured out that he was from Galilee after his arrest, and so figured that Simon Cephas was with him and from the same province. Greek? Nah....

[oldbadger]

More from Luke:

LUKE:{2:1} And it came to pass in those days, that there went
out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world
should be taxed.

...No. Onkly Archelaus's provinces of Idumea, Judea and Samaria were accounted, plus the exchange rate taxation at the Temple, which did affect all Jews, which is maybe how Luke felt that he could manipulate the story to included Galileans and others.

[JehovahsWitness]

So according to Matthew Jesus was born somewhere between about 9BC and 4BC.

Matthew doesn't mention any dates at all. The available evidence indicates that Herod died likely in the year 1 B.C.E, following Luke's chronology Jesus would have been born in the fall of 2 B.C.E.

[JehovahsWitness]

RESPONSE: Matthew establishes Jesus' descent according to the prophecy that the kinship would pass from David to Solomon and then from Solomon's offspring. (See II Samuel and Chronicles).

The Davidic covenant was made to David, it was not made to Solomon. Solomon was promised the kingship but the Messiah would come from any of David's descendants.

JW