Does anyone here think the Nativity is not pure myth?

[edhopper]

I mean we know so much of it is a-historical or completely contradictory.
And the Magi, the travel to Bethlehem, the manger? Really.
I understand taking it for a metaphor. But do thinking people believe it is a factual account of a real event?

Yes, this is a good time to bring this up.

[Goonch]

1. I was there

when they crucified my lord ;-{)

[edhopper]

2. You must be very old.

Do you think the story of his birth is factual true.

[4139]

3. If you read the Bible, the wisemen could have been two or twenty two, AND...

And visited Jesus, not at his birth but after, Jesus as toddler

[PJMcK]

51. Right you are

The wise men are not named in the Bible. Gaspar, Balthasar, and Melchior are completely made up, just like the rest of the story.

Where do people get these ideas?

[Dream Girl]

4. Similar myths appear in other spiritual traditions

I say that as someone who is “spiritual” and believes there is a higher power. As a child I put it in the same category as Santa Claus. So much of my religious indoctrination made no sense to me. As a rational child I didn’t believe any of it. I do think there was a Jesus Christ and that he was an enlightened being. Same as Sidhartha and Mohammed and many others through he ages. I think we all have the same potential to become enlightened. It’s the followers that warp and corrupt their teachings...

[Karadeniz]

5. Four gospels, four different birth treatments. The message was more important than fact.h

[Major Nikon]

9. Only two bother to mention the nativity

[Mariana]

17. How long has it been

since you actually read the Gospels? It seems like a review is in order.

[Karadeniz]

25. That was why I said "treatments." Mark doesn't give a birth story, so apparently the birth was

Routine, not worth mentioning. By the time we get to John, we're at a soul/god level up in the cosmos. There's some John the Baptist (?) sect that is/was in a heavily Muslim country like Iran or Iraq. According to one source, that sect describes Jesus as a "book"character, a literary creation for the purpose of disseminating the truths acquired by near death experiences, out of body experiences, psychics, mediums. This might explain why there were quite a few early Christian communities which disputed the physicality of Jesus, claiming he could feel no pain or he was an image which appeared physical, but wasn't.

This makes me wonder about the theories which attach Jesus to the Essenes. They believed in reincarnation; Jesus's parables teach reincarnation. They were devoted to water for spiritual reasons; water is a major feature in Jesus's symbology. They were totally antimaterialism; you had to give up material pursuits to be Christian. But if the book Jesus is true, I have to wonder if the Essenes' Teacher of Righteousness wasn't also the personification of the soul, which would be the teacher of righteousness to which we all have access, if we only will!

[RKP5637]

6. Greatest hoax of all time, and a big money maker for some! Pure BS IMO! n/t

[Major Nikon]

7. The story of the nativity appears in later gospels

It deals with a particular problem that Jesus was well known to be from Nazareth, but the messianic prophecy requires the messiah to be from Bethlehem. The myth doesn’t line up with historical fact. Supposedly the couple travels to Bethlehem for the census, but there was no Roman census for Bethlehem or Nazareth around the time of Jesus’ alleged birth, and even if there were it wouldn’t have required one to travel for it.

I’m sure there are those who will try and pull the “metaphor” card when faced with irreconcilable facts, but all they would really be doing is creating more questions while not really answering anything.

[3Hotdogs]

8. So he was given gifts of frankensense, myrrh and GOLD.

If gold was part of the swag, the camel would have been high-jacked. Same with the stuff about Joseph Smith losing gold tablets, given to him by God. Now they were 'sposed to have been lost in upper N.Y. state. If ANYONE thought that was true, all of N.Y. state would have been dig up, plowed, excavated, dredged and rendered useless in the search for that missing gold missive.

[stopdiggin]

10. as recently as ...

guessing 80-90s? -- there were still stories and articles purporting to identify the real (astronomical) "star in the east."

But, in answer to your question, No. It's all about as "historical" as The Little Drummer Boy. On the other hand -- you've got people out in CA trying to RESURRECT a child that's been in the morgue for days -- so "thinking people" might be kind of a fluid concept in the realm of Christianity these days

[edhopper]

11. maybe I should have said

rational instead.

[Ferrets are Cool]

12. And the Ark (flood) was a TRUE account of actual events.

[guillaumeb]

13. Was Jesus born?

Yes.

Is His birth also symbolic?

In my view, yes.

Do some people read it as literally true in all of the description?

Yes.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

34. Your first premise is not that easy or clear cut.

There is very little to no proof that there was a historical Jesus.

[guillaumeb]

36. We could trade citations,

but historians in general agree that there was an historical Jesus who preached in Palestine circa 30 CE.

And Pontius Pilate had a reputation as one who crucified many who were accused of sedition.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

37. "Historians in general agree that there was an historical Jesus who preached in Palestine"

All that's missing is the citation.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

38. My first citation for you

"There is no definitive physical or archaeological evidence of the existence of Jesus."

History.com

And, yes, you will then argue that the article says that there is no record of basically anyone at that time. But you are making a claim that "historians in general" agree that he existed and preached. History.com disagrees with you.

[guillaumeb]

39. And in return,

The historicity of Jesus relates to whether Jesus of Nazareth was a historical figure. Virtually all scholars who have investigated the history of the Christian movement find that the historicity of Jesus is effectively certain,[1][2][3] and standard historical criteria have aided in reconstructing his life.[4] However, scholars differ on the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the details of his life that have been described in the gospels.[5][6][7][note 1] Despite this, very few scholars have argued for non-historicity and have not succeeded due to abundance of evidence to the contrary.[8]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

And with that, have a nice day.

[Mariana]

40. The Bible stories all agree

that Pilate found Jesus not guilty of sedition, and wanted to let him go. It was the local religious authorities who wanted him killed, and they convinced the population to demand it.

[guillaumeb]

41. And historians agree that Jesus was crucified for sedition.

And Palestine was controlled by the Romans. And the Romans reserved crucifixion for persons convicted of sedition. This story you mention, the supposed guilt of the Jews, is one of the roots of anti-Semitism.

But this is not the actual point, which concerns the historicity of Jesus.

[Enoki33]

14. The story of Jesus was written by various people one hundred

years after the event. That alone makes the historical accuracy questionable. The writers had an interest in promoting their beliefs, and it seems fair to say, a very good promotional strategy if one ignores the contradictions. Historically there may have been other so called saviors with less effective marketing strategies.

[KT2000]

31. "if one ignores the contradictions"

like trump followers. Many are one in the same. RW unlocked the secret.

[Dunnjen]

15. Sort of, an example.

In my opinion, the various stories around the birth and childhood of the man known as Jesus were curated.

For example, I think magi or priest/shaman types from the east visited at some point. I suppose that a snippet of old teachings (from the archives) were recalled after an astronomical event that was remarkable at the time, though cyclical and normal to today's astronomers. Rather than following a literal star, I conjecture that they had an intuitive feeling, an internal star if you will, based on the rough sketch given by the old teachings. They still had to ask around because the information from old was hazy, to say the least.

I think, meaning it's my opinion, that people of various backgrounds have had experiences with a sort of deity and did their best to tell others. Maybe a lot was lost in translation. Maybe a lot was added for story telling purposes.

[Major Nikon]

16. Or maybe the entire story was completely made up

The idea a very pregnant woman would have made a 100 mile journey on the back of a donkey for no good reason stretches the imagination a bit much.

It’s no different than much of the rest of the bible where it claims a particular prophecy was fulfilled. The much simpler explanation is they just made it up in an attempt to enhance credibility with people who at that time would have been concerned with such things.

[Steelrolled]

18. I think Jesus was a person who had to be born somewhere.

We have two gospels providing a similar story, so I'll take it as the best we've got.

[Dunnjen]

19. Reasonable

That's a decent point to start with. He was born somewhere. Something about him was historically significant. Where reality blends into legend we just don't know. The idea that the first known written account was a hundred years later suggests that people talked about him for years and years after his short life.

In 100 years will we still talk about Ram Dass?

[Steelrolled]

24. Per sources referenced by wikipedia

the gospels "were probably written between AD 66 and 110". That means there *could* have been people who were adults at the time of Jesus' death still alive, but it not that, people one or two generations away. I find the history of that first 100-200 years most interesting.

[Major Nikon]

20. If Jesus wasn't born in Bethlehem, he isn't the messiah

There's other reasons why he doesn't qualify, but that one is the most obvious. So the story had to be invented of his birth in Bethlehem, instead of 100 miles away in Nazareth where he was known to be from.

The reason why the two gospels detail a similar story is because they are probably derived from the same source.

[Steelrolled]

22. I agree that ultimately, the birth story would have a single source

in the personages of Jesus' parents. I expect the story would have then fanned out through the generations, and the gospel authors might have gotten information from nearby spots on the fan.

Having said that, the stories have their differences. Only Luke talked about the "census" for example. And based on my life experience, it is very possible that as the story was passed down, some people thought that the census aspect was very significant and interesting, while others thought it was immaterial and mundane.

[OnDoutside]

27. Maybe he's just a very naughty boy ?

[Major Nikon]

29. Excitable boy, they all said

[Act_of_Reparation]

21. You missed something important.

Those two gospels don't just tell a similar story. They tell it almost verbatim.

They aren't corroborative. They just copied the story from the same source material.

[Steelrolled]

23. I wouldn't say they tell it verbatim

I think the differences and similarities are reasonable for a story that started out the same, but then diverged as it was passed down the generations.

[Act_of_Reparation]

32. A distinction without a difference.

The point is the Gospels do not independently verify the story. They are all cribbing from the same source.

[Steelrolled]

33. I think we cannot make such firm conclusions given how little information we have

outside of the Bible. With respect to the birth of Jesus, it is perhaps surprising that
two of the four Gospels really don't mention it at all. Maybe their dogs ate their crib
notes

Of the other two Gospels, only Luke mentions the census story, the manger, and the
shepherds, and only Matthew mentions the magi and Herod. They agree mainly on
the names of the parents, the immaculate conception, and the location of Bethlehem.

You really should read them, given there are only two accounts and they are fairly
short.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

35. Dennis McDonald (and others) make a compelling argument that the NT

is a retelling of Homer.

[Act_of_Reparation]

42. Gosh.

Pretty much every contemporary scholar tells me one thing, but this random guy on the internet tells me something else. Now I don't know who to believe.

[uriel1972]

48. of the four gospels

One has a jewish trial of Jesus, one has a roman trial, one has both and another has neither... reliable eyewitness accounts, oh yeah and don't get me started about who did or did not find Jesus at the cave after the resurrection... or indeed if he was found at the cave.

[sandensea]

26. Isn't it mostly a rehashed Mithras myth anyway?

Not to take from Christ's greatness as an activist and a human being - but the historical precedent is there whether devout Christians like it or not.

While they're at it, they could try to actually learn something from the compassionate Christ they worship so fervently.

[Loki Liesmith]

28. Pure myth? No.

I think there was an historical Jesus and if he was born poor it’s possible he was born in a cave or stable or whatever.

[connecticut yankee]

30. Telephone

The stories in the Bible were repeated orally for many years. Undoubtedly, they were embellished and fabricated. Many were based on pagan tales and myths.

Did you ever play telephone? A sentence or phrase is repeated from one person to the next in a line or circle. By the time it gets to the end, it bares very little resemblance to the original.

How, then, could the Bible stories remain constant for so many (maybe 100) years before being written down?

I've always felt they were a bunch of fairy tales.

[mvd]

43. One of the reasons I am spiritual rather than religious..

Is the ability to form my own opinions and practice my faith how I like. I do not take the Bible literally. Much of it, especially the Old Testament, is just stories. I think the accounts of Jesus were sometimes embellished to please Rome and to grow the new faith. I think the Virgin Birth and literally being Son of God defy reason. I think being sent by God and the Resurrection are more likely. Miracles supposedly happen even today. And yes, he could have been born in a manger and into poverty. You don’t have to take everything word for word to enjoy the general message.

[Iggo]

44. Vatican has the actual for-real manger.

https://www.mdrevelation.org/bethlehems-manger-in-rome/

So...yeah...how about that.

[Major Nikon]

45. I guess that settles it then

Funny how the baby Jebus looks white even when plated in gold.

[Act_of_Reparation]

46. I have the Ark of the Covenant in my garage.

I use it as a cooler.

[Iggo]

47. Wise choice!

[Act_of_Reparation]

49. The trouble is...

...it turns any beer I put in there into Budweiser. But then, the ice never melts. So whaddya gonna do?

[Iggo]

50. Pinche the covenant, I swear to god!

Effin Budweiser.

[COLGATE4]

55. Remember not to look at it

when you open it to take out a beer.

[Act_of_Reparation]

56. Can't tell you how many neighbors it's melted over the years.

I'm thinking about trading it in for the Holy Grail, but I don't want to pick the wrong one.

[Croney]

52. You're all discussing a virgin birth like it, um,

really happened.

[Major Nikon]

53. ...

[edhopper]

54. I am discussing the virgin birth

like billions believe really happened.
As amazing as that is.