Were Bible Stories Copied from Ancient Myths? (Part 2 of 2)

Continuing from our previous post, British writer Sam Woolfe maintains that the biblical account of Jesus’ life is not original, “probably the story which actually has the most parallels with other religions,” representing “the archetypal story of the archetypal hero.”¹ As evidence Woolfe points to Peter Joseph’s conspiracy documentary Zeitgeist, even though Woolfe admits the film contains factual errors and overstates comparisons “in order to support his conspiracy theory.” Nonetheless, Woofe insists “there are still similarities between Jesus and other gods, suggesting that the authors of the Bible borrowed myths from other religions.” He particularly notes the “dying-and-returning-god” pattern of various myths, particularly Adonis, Tammuz, Osiris, Horus, Dionysus, Mithras, Attis, and Krishna, concluding this “suggests that there never was a real, historical Jesus.”

An Open-and-Shut Case?

The idea of an ancient “dying-and-returning god” archetype comes from Sir James George Frazer’s 1890 The Golden Bough: a Study in Comparative Religion. However, subsequent scholarship has proven the claim to be farcical. These so-called dying (or disappearing) and returning gods of ancient mythology are actually accounts of deities that died and did not return, or deities that returned but had not died. “The category of dying and rising gods, once a major topic of scholarly investigation, must now be understood to have been largely a misnomer based on imaginative reconstructions and exceedingly late or highly ambiguous texts.”²

The same would apply to the alleged pagan origins of the virgin-birth narrative in Matthew and Luke’s Gospels.³ Reputable scholarship avoids such erroneous claims, even among liberal critics who deny the historicity of Christ’s virgin birth.⁴ One such scholar, Thomas Boslooper, writes: “The literature of the world is prolific with narratives of unusual births, but it contains no precise analogy to the virgin birth in Matthew and Luke. Jesus’ ‘virgin birth’ is not ‘pagan’.”⁵

Did Jesus Plagiarize His Teachings?

Jesus is recorded as saying, “Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets” (Matt. 7:12 NKJV). It has been purported that he or his followers plagiarized this golden rule from eastern religions, Greek philosophers, and/or Jewish rabbis.⁶ But the statement, which is merely a tiny segment of an extensive discourse, is noticeably different from the prevailing ethic of reciprocity (“Give to get something in return”) or the negative and passive version, “Do not do to others what you would not want done to you.” Beyond a presumed maxim of human nature endowed by the Creator, and irrespective of the fact that Jesus is the first on record to express the positive and active form of the principle, he also cited “the Law and the Prophets,” which predate these eastern religions, Greek philosophers, and Jewish rabbis. Critics are assuming their conclusion to be true without proof.

Let’s Be Honest

When deceptive ploys, whether intentional or not, are used to challenge the Bible’s integrity, this ought to have the opposite effect once exposed. Secondary sources are not always credible. The popular charge that biblical writers borrowed from pagan mythology tends to be “characterized by brief word, phrase and sentence quotations that have been lifted out of context or incorrectly translated and used to support preconceived theories. Sweeping generalizations based on questionable evidence have become dogmatic conclusions that cannot be substantiated on the basis of careful investigation.”⁷

Commonsense Observations⁸

1. There is nothing unusual or suspect about any ancient record corresponding to the environment in which it emerged. There are only so many options available. Linguistic, historical, and cultural parallels can often confirm the realism and credence of biblical narratives but do not necessarily prove borrowing in any direction.

2. If something is historically true, it is not unprecedented to find similar reports in multiple accounts, albeit with variations developing over time. The prospect of different versions sharing a common historical core does not constitute anyone copying from anyone else.

3. When direct dependence can be established (e.g. quotes and illustrations), it is important to consider the nature of the usage and how it either affects or does not affect the matter at hand. Long before the modern copyright mentality, ancient authors could reasonably expect their contemporary readers to recognize well-known allusions and quoted materials.

4. If borrowing did occur yet historical positioning is overlooked, or if the dating of a presumed source is tentative or inaccurate, the Bible may have been the original source rather than vice versa.⁹ This would also include oral traditions that predate written texts.

5. Biblical documents were written by multiple authors for particular reading audiences at various times in different environments addressing a variety of issues. Effective communication naturally involves the employment of images and terminology intelligible and meaningful to the targeted audience (cf. 1 Cor. 9:22).

6. Apparent similarities do not override or discount significant differences. The uniqueness of the biblical record must still be accounted for.

7. When alleged parallels are artificial, exaggerated, and distorted, preconceptions may appear to be bolstered but the pursuit of truth is disrupted. 

Concluding Remarks

It is helpful to remember, “though the Bible arose in the ancient world, it was not entirely of it; though its history and its people resemble those of the surrounding nations, yet it radiates an atmosphere, a spirit, a faith far more profound than, and radically different from, that of any other ancient literature.”¹⁰ May we approach the biblical text, if not with eagerness to learn, at least with honesty and fairness.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Sam Woolfe, “How the Bible Borrowed from Other Stories,” Sam Woolfe (25 April 2013) <Link>.

     ² Jonathan Z. Smith, “Dying and Rising Gods,” in The Encyclopedia of Religion, ed. M. Eliade (London: Macmillan, 1987): 4:521-27. This would apply to all the deities Woolfe has listed, including Osiris, the Egyptian patron of the dead, who was reportedly murdered by his brother but then brought back to life by Isis. This “rebirth” enabled him to be lord of the underworld in the afterlife, since he could no longer rule the world of the living. Ancient Egyptians considered various facets of reality but did not envision a resurrection in this world (see Ogden Goeler, “Commentary,” in The Egyptian Book of the Dead: The Book of Going Forth By Day, The Complete Papyrus of Ani, ed. Eva von Dasso [San Francisco: Chronicle Books, 1994]: 153). See also Paul Rhodes Eddy and Gregory A. Boyd, The Jesus Legend: A Case for the Historical Reliability of the Synoptic Jesus Tradition (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003); Bart D. Ehrman, Did Jesus Exist?: The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth (NY: HarperCollins, 2012); Tryggve N. D. Mettinger, “The ‘Dying and Rising God’: A Survey of Research from Frazer to the Present Day,” in David and Zion: Biblical Studies in Honor of J. J. M. Roberts,” eds. B. F. Bernard and K. L. Roberts (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2004): 373-86.

     ³ Walter Bundy opines, “The idea of a supernatural or virgin birth is pagan, and it must have found its way into the story of Jesus through Gentile-Christian channels” (Jesus and the First Three Gospels [Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1955]: 11).

     ⁴ See Thomas Boslooper, The Virgin Birth (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1962), who attributes the virgin-birth story to the influence of Philo’s allegorical method on Hellenistic Jewish Christianity. Also James Veitch, The Birth of Jesus: History or Myth? (Wellington: St Andrew’s Trust, 1997), who surmises that Matthew and Luke’s birth narratives were derived from stories in the Hebrew Bible.

     ⁵ Thomas Boslooper, op cit.136. Reginald H. Fuller, in his critical review of Boslooper’s work, states: “In an amazingly comprehensive historical survey of the doctrine from its first appearance in the infancy narratives to the later phases of biblical criticism, the author offers at every point shrewd and penetrating judgments. The historical survey in itself makes the work invaluable” (The Journal of Religion 43:3 [July 1963]: 254-55). Louis Matthews Sweet observes: “After a careful, laborious, and occasionally wearisome study of the evidence offered and analogies urged, I am convinced that heathenism knows nothing of virgin births” (The Birth and Infancy of Jesus Christ [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1906]: 188).

     ⁶ This is ranked # 1 among Melloson Allen’s “10 Influences on the Bible,” in Jamie Frater’s Listverse.com's Bathroom Reader: Loads of Top Ten Lists (Berkley, CA: Ulysses Press, 2014).

     ⁷ Thomas Boslooper, op cit.135.

     ⁸ See Everett Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity 3rd ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003): 1-4.

     ⁹ For example, Apollonius of Tyana (AD 15-100) was a philosopher and mystic, and his biographer Philostratus (ca. 172-250) claims he performed miracles like Jesus (Life of Apollonius 3.38-39); by the late 2nd century he had become a cult figure rivaling Jesus. However, these stories “are at several points obviously influenced by stories about Jesus, not the other way around” (Albert A. Bell, Jr., Exploring the New Testament World [Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1998]: 131).

     ¹⁰ G. Ernest Wright, An Introduction to Biblical Archaeology, Rev. ed. (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1962): xi.

Related Posts: Were Bible Stories Copied from Myths? (Part 1), The Study of Ancient History, The Resurrection of Jesus Christ

Related articles and videos: Dewayne Bryant, Is Christianity a Copycat Religion?

Image credit: http://www.featheredprop.com/did-christianity-borrow-from-other-religions/

Were Bible Stories Copied from Ancient Myths? (Part 1 of 2)

Sam Woolfe, a freelance writer and blogger based in London, claims the Bible’s “myths, stories and parables” are not original but “have been borrowed or copied from other myths from other religions …. if some of the central stories of the Bible have been plagiarised, then how can the Bible be the inerrant word of God? Is it the word of some other god before Christianity? Or does plagiarism in the Bible show that the book is not holy, but merely an invention of the imagination?”¹

In an attempt to establish his case, Woolfe points to similarities between biblical narratives and various ancient legends and myths, including Pandora’s Box and the Epic of Gilgamesh. Before we examine these allegations more carefully, suffice it to say that the way in which Woolfe has presented his arguments gives the appearance of a credible indictment against the Bible that some might find convincing. However, he, like other antibiblicists, ignores major differences among the various accounts, while cherry-picking, generalizing, and reconfiguring elements to create so-called “parallels” that make the case seem more plausible than it really is. Woolfe’s “well-researched content,” as he describes it, proves to be presumptive and deceptive.

Pandora’s Box?

According to Greek mythology dating back to at least the 8th century BC, Pandora was the first woman to be created, who opened a large storage jar (referred to as a “box” in modern descriptions) that unleashed all the evils of mankind. While there are similarities here with the Genesis 3 record of sin’s advent into the world, the details of both stories are so markedly different, one would be hard pressed to see much of a parallel unless the differences are overlooked. Nevertheless, the Genesis account was written about seven centuries before the earliest recorded appearance of the Pandora’s Box myth—hardly a case of plagiarism!

The Epic of Gilgamesh and Genesis 1–3?

The Epic of Gilgamesh is an ancient Mesopotamian saga about the exploits of King Gilgamesh. The oldest version of this epic poem has been dated as early as about three centuries prior to the earliest biblical text. According to the Gilgamesh narrative, a man is created from clay who lives among the animals until he is tempted by a woman offering him food. He leaves his paradise home, puts on clothes, and a snake later steals the plant of immortality. With this selective summary, it is easy to see parallels to the biblical account of Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden. The problem is, these comparisons hinge on overgeneralization and distortion of certain details,² while numerous others are ignored.

Following the story’s standard Akkadian version, Enkidu, who is neither the first nor the only man, is created by the goddess Anu, throwing a pinch of clay into the wilderness, at the instigation of the gods to counter King Gilgamesh’s aggression. Enkidu is a wild-man covered in hair (later described as the son of a gazelle and wild donkey), eats grass and wears “a garment like Sumukan,” living among the animals and preventing a trapper from catching them. The trapper brings Shamhat, a temple prostitute, to seduce Enkidu and introduce him to the ways of civilization. After six days and seven nights of carnal relations, Enkidu is lured out of the wild and taken to the shepherds’ hut where they give him food and seven jugs of beer. He turns into a human, bathes and clothes himself, and guards the sheep. After Enkidu fights with Gilgamesh, they become friends and go on adventures battling mythological forces. When Enkidu dies, Gilgamesh travels to “the Garden of the gods, a paradise full of jewel-laden trees.” In yet another episode Gilgamesh is told about a plant at the bottom of the sea that restores youth; he procures the plant only to have it stolen by a snake. More adventures follow.³

When the story of Enkidu and Gilgamesh is read alongside the biblical account of Adam and Eve, clear parallels are hard to find and nearly every comparison seems forced. It does demonstrate, however, that if something is removed from its context, it can mean just about anything one wants it to mean. 

The Epic of Gilgamesh and Genesis 6–9?

The Epic of Gilgamesh also contains the account of a great flood, comparable in many ways to what is recorded in Genesis 6–9. Grieving the loss of his friend Enkidu, Gilgamesh roams the wild searching for the secret of immortality. He meets Utnapishtim, who tells of the gods having sent a great flood on the city of Shuruppak to destroy mankind. But one of the gods (Ea) instructed Utnapishtim to build a boat according to precise measurements (10 x 12 cubits in height and width, with six decks), sealed with pitch and bitumen, to keep alive “all living beings.” Aboard the boat were all of Utnapishtim’s kinsmen, all of his possessions, and “all the beasts and animals of the field and the craftsmen.” The god Shamash caused it to rain bread and wheat; then the mountain was submerged in water, and the gods were frightened by the flood and fled to the heavens. After six days and seven nights, the boat landed on Mt. Nimush. On the seventh day Utnapishtim sent out a dove followed by a swallow, both of which returned, but the raven he sent out did not return. Utnapishtim released everything and offered a sacrifice and incense, then he and his wife became like the gods. 

Critics argue that the two versions match so closely that the Bible’s flood narrative must have been derived from the Gilgamesh flood narrative. But is this the only or even the best possible explanation? The fact of the matter is, there are literally hundreds of curiously analogous flood stories among a wide variety of ancient cultures throughout Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, the Middle East, the Pacific Islands, and North, Central, and South America.⁴ Would anyone argue that all these traditions are based on the same fictitious tale, or could there have been a real catastrophic deluge that gave rise to such widespread and consistent testimony?

What if all these stories share a common historical core? Significant variation is not surprising, given the human tendency to modify and embellish, particularly over an extended period of time across vast geographical regions and copious linguistic and cultural groups. In fact, too much overlapping of details would warrant suspicion of collusion or copying. Yet striking commonalities among so many retellings of the event are more readily explicable if every culture descended from the survivors of a catastrophic flood.⁵

Concluding Thoughts

If one begins with certain preconceptions and relies too heavily on secondary sources, knowledge of the true state of affairs will almost surely be eluded. Any assertions based on contextual disregard, unprovable presuppositions, overstatements, and failure to consider other viable options, are deeply suspect. When misinformation and deception are involved, all credibility is lost. In our next post, we will address related challenges to the biblical story of Jesus.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Sam Woolfe, “How the Bible Borrowed from Other Stories,” Sam Woolfe (25 April 2013) <Link>.

     ² Jamie Frater’s Listverse.com's Bathroom Reader: Loads of Top Ten Lists (Berkley, CA: Ulysses Press, 2014) includes “10 Influences on the Bible” by Melloson Allen, in which the assertion is made that the Epic of Gilgamesh tells of a snake that steals the plant of immortality from Enkidu, the alleged archetypal Adam. But this is not true. The plant was stolen from King Gilgamesh, for whom there is no biblical parallel. 

     ³ The entire extant narrative, translated by Maureen Gallery Kovacs, can be accessed here <Link>.

     ⁴ For a detailed listing with summaries, see Mark Isaak, “Flood Stories from Around the World,” The TalkOrigens Archive (2 Sept. 2002) <Link>.

     ⁵ Biblical catastrophism challenges the popular theories of uniformitarianism and macro-evolution, and is consistent with geological phenomena such as sedimentary layers across and between continents, marine fossils on mountains, lack of erosion between rock layers, catastrophic fossilization, abnormal seismites in rock layers, wide-ranging sedimentary deposits, explosion of fully formed fossils above the Cambrian strata, and rapid rather than gradual deposition of sedimentary rock layers. See Jeff Miller, “Was the Flood Global? Testimony from Scripture and Science,” Apologetics Press (2019), <Link>.

Related Posts: The Bible in Perspective, Were Bible Stories Copied from Myths Part 2

Related articles: Jeffery P. Tompkins, Population Growth Matches Bible and DNA Clock; and Y-Chromosome Study Confirms Genesis Flood Timeline

Image credit: https://theconversation.com/guide-to-the-classics-the-epic-of-gilgamesh-73444

Paul the Myth Versus the Real Paul

      The apostle Paul gives his readers a very lofty admonition: “Imitate me” (1 Corinthians 4:16; 11:1 NKJV). The problem is, we tend to have such a distorted view of Paul that this seems to be an extremely difficult, if not impossible, thing to do. One of the reasons this is such a challenge is because numerous misconceptions about the apostle have been generated over the centuries. Sometimes he is referred to as “Saint Paul” to distinguish him from the ordinary Christian. He is commonly viewed as an inaccessible authority figure, high up on a pedestal with a halo encircling his head. We hear of “Pauline theology” and “Pauline churches,” as though he were a lone maverick who developed his own brand of Christianity distinct from that of the Jerusalem apostles. He is often regarded as a fearless missionary who boldly marched into unknown territories, bravely confronting religious error and conquering men’s souls without the slightest apprehension.

     With such an inflated view of the apostle Paul, how can any of us mere mortals ever hope to comply with the apostolic directive to imitate him? Few can live up to such a high standard, and since I am no “Saint Paul,” I have an excuse for not doing more for the Lord, for not being more involved in the church, and for not being more faithful in my Christian walk. However, to be fair to Paul, to give credit to God (who is the real reason for the apostle’s success), and to counter some of our flimsy excuses, we need to have a more realistic view of Paul. The purpose of this article is not to take anything away from the apostle that is his due but simply to dispel some of the mistaken ideas about him.

Paul the “Theological Genius” is a Myth

     Is it legitimate to speak of “Pauline theology” as though the apostle developed his own doctrine and his own brand of Christianity? What does Paul himself say? “But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ” (Galatians 1:11-12). The message that Paul preached was something he himself had “received” (1 Corinthians 15:1-3), and the directives he recorded were ultimately “the commandments of the Lord” (1 Corinthians 14:37).      

     Whether or not Paul was highly intelligent, talented or creative is beside the point. Everything he believed, taught, and stood for did not originate with him. It all came from a much higher source. Rather than promoting anything about himself, he hid behind the message of a crucified and risen Savior. How, then, do I imitate Paul in this regard? “If anyone speaks, let him speak as the oracles of God . . .” (1 Peter 4:11).

Paul the “Fearless Warrior” is a Myth

     Is it realistic to think of Paul as a man without apprehensions, trepidations, or fears? If so, it makes it much more difficult for most of us to imitate him. But is this what the apostle was really like? During their first missionary tour, Barnabas and Paul were working in areas familiar to them, namely Cyprus and Southern Galatia (Acts 13–14). On the second tour it seems that again Paul was wanting to stay fairly close to home, namely in Asia and Bithynia (Acts 16:6-7). However, the Lord wanted him to go even farther a field (Acts 16:9-10). While Paul obeyed this missionary call, it was anything but easy for him.

     In Achaia the Lord reassured him: “Do not be afraid, but speak, and do not keep silent: for I am with you . . .” (Acts 18:9-10). Paul later admitted to the Corinthians, “I was with you in weakness, in fear, and in much trembling” (1 Corinthians 2:3). He also wrote, “when we came to Macedonia, our bodies had no rest, but we were troubled on every side. Outside were conflicts, inside were fears” (2 Corinthians 7:5). Apparently the apostle Paul was just as human as the rest of us!

     Simply based on the information available to us, there does not appear to have been anything all that remarkable about Paul as a man. Both his bodily presence and his speech were considered unimpressive (2 Corinthians 10:10). A second-century description of him portrays him as a man of small stature, with a bald head, hooked nose and crooked legs (Acts of Paul and Thecla 1.4-7). Considering the extreme maltreatment he endured through the years (cf. 2 Corinthians 11:23-28), it is not surprising that his body bore visible scars (Galatians 6:17). On top of all that, it has been suggested that what he describes as his “thorn in the flesh” (2 Corinthians 12:7-10) may have been some physical malady that he struggled with for most of his life.

     If Paul were such a pitiful and unimpressive specimen of humanity, how does one explain his phenomenal success as a missionary? First and foremost, credit must be given to the mighty working of God (1 Corinthians 2:4-5; 15:10). Secondly, one cannot discount the invaluable assistance of Paul’s co-workers (Acts 20:4; etc.). But as far as Paul himself is concerned, what made the difference in his life was a convicted heart and the burden he carried for a lost world (1 Corinthians 9:16). No matter how untalented, inadequate, or fearful you might feel, if your heart is convicted by the message of Christ, you will be compelled to step out in faith and allow God to powerfully accomplish his will despite your imperfections.

Paul the “Individualist” is a Myth

     The lone maverick and solo missionary are not the images of Paul we get from the New Testament. Of the thirteen letters bearing Paul’s name, only five begin with his name alone (each for a special reason). However, the normal practice was to include references to co-senders: Sosthenes (1 Corinthians), Timothy (2 Corinthians, Philippians, Colossians, Philemon), “all the brothers with me” (Galatians), Silvanus and Timothy (1, 2 Thessalonians). In addition, there are numerous co-workers mentioned in the body of Paul’s letters as well as those who send greetings at the end. The apostle was anything but a loner.

     On his first journey he worked in partnership with Barnabas and for a time with John Mark (Acts 13–14). On the second expedition he labored with Silas, Timothy, Luke, Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 16–18). On the third tour at least ten companions are mentioned in the biblical record (Acts 19–20). Of course the chief partner in Paul’s lifelong ministry was the Lord himself (cf. Acts 14:27; 15:4; 21:19; 1 Corinthians 3:6-7).

     Paul the so-called “theological genius,” “fearless warrior,” and “individualist” are myths that have no basis in scripture. The apostle did not give an impossible directive when he said, “Imitate me.” To truly imitate Paul, as he imitated Christ, we must: (1) hide behind the message of a crucified and risen Savior; (2) step out in faith, confront our fears, and do what the Lord has commissioned us to do; and (3) understand that we are called upon to work within a community, in partnership with one another and ultimately with God.

–Kevin L. Moore

Originally appearing in The Voice of Truth International (58:97-99) and republished in The Summit Chronicle 11:1 (June 2008): 3, 6, 9. 

Related Posts: Challenging Anti-Conservative Presuppositions Part 3, Part 4

Image credit: http://www.fredmckinnon.com/myblog/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/stpaul01.jpg

Test Your Knowledge: What does the Bible say about Jesus’ Birth?

According to the Bible . . .

Can you identify 7 non-biblical/non-historical things in this picture? (see below)

1. True or False: Jesus was born December 25th.

2. True or False: Mary, who was pregnant with Jesus, rode a donkey to Bethlehem.

3. True or False: The donkey, upon which Mary rode, was led by Joseph.

4. True or False: An inn keeper turned them away because there was no room.

5. True or False: Mary gave birth to Jesus the same night they arrived in Bethlehem.

6. True or False: Jesus was born in a stable or barn.

7. True or False: Jesus was born among domestic animals.

8. True or False: There were three wise men (magi) from the East.

9. True or False: The wise men (magi) traveled on camels from the East.

10. True or False: The wise men (magi) arrived the night Jesus was born.

11. True or False: The star of Bethlehem shone over the manger the night Jesus was born.

12. True or False: The night Jesus was born, angels sang to the shepherds.

13. True or False: The shepherds were directed by the star to the place Jesus was born.

     According to what the Bible actually says, the answer to every question above is “False.” Discarding all human misconceptions and traditions, here is what we learn from the biblical record itself. The birth and infancy of Jesus are recorded only in Matthew (1:25–2:18) and Luke (2:1-39). Matthew mentions the birth of Jesus in just one verse (1:25) and then discusses events that took place sometime afterwards (2:1-12). Luke describes events leading up to Jesus’ birth and gives much more information about the immediate circumstances of his birth (2:1-20).

Here is a chronological harmony of the two accounts:

1. Mary was betrothed to Joseph without having had sexual relations (Matthew 1:18a; Luke 1:27).

2. God sent the angel Gabriel to tell Mary that she was to conceive and bear a son by the power of the Holy Spirit and call his name Jesus (Luke 1:26-35; cf. Matthew 1:18).

3. Mary visited her relative Elizabeth (who was pregnant with John) in the hill country of Judah for three months (Luke 1:39-56).

4. Mary became pregnant by the Holy Spirit’s power, and an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph to assure him that the pregnancy was miraculous in fulfillment of Isaiah 7:14; the child was to be called Jesus, and Joseph was to take Mary as his wife (Matthew 1:18-24).

5. Joseph took Mary as his wife (Matt. 1:24) and traveled to his ancestral town of Bethlehem in compliance with Caesar’s decree to be registered (Luke 2:1-5).¹

6. While they were there (for an unspecified period) Jesus was born (Luke 2:6-7a; Matthew 1:25).

7. Baby Jesus was placed in a manger (feeding trough) -- most likely carved out of rock rather than made of wood -- because there was no room for them in the katáluma = lodging place or guest room (Luke 2:7; cf. 22:11; Mark 14:14). It was probably not an “inn” where there was no room, since the typical word for inn is pandocheion (cf. 10:34). More likely there was no space in the upper-floor guest room of a relative’s house (cf. Matthew 2:11), so they were staying on the ground floor where animals were customarily kept.

Biblical text	Occasion	Word used	Meaning	Not Inn	Inn
Luke 2:7	Birth of Jesus	katáluma	lodging place/guest room	✓
Luke 22:11	Last Supper	katáluma	lodging place/guest room	✓
Mark 14:14	Last Supper	katáluma	lodging place/guest room	✓
Acts 1:13	Apostles residing	huperōon	upper room	✓
Acts 9:37, 39	Tabitha’s deathbed	huperōon	upper room	✓
Acts 20:8	Troas assembly	huperōon	upper room	✓
Luke 10:34-35	Good Samaritan	pandocheion	inn		✓

8. An angel of the Lord told shepherds where to find the Christ-child, after which a host of angels praised God and the shepherds visited Joseph, Mary, and the newborn (Luke 2:8-20).²

9. The infant was circumcised on the eighth day and named Jesus (Luke 2:21).

10. Following the “days of purification” (cf. Leviticus 12:1-8), when baby Jesus was around six weeks old, he was taken to Jerusalem where a sacrifice was offered, and he was seen by Simeon and Anna in the temple (Luke 2:22-38). Note that the traditional sacrifice was a lamb and a young pigeon or turtledove (Leviticus 12:6). If one could not afford a lamb, the alternative sacrifice of the poor was two turtledoves or two young pigeons (Leviticus 12:8). The fact that only two birds were offered (Luke 2:24) indicates that Jesus was born into a relatively poor family.

11. Sometime afterwards, conceivably up to two years later (cf. Matthew 2:16), Joseph, Mary and young Jesus were residing in a house in Bethlehem (Matthew 2:8, 11).

12. An unspecified number of wise men (magi) from the East,³ directed by a star, visited young Jesus and his mother in the house in Bethlehem, bringing gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh (Matthew 2:1-12).

13. Having been warned of danger by an angel of the Lord, Joseph took Mary and young Jesus to Egypt for safety (Matthew 2:13-15).

14. Herod [the Great] put to death all the male children up to two-years old in Bethlehem and all its districts (Matthew 2:16-18).

Note what is NOT included in these birth narratives:

1. The date of Christ’s birth.

2. Mary riding a donkey led by Joseph to Bethlehem.

3. An inn-keeper turning them away because there was no room.

4. Mary giving birth to Jesus the same night they arrived in Bethlehem.

5. Jesus born in a barn or stable.

6. Jesus born among farm animals.

7. The number of wise men (magi).

8. The wise men (magi) traveling on camels from the East.

9. The wise men (magi) arriving the night Jesus was born.

10. The star of Bethlehem shining over the manger the night Jesus was born.

11. Angels singing to shepherds the night Jesus was born.

     While the Bible never instructs us to celebrate Jesus’ birth as a religious holy day, it does set aside the first day (Sunday) of every week (Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 16:1-2), the day of the Lord’s resurrection (Mark 16:9), to commemorate his death (1 Corinthians 11:20-26). What will you be doing this Sunday and all the following Sundays until Christ returns? How committed and faithful are you to the blueprint of God's word? Don't blindly rely on others to interpret the scriptures for you (Acts 17:11) or mislead you into thinking that imaginative speculations are historical fact with divine sanction. "Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth" (2 Timothy 2:15 ESV).

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ See Luke's Historical Blunder? 

     ² Cf. John 10:1-16; Heb. 13:20; 1 Pet. 5:4; Rev. 7:17. Note that Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and David were all shepherds.

     ³ The Greek word is magoi, plural of magos, which refers to a Persian or Babylonian “wise man and priest, who was expert in astrology, interpretation of dreams and various other secret arts” (BAGD 484). They may have been astrologers who studied stars, who could identify something out of the ordinary among the luminaries unobservable to the untrained eye. They could have been descendants of Jewish exiles in Babylon. Religious leaders in Jerusalem were consulted to determine that Bethlehem was the town of the Messiah’s birth (Matt. 2:1-12).

*Seven non-biblical/non-historical things in the above picture: (1) the barn, (2) the tiny star hovering over the barn, (3) only one shepherd, (4) the animals, (5) the wooden manger (rather than the typical Palestinian manger carved out of rock), (6) three wise men, (7) wise men present at Jesus' birth.

Related Posts: Isaiah 7:14, Lineage of Jesus According to Matthew, Luke's Historical Blunder?

Related Articles: Ian Paul's Jesus Wasn't Born in a Stable, Revised, Michael LeFebvre, Jesus Born in a House

Image credit: http://leesbirdblog.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/nativity-clipart.jpg