H
HCTC
Guest
No, silly. It’s a metaphor. The refugee children are in metaphorical mangers because the U.S. can find no room for them.
- Status
D
Dr_Meinheimer
Guest
She’s a deep tweeter.
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
Remember that St Paul was a Roman Citizen. I have never heard or read that Christ, Mary nor Joseph were Roman Citizens.
Does @LastStand have some historical sources?
Does @LastStand have some historical sources?
H
HCTC
Guest
When I was in first grade, our class put on a Nativity play. All the girls wanted to be Mary - including me. Being very young, I did not appreciate the plum part I had when Sister gave me the only speaking part - that of the narrator. It involved memorizing the scripture and reciting it from the stage as the rest of the class acted it out. That exercise will give a child a deep understanding about the circumstances of the Nativity.
H
HCTC
Guest
So it didn’t seem especially deep to me, and I wondered why it would seem deep to you - but not to me. My stream of consciousness went back to first grade, and I realized that was where my understanding of the Nativity was rooted. I can no longer remember the scripture word for word - but as a result of my education, my understanding remains.
I shared that experience instead of the snarky thought that first occurred to me because I am trying to be more loving - in thought, in word, and in deed. Word and deed are easier than thought. :hugs:
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
She and Joseph were fleeing Herod because Joseph was warned by God in a dream that Herod intended to kill Jesus. That’s very basic Christianity.
There was nothing inaccurate about her Christmas tweet. Accusations to the contrary are nothing but a desperate attempt to say something - anything - negative about her because of her political policies. If you disagree with her policies it would be better to talk about that rather than this foolish denial that the Holy Family were refugees.
Last edited:
L
LastStand
Guest
Do you have evidence that travel within the Roman Empire was restricted for non-citizens and that these restrictions would have applied to the Holy Family’s situation?
L
LastStand
Guest
This must be an example of the “whataboutism” that the American left constantly lectures the American right about.
D
Dr_Meinheimer
Guest
Yes, we covered that. So in the Christmas story, which she was referencing, Jesus was a refugee at the moment of birth, and Jospeh the second he left for Bethlehem. Got it.
I’ll remember that using hyperbole or misrepresentations is not a problem with you guys the next time you whine about lifesitenews.com and Breitbart. Fair?
I’ll remember that using hyperbole or misrepresentations is not a problem with you guys the next time you whine about lifesitenews.com and Breitbart. Fair?
L
LastStand
Guest
Besides moving from province of a political entity to another part of that same political entity, another difference between the Holy Family and the illegal aliens at the border is this. Joseph had a useful skillset and the Holy Family went home after a few years.
On the other hand, once we pay the illegalgeld, we will never be rid of the illegals.
On the other hand, once we pay the illegalgeld, we will never be rid of the illegals.
I
Inisfallen
Guest
Yes, that was my takeaway from the New Testament too.
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
The passport system for the Roman Empire is a historical fact:
https://www.amazon.com/Roman-Citizenship-N-Sherwin-White/dp/019814847X
" But with the steady extension of the citizenship by individual grants to provincials isolated in peregrine communes, and with the informal settlement of large numbers of Italian immigrants in the provincial territories, a more effective means of registration became necessary. Formal documentation of the grant of citizenship to provincial soldiery appears first in 89 B.C., in the shape of a bronze tablet recording the decree of a proconsul enfranchising a unit of Spanish cavalrymen in the Social War, who are all named in a general list. Presumably each soldier received a copy. The cities of persons of higher status enfranchised by Octavian in c. 40 B.C. received a copy of a decree detailing all the privileges of their new status, while his auxiliary veterans could acquire copies of the enabling edict that enfranchised them. But it is only with the regularization of the grant of citizenship to the all time-expired auxiliaries by Claudius that a standardized document appears. This is the small bronze diptych known as the diploma civitatis , containing a brief and uniform formula conferring the Roman citizenship on the holder and his descendants, who is indicated by his name and military unit. These documents were not normally used for civilians, who received instead a copy in libellus form of the brief imperial warrant authorizing the registration of their enfranchisement in the archives at Rome.
Diplomata and libelli provided for new citizens. For the mass of the citizenry, for whom censorial registration at five-yearly intervals was an inefficient instrument, adequate provision was finally made by the creation of an official system of compulsory birth registration under the social legislation of Augustus (A.D. 4)… The Roman citizen was required to register the birth of his children within thirty days before a Roman official, and he received a wooden diptych recording the declaration, which acted as a certificate of citizenship for the child for the rest of his life. Like the military diplomata this contained the names of seven witnesses, and provided a presumptive proof of citizen status… Similarly the enfranchisement of freedmen, which depended upon a formal act, was recorded in a documentary tabella manumissionis . Citizens of diverse origins thus came to have some form of documentary evidence of their status."
https://www.amazon.com/Roman-Citizenship-N-Sherwin-White/dp/019814847X
" But with the steady extension of the citizenship by individual grants to provincials isolated in peregrine communes, and with the informal settlement of large numbers of Italian immigrants in the provincial territories, a more effective means of registration became necessary. Formal documentation of the grant of citizenship to provincial soldiery appears first in 89 B.C., in the shape of a bronze tablet recording the decree of a proconsul enfranchising a unit of Spanish cavalrymen in the Social War, who are all named in a general list. Presumably each soldier received a copy. The cities of persons of higher status enfranchised by Octavian in c. 40 B.C. received a copy of a decree detailing all the privileges of their new status, while his auxiliary veterans could acquire copies of the enabling edict that enfranchised them. But it is only with the regularization of the grant of citizenship to the all time-expired auxiliaries by Claudius that a standardized document appears. This is the small bronze diptych known as the diploma civitatis , containing a brief and uniform formula conferring the Roman citizenship on the holder and his descendants, who is indicated by his name and military unit. These documents were not normally used for civilians, who received instead a copy in libellus form of the brief imperial warrant authorizing the registration of their enfranchisement in the archives at Rome.
Diplomata and libelli provided for new citizens. For the mass of the citizenry, for whom censorial registration at five-yearly intervals was an inefficient instrument, adequate provision was finally made by the creation of an official system of compulsory birth registration under the social legislation of Augustus (A.D. 4)… The Roman citizen was required to register the birth of his children within thirty days before a Roman official, and he received a wooden diptych recording the declaration, which acted as a certificate of citizenship for the child for the rest of his life. Like the military diplomata this contained the names of seven witnesses, and provided a presumptive proof of citizen status… Similarly the enfranchisement of freedmen, which depended upon a formal act, was recorded in a documentary tabella manumissionis . Citizens of diverse origins thus came to have some form of documentary evidence of their status."
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
I sure do doubt it, since there were very large Jewish communities scattered within the Empire and huge numbers of Greeks all over the place.
Remember that part of the NT (Acts 2:8?) in which the Apostles were preaching and some remarked at how each heard them in his own language. The speaker listed: Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, 10Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians.
It would seem people could wander about the Empire at will.
L
LastStand
Guest
That excerpt says nothing about travel rights.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
The issue of exactly when they became refugees is purely pedantic. It is not hyperbole or misrepresentation to say they were.
Much has been made here about the issue of Roman control of Egypt. That is a silly technicality. No one in first century Israel would have considered Egypt to be “the same country” they lived in. They surely would have thought of leaving Israel and going to Egypt as “leaving their country.” Rome occupied many nations at it’s peak. It did not unite them into a single country. To a first century Jew, their religion and their nationality were one in the same. Certainly Joseph and Mary would have seen it that way. They would have felt like foreigners in Egypt, remembering how their people were led out of the slavery of Egypt by Moses. That was a deep part of their identity.
I am astonished over how hard people who dislike Ocasio-Cortez fight to assert that every word that comes out of her mouth (or her Twitter feed) is a lie. Why???
Last edited:
L
LastStand
Guest
So what you are saying is that trying to apply 21st century political concepts retroactively is futile? Better pass that memo onto Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez then.
What the Jews felt was irrelevant. Rome had political control of both Israel and Egypt, therefore all the territory the Holy Family passed through was part of the same political entity. This is the same sort of fuzzy logic that justifies transsexualism.
Nobody here has called Cortez a liar. We certainly think she is misinformed at best, but nobody has equated her woeful ignorance of Scripture with malice.
She better not be saying anything good about separation of Church and state though since she is trying to hijack my religion for her agenda.
What the Jews felt was irrelevant. Rome had political control of both Israel and Egypt, therefore all the territory the Holy Family passed through was part of the same political entity. This is the same sort of fuzzy logic that justifies transsexualism.
Nobody here has called Cortez a liar. We certainly think she is misinformed at best, but nobody has equated her woeful ignorance of Scripture with malice.
She better not be saying anything good about separation of Church and state though since she is trying to hijack my religion for her agenda.
Last edited:
I
Inisfallen
Guest
Well, it’s her religion, too (assuming you’re a Catholic – if you’re not, my apologies).
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
When an argument starts with “So what you are saying…” it is guaranteed that the other side is not saying that.
Last edited:
L
LastStand
Guest
No argument, just a question.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
The answer to your question is no.
Last edited:
- Status