Matthew 1-2: the magi entered the "house"?

  • Thread starter Thread starter philv
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Gloria_de_G said:
Do not tell me that you did not know this!!! :bigyikes: But I do not understand the point of making that was first use in the 14th century. You want to mean that there were no mangers for the animals before that???😃

That is why I said that there was hay in the manger, because the hay is to be eaten by the animals, that were there in the stable where they stay for the night. But animals do not eat at night when she had her baby! So they put him on the hay in the manger, but rapped around!
Click to expand...
The poster’s point was not that mangers were not used before the 14th century, but that the 14th century is when that particular word came into use. That information (the derivation of words and when they started being used in English) can be found in several on-line dictionaries.
 
robwar said:
Mary and Joseph were the working poor. The sacrifice in the temple was two doves, which was the sacrifice of the poor, not the well off or the rich. You make a number of assumptions here that are not exactly supported by scripture and scripture isn’t clear at all. Jesus obviously was laid where he was born which was a stable (which in reality a cave). We don’t have the exact time frame of when they were able to move from there to some kinds of house where the magi saw him. It really doesn’t matter because the main point is that Jesus was born in the humblest of circumstances and it took gentile astrologers looking at a star to find him and the people that should have been aware of His birth and coming were asleep at the wheel.
Click to expand...
I do not believe you that they were the working poor.:tsktsk: I do not say that they were rich but only that they were quite well off to consider go to Bethlehem to stay in an Inn. What working poor could afford that??? And they obviously were not as rich as to offer a lamb in the temple because probably they had enough money to come for the census and to pay the meals and the Inn, but not on top to pay for a lamb. They were not from the working poor, they will never have been able to do this.

You say that the stable was a cave. Sorry this is not in the Gospel. If you were to live in Israel, like I do, and have been in Bethlehem, you will know that in those days to have a stable in the lower part of the house and in the upper an Inn, is not outrageous. Your common sense does not tell you that they came looking for an Inn, not for a cave!!! So they have money to pay an Inn and as soon as they could they will move into it. That is why I suggested that they only spend the night in the stable and next day they move into the house. Why you can not imagine this??? Because you want to make the Holy Family the poorest of the poorest. Sorry but no.
Even you know that when the Magi arrived they were already in the house.

In the love of having Biblical imagination,👍
Gloria

.
 
DaveBj said:
The poster’s point was not that mangers were not used before the 14th century, but that the 14th century is when that particular word came into use. That information (the derivation of words and when they started being used in English) can be found in several on-line dictionaries.
Click to expand...
That is exactly what I am saying. What is the point that ezeekl wants to make?? If the word manger did not exist before the 14th century they will have used another one. But still is the place where the hay is put for the animals to eat it!!!😃

Gloria

.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ezeekl
A manger is a feeding trough for animals. According to Merriam’s & Webster’s the word comes from Middle English mangeour, manger, from Anglo-French mangure, from manger to eat, from Latin manducare to chew, devour, from manducus glutton, from mandere to chew. The word was first used in the 14th century.
Gloria_de_G said:
Do not tell me that you did not know this!!! :bigyikes: But I do not understand the point of making that was first use in the 14th century. You want to mean that there were no mangers for the animals before that???😃

That is why I said that there was hay in the manger, because the hay is to be eaten by the animals, that were there in the stable where they stay for the night. But animals do not eat at night when she had her baby! So they put him on the hay in the manger, but rapped around!

Happy Christmas!!
Gloria
Click to expand...
Like WOW man!!! Okay, I’ll go slow. The word ‘manger’ was first used in the 14th century. Isn’t that what I typed initially? Maybe you did not see that I used Merriam & Webster’s dictionary as a reference giving the definition and etymology of the word manger.
 
Gloria_de_G said:
Well I thought that your dad may have point. In the moment that the Holy Spirit overshadows Mary and she conceived, in that moment the star appear. Therefore the Magi had nine months to arrive to Bethlehem:rolleyes:

But it does not says that the story, says this: “16 Then Herod, when he saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, was in a furious rage, and he sent and killed all the male children in Bethlehem and in all that region who were two years old or under"”
Then Herod only makes sure he was not going to miss it. **All babies were killed from birth **to 2 years of age!:eek:

This sounds quite reasonable, because as someone point out:

So as soon as the people occupying the upper part of the house went to register, surely they left the place and Mary and Joseph and Jesus could have moved up, to wait until the time of the purification in the temple.

When the Magi arrived probably it has passed already the purification period (33 days after the circumcision on the 8th day Leviticus 12:1-4) and Mary and Joseph have presented the child already in the temple. That will put the age of Jesus in about one month and 10 days. Then the Magi left their presents and went their way, different of the one they came from, to avoid Herod.
Herod not seeing them back sent immediately to kill the babies, and the Holy Family escaped to Egypt (warned by the angel), until Herod’s death.👍

In the love of Christ,
Gloria

.
Click to expand...
👍 I think this is the best interpretation of the two Gospel stories. I was looking at the two infant narratives in a Greek interlinear NT, and Luke uses a Greek word for an infant to describe the child, and Matthew uses a different Greek word which describes a small child (maybe a toddler). So I also think there is a period of time that elapses before the Magi arrive, and by that time the Holy Family has moved up from the cave or area below the house where the animals are kept to the living quarters of the house.
 
Re the manger I always liked Luke 2:16. The shepherds went to the stable and
16 And they went with haste, and found Mary and Joseph, and the babe lying in a manger.
Click to expand...
Wasn’t it crowded in the manger? 😃
 
Joe_Kelley said:
Re the manger I always liked Luke 2:16. The shepherds went to the stable and “16 And they went with haste, and found Mary and Joseph, and the babe lying in a manger.”

Wasn’t it crowded in the manger? 😃
Click to expand...
OK Joe, I went and did my homework!

The Greek word that translates “lying” **κειμενον **it refers only to the baby!!! If you look in Luke 2:12 the same Greek word is used to announce to the shepherds that they will find the babe “lying” **κειμενον ** in a manger.

So the translation should be very simply changed to this:

“And they went and found both: Mary and Joseph. And the babe laying in a manger”

How about this??? Solved the crowded manger!!!😃

In the love of Christ,
Gloria

.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top