Wednesday, December 31, 2014

The Vatican's Extraordinary Synod

From http://el-paso.ucg.org/ or call 1-888-886-8632. Please follow this site here.

The Vatican's Extraordinary Synod

Voices in the Catholic church are pushing for change in basic matters of the family. Where could this lead?

Media Download Options [ Download Media: right-click on link ]
filesVideo
MP4 VideoVideo
MP4 Video - Low QualityAudio
MP3 Audio - The Vatican's Extraordinary Synod

[Darris McNeely] The Roman Catholic Church, just a few days ago, completed what they called an extraordinary synod. Now, don't get thrown off by that word, "synod" – it just means "meeting". But it was an extraordinary meeting called by the pope, Pope Francis, of many of the cardinals of the Catholic Church, to discuss the family, and issues regarding and relating to the family and Catholicism, especially whether or not divorced Catholics can take the Mass, according to church teaching. Also on the agenda was discussion about gay marriage and homosexuality, and the church's long-held stances on those particular social matters. And so it was hailed prematurely as a time when there would be some breakthroughs made and changes made in the Catholic Church's stance on these issues. But by the time they came to the end of the meetings and issued their preliminary papers on it, it was evident that they had not really changed at all. In fact, they could not get the two-thirds votes of the bishops that were convened on this to make any change whatsoever in the teachings and the stance of the Catholic Church on these matters. Now it's going to be carried over into another meeting next year. Whether or not they will change, we'll have to wait and see. The present pope, Pope Francis, has made some rather interesting comments about those issues, basically indicating that he was perhaps a little bit more flexible on them than the church teaching or past stances have been, but no change has taken place.
As you watch a church go through openly, at least as much as it can be, discussions on topics like this – these volatile social issues of gay marriage, of homosexual conduct, and the state of marriage, and particularly as it relates to Catholic teaching and other traditional Catholic instruction and even Christian instruction on the subject – you marvel at what is taking place compared to the upheaval that is going on in society at large and what will be the outcome – it will be yet to be determined.
What's quite interesting, I think, for us to look at and to consider, is where will this lead? What is going to be the future of this when it comes to at least just the Catholic Church and their particular stance on that? Nobody can predict that, necessarily. But I think that you're going to see further pressure for the church to reform its teachings. I think that's one thing that there is going to be, pressure to reform. Now, pressure by itself, when it comes to Catholicism, is not going to be enough to make any radical changes there, but the pressure, I think, is going to continue on. And also, I think that there's going to be possible backlash that we might look for, even within the church, and its impact upon its particular policies and approach and its public persona that could create some type of further interesting situations when it comes to religious associations and religious matters as a whole.
To watch something like this take place within the church that has over 1.2 billion adherents around the world is quite instructive, it is fascinating, and it is very, very important in our understanding of something that is taking place in society at large and in a very, very large church in our world today, and its implications for the future could be significant.
That's BT Daily . Join us next time.

Nobody has commented yet. Be the first to kick off the discussion!

Darris McNeely

Darris McNeely

Who is the Antichrist? - (Video)

The Moment After You Die - (Video)

More Information

Categories:

News and Prophecy

This post has favorited 1 times

Wednesday, December 24, 2014

Was There Really "No Room in the Inn"?

From http://el-paso.ucg.org/ or call 1-888-886-8632. Please follow this site here.

Was There Really "No Room in the Inn"?

9 comments

article by Mario Seiglie , Tom Robinson

Most have taken for granted Jesus' nativity story as commonly related - that when Joseph and Mary arrived in Bethlehem there was no room in an inn so Mary ended up giving birth to Jesus in a stable. But is this the true account in Scripture? See for yourself!

The Greek word translated "inn" in Luke 2:7 refers to a guest room.

Source: Scott Ashley/Explorations in Antiquity Center, LaGrange, GA.

A typical translation of Luke:2:7 says about Mary giving birth to Jesus, "And she brought forth her firstborn Son, and wrapped Him in swaddling clothes, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn" (New King James Version).
We've grown up hearing the account that the "inn" in Bethlehem was full, with no "room" available, so Joseph and Mary ended up in a stable, with Jesus Christ born and laid in a manger there. This image has been used to promote the typical Christmas nativity scene for generations. Yet a careful analysis of the biblical text reveals quite a different story!

Not an inn but a guest room

The New Testament was originally written in Greek, and the Greek word translated "inn" here is kataluma. It means a place of rest, usually a guest room. In fact, the same writer Luke uses this very word later where it clearly refers to a guest room and not an inn. Notice Luke:22:11, where Jesus said to His disciples, "Then you shall say to the master of the house, 'The Teacher says to you, "'Where is the guest room [ kataluma ] where I may eat the Passover with My disciples?"'" (emphasis added throughout).
Furthermore, Luke elsewhere in his Gospel uses a different Greek word when he writes about an actual inn— not the word kataluma. In the parable of the Good Samaritan, Jesus mentions that the injured man in the story was taken to an inn—and here Luke translates using the Greek word pandokheion, the normal word for an inn. We read this in Luke:10:34, where the kind Samaritan set the injured man "on his own animal, brought him to an inn, and took care of him."
Interestingly, the Arabic and Syriac versions of the New Testament, which reflect more of a Middle Eastern context, have never translated kataluma as meaning an inn, but instead as a guest room. As Kenneth Bailey, a Middle Eastern and New Testament scholar points out, "This translation [of the word as 'inn'] is a product of our Western heritage" ("The Manger and the Inn: The Cultural Background of Luke:2:7," Bible and Spade, Fall 2007, p. 103).
In addition, Young's Literal Translation uses the term "guest-chamber" instead of an inn. It says: "And she brought forth her son—the first-born, and wrapped him up, and laid him down in the manger, because there was not for them a place in the guest-chamber ."
Note also the word here translated "place" or "room." In the context of "inn," most assume this is referring to an individual room ("no room in the inn"), yet even inns of that time did not often have individual rooms. The reference is simply to space. What Luke is telling us is that there was not enough room, or enough space, for them in the guest room.
The linguistic evidence shows that Luke used the term kataluma to mean not an inn, but the guest room— indeed, "the" guest room (the definite article is used) of a particular house.

Historical factors

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, after pointing out that the word kataluma is used elsewhere in the Gospels for the guest chamber of a private home, comments: "Was the 'inn' at Bethlehem, where Joseph and Mary sought a night's lodging, an upper guest room in a private home or some kind of public place for travelers? The question cannot be answered with certainty. It is thought by some that it may have been a guest chamber provided by the community. We know that visitors to the annual feasts in Jerusalem were entertained in the guest rooms of private homes" (1982, Vol. 2, "Inn," p. 826).
Another factor that powerfully argues against this term meaning an inn is that these places were not appropriate to giving birth to a child. Inns at that time were far from anything like typical motels or hotels we might think of today. "Generally speaking, inns had a bad reputation . . . This ill repute of public inns, together with the Semitic spirit of hospitality, led the Jews and the early Christians to recommend the keeping of an open house for the benefit of strangers" (ibid.).
Besides, for commercial reasons inns were usually found along the major roads. Yet Bethlehem was a small town in the upper mountains of Judea, and no major Roman road is known to have passed through it. Since it seems to have been an insignificant village at the time, it's doubtful that an inn even existed there then.
This gives yet more reason to realize that what Luke really wrote is that there was no room in the guest chamber. Certainly, due to the Roman census being taken at the time and the huge number of people traveling to their birthplaces, available space in the guest quarters was scarce.
So the question then becomes: Does that mean Joseph and Mary aimed to stay in someone's home but, since the guest room was full, were turned out into the night to a stable? When Mary was in labor? That might seem worse than being turned away from an inn. Of course, both scenarios seem rather terrible—certainly downright inhospitable, which is far out of line from the way things were at that time.

A culture of hospitality and honoring kinship

In Christ's day, hospitality to visitors among the Jews was essential, based on biblical example and law. In Deuteronomy:10:19, God told the Israelites to "love the stranger." And Leviticus:19:33 stated, "If a stranger dwells with you in your land, you shall not mistreat him." Denial of hospitality was shown throughout Scripture to be an outrage. Hospitality toward visitors is still important throughout the Middle East.
Moreover, since Bethlehem was Joseph's ancestral home, he probably had relatives there. And being a descendant of King David, whose hometown this was, he would have been highly respected upon his arrival. Think of a descendant of George Washington coming to his hometown of Alexandria, Virginia, after a long lapse of time. The townspeople would've shown him respect.
As Bailey explains: "[My] thirty-year experience with villagers in the Middle East is that the intensity of honor shown to the passing guest is still very much in force, especially when it is a returning son of the village who is seeking shelter. We have observed cases where a complete village has turned out in a great celebration to greet a young man who has suddenly arrived unannounced in the village, which his grandfather had left many years before" (p. 103).
It should also be pointed out that childbirth was a major event at that time. In a small village like Bethlehem, many neighboring women would have come to help in the birth. Bailey states: "In the case of a birth, the men will sit apart with the neighbors, but the room will be full of women assisting the midwife. A private home would have bedding, facilities for heating water and all that is required for any peasant birth" (p. 102).
What this all means is that it would have been unthinkable and an unimaginable insult and affront to societal decency for Joseph, a returning village son, and his laboring wife to need to seek shelter in an unsavory inn to have a baby of Davidic descent—and then, even worse, to be sent out to have the birth in a stable. This simply cannot be what happened. Nor can it be that they were sent out into the night from a private home.
So what actually happened?

Reading the text carefully

Regrettably, the birth of Christ is later overlaid with so much tradition and legend about Christmas that it's hard to let the biblical text speak for itself.
The common assumption is that Joseph and Mary arrived in Bethlehem and, being hastened by her labor pains, rushed to an inn only to find it full with no vacancies, so they ended up in a stable where she gave birth.
However, a careful reading of the text shows us they had already been in Bethlehem for some days when she went into labor. Notice carefully Luke:2:4-6: "Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth into Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to be registered with Mary, his betrothed wife, who was with child. So it was, that while they were there, the days were completed for her to be delivered."
Consequently, they must have already been lodging somewhere in Bethlehem when her birth pangs began—and this was surely not a stable for a period of days. Could not Joseph have found a more suitable lodging place for his pregnant wife in that amount of time? Of course.
In fact, we should realize that not far from here dwelt Mary's cousin Elizabeth, whom Mary had lived with for a while during her pregnancy (Luke:1:39-40). If they were seeking a place to stay for days, why didn't they go to Elizabeth's house? The answer is simple. They found a house in which to stay in Bethlehem—probably that of Joseph's relatives.
And being in these accommodations already, it makes no sense for them to suddenly be out seeking a room in an inn or anywhere else at the time of Mary's labor.
Yet we might still be asking: So why were they sent out to a stable? The answer is, they weren't.

Birth in a house, not a stable

The Archaeological Study Bible offers some helpful background: "The 'manger' was the feeding trough of the animals. This is the only indication that Jesus was born in a stable. Very early tradition suggests that his birthplace was a cave, perhaps being used as a stable.
" Justin Martyr in the second century A.D. stated that Jesus' birth took place in a cave close to the village. Over this traditional manger site the emperor Constantine (A.D. 330) and his mother, Helena, constructed the Church of the Nativity" (2005, p. 1669).
Note that it is only the manger, an animal food or water trough, that gives any indication of a stable. And indeed a manger might well have been found in a stable. But it's important to realize that they were also to be found within first-century homes!
A typical Judean house of that day consisted of an area near the door, often with a dirt floor, where the family's animals were kept at night—so they wouldn't be stolen or preyed upon and so their body heat could help warm the home on cool nights. The family lived and slept in a raised part of the same room set back from the door. There was also usually a guest room either upstairs on a second floor or adjoining the family common room on the lower floor. Typically the lower area near the door had a manger for food and/or water for the animals.
Eric F.F. Bishop, an expert in Middle East culture, noted that the birth of Christ probably took place in "one of the Bethlehem houses with the lower section provided for the animals, with mangers 'hollowed in stone,' the dais [or raised area] being reserved for the family. Such a manger being immovable, filled with crushed straw, would do duty for a cradle. An infant might even be left in safety, especially if swaddled, when the mother was absent on temporary business" ( Jesus of Palestine, 1955, p. 42).
Yet another authority on Middle Eastern life, Gustaf Dalmann, stated: "In the East today the dwelling-place of man and beast is often in one and the same room. It is quite the usual thing among the peasants for the family to live, eat, and sleep on a kind of raised terrace . . . in the one room of the house, while the cattle, particularly donkeys and oxen, have their place below on the actual floor . . . near the door; this part sometimes is continued along under the terrace as a kind of low vault. On this floor the mangers are fixed, either to the floor, or to the wall, or at the edge of the terrace" ( Sacred Sites and Ways, 1935, p. 41).
This scene of an ox or donkey in the house at night might go against our Western sensibilities. Yet, as Bailey comments: "It is we in the West who have decided that life with these great gentle beasts is culturally unacceptable. The raised terrace on which the family ate, slept and lived was unsoiled by the animals, which were taken out each day and during which time the lower level was cleaned. Their presence was in no way offensive" (p. 105). Of course, the animals could have been taken outside when the actual birth was occurring.
Consider that the medium of En Dor whom King Saul sinfully consulted with "had a fatted calf in the house," which she killed to prepare a meal for Saul and his men (1 Samuel:28:24). It was more often the wealthy who had stables for their animals apart from the house.
Thus, a more realistic view of what occurred with Christ's birth according to the customs of the time is that the manger was in a house and not in a stable. It should be stated that this could conceivably have involved a cave, but that's only because some houses were built over caves. Yet this was not the norm. And the cave imagery may come from pagan myth about the Persian sun-god Mithras, who was supposedly born in a cave—along with the belief of some that Christ's birth had to have been in seclusion, as we will see.

The pieces fall into place

What we've seen so far explains a great deal.
Some might object that Mary and Joseph being accommodated in the family common room of a house instead of the guest room is itself inhospitable. But as Bailey points out: "No unkindness or lack of hospitality is implied when the Holy Family is taken into the main family room of the home in which they are entertained. The guest room is full. The host is not expected to ask prior guests . . . to leave. Such would be quite unthinkable and, in any case, unnecessary. The large family room is more appropriate in any case" (p. 104).
Indeed, considering all the women that would be going in and out of the room during the birth, having Mary stay in the main room would probably have seemed the wisest choice to everyone concerned. In fact, it's possible that Luke's mention of there being no room or space meant that this particular guest room was too small for all the birth activity.
Bailey continues in regard to understanding kataluma as meaning the guest room: "This option admirably fulfills both the linguistic requirements of the text and the cultural requirements of the village scene. This translation gives new understanding to the story of Jesus' birth. Joseph and Mary arrive in Bethlehem. They find shelter with a family whose separate guest room is full [or too small], and are accommodated among the family in acceptable village style. The birth takes place there on the raised terrace of the family home, and the baby is laid in a manger . . .
"The (Palestinian) reader [of Luke's account] instinctively thinks, 'Manger—oh—they are in the main family room. Why not the guest room?' The author instinctively replies, 'Because there was no place for them in the guest room.' The reader concludes, 'Ah, yes—well, the family room is more appropriate anyway.' Thus, with the translation 'guest room,' all of the cultural, historical and linguistic pieces fall into place" (p. 104).

The reaction of the shepherds

Another element of the story that reinforces the picture here is that of the shepherds who received the announcement of the birth of the Savior, the Lord Messiah, and where to find Him that night from an angel (Luke:2:8-11). As men of the lower ranks of society, they may not have felt they would be received well in visiting a king, but the angel told them that as a sign they would find the child lying in a manger (verse 12).
"That is," says Bailey in an insightful book he has written, "they would find the Christ child in an ordinary peasant home such as theirs. He was not in a governor's mansion or a wealthy merchant's guest room but in a simple two-room home like theirs" ( Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes: Cultural Studies in the Gospels, 2008, p. 35).
Luke's account further states that the shepherds "came with haste and found Mary and Joseph, and the Babe lying in a manger" (verse 16). On arriving they made "widely known" what had been announced to them (verse 17)—showing that there were many people there. And when they left, they went out "praising God for all the things that they had heard and seen" (verse 20).
Bailey points out: "The word all obviously included the quality of the hospitality that they witnessed on arrival. Clearly, they found the holy family in perfectly adequate accommodations, not in a dirty stable. If, on arrival, they had found a smelly stable, a frightened young mother and a desperate Joseph, they would have said, 'This is outrageous! Come home with us! Our women will take care of you!'
"Within five minutes the shepherds would have moved the little family to their own homes. The honor of the entire village would rest on their shoulders and they would have sensed their responsibility to do their duty. The fact that they walked out, without moving the young family, means that the shepherds felt they could not offer better hospitality than what had already been extended to them" (pp. 35-36, emphasis in original).

Where does this leave us?

So what are the implications of upending the traditional view of the Christmas nativity scene?
We should first ask, given the facts we've seen, why has there been such an insistence since early centuries that the birth setting of Christ was a stable or cave with no one around—perhaps even outside the town, as some have even contended?
Bailey reveals: "After reading a number of Arabic and Syriac fathers' writings on the question, one has the distinct feeling there is an unspoken subjective pressure to understand the birth as having taken place without witnesses because of the sacred nature of the 'mother of God' giving birth to the 'Son of God.'
"Even as the sacraments are consecrated in utter seclusion behind an altar screen, so the eyes of even the faithful might not look on the holy event, even so Middle Eastern Christology, Mariology and piety seem to combine to insist that the birth took place where no eye beheld the divine mystery" ("The Manger and the Inn," p. 105).
Yet this is a fiction straight out of ancient pagan mystery religion. The reality is quite different, as we've seen. While Jesus was conceived of God the Father through the Holy Spirit, His was nonetheless a typical birth for the common man of His day. Though begotten of God, He truly came as one of us.
As for the common tradition, Kenneth Bailey concludes: "We all face the enormous weight of church tradition which surrounds us with the 'no room at the inn' mythology. If our conclusions are valid, thousands of good Christmas sermons, plays, filmstrips, films, poems, songs and books will have to be discarded.
"But is the traditional myth of a lonely birth in a stable a help or a hindrance to the reality the text proclaims? Surely a more authentic cultural understanding enhances the meaning of the story, rather than diminishing it.
"Jesus was rejected at His birth by Herod, but the Bethlehem shepherds welcomed Him with great joy, as did the common people in later years. The city of David was true to its own, and the village community provided for Him. He was born among them, in the natural setting of the birth of any village boy, surrounded by helping hands and encouraging women's voices.
"For centuries Palestinian peasants have been born on the raised terraces of the one-room family homes. The birth of Jesus was no different. His incarnation was authentic. His birth most likely took place in the natural place for a peasant to be born—in a peasant home" (pp. 105-106).
Let's be thankful that we can examine the biblical text without the hidden biases of religious tradition—and that we don't have to prop up a wrong meaning of a term in order to keep alive the religious myths of Christmas.
The Bereans left us with a wonderful example on how we should base our faith. Luke commended them by saying in Acts:17:11, "These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so."
May we all do the same!

9 comments

Tuesday, December 23, 2014

When Was Jesus Born?

From http://el-paso.ucg.org/ or call 1-888-886-8632. Please follow this site here.

WhenWas Jesus Born?

Did His birth occur on December 25th? Can we even know when Christ was born? And, should we really be celebrating His birth?

Media Download Options [ Download Media: right-click on link ]
filesVideo
MP4 VideoVideo
MP4 Video - Low QualityAudio
MP3 Audio - When Was Jesus Born?

[Darris] Was Jesus born on Christmas Day? Can we even know when He was born? And most importantly, does it really matter?

December 25th is universally celebrated as Jesus Christ's birthday. Around the world Christians celebrate the season and the day by giving gifts, being with family and friends. Even for those who aren't Christian it's a season of joyous celebration.

So when was Jesus born? Let's find out. And join us on Beyond Today as we explore the many issues surrounding the question: "When Was Jesus Born?"

[Announcer] Join our host Darris McNeely and his guests, as they help you understand your future on Beyond Today !

[Darris] When was Jesus Christ of Nazareth born?

Every year, we hear Christmas carols all about the baby Jesus in the manger and the winter wonderland associated with His birth. If we look at our calendar, chances are, right there on December 25th, it says Christmas Day. The birth of Jesus Christ is said to be the reason behind the season. But of course every year people worry about the fact that Christ is not in the season. But was Christ actually born on Christmas Day - on December 25th? It's not as clear and simple as our calendars would suggest.

If we look into it, we find that December 25th wasn't always considered Jesus' birth date. Joseph L. Sheler of U.S. News & World Report , wrote in an article entitled, "In Search of Christmas":

"Lacking any scriptural pointers to Jesus' birthday, early Christian teachers suggested dates all over the calendar...Clement who was an early church father, he picked November 18th...A man named Hippolytus, another early father, he "figured Christ must have been born on a Wednesday...And then there is an anonymous document believed to have been written in North Africa around the year 243 A.D. which placed Jesus' birth on March 28th." (Joseph L. Sheler, U.S. News & World Report , "In Search of Christmas," Dec. 23, 1996, p. 58).

Although it is difficult to determine the first time anyone celebrated December 25th as Christmas Day, historians are in general agreement that it was sometime during the fourth century. Now this is an amazingly late date. Think about it! What this means is that Christmas - which most consider Jesus' birthday - wasn't observed by the Roman church until about 300 years after Christ's death. Christmas cannot be traced back to either the teachings or the practices of the earliest Christians. That sounds almost impossible, doesn't it? But it's true.

So why did the Roman church adopt Christmas Day as the time to celebrate Jesus' birth? The reason His birthday is celebrated now, at that time, is because religious leaders of the day wanted to give a pagan festival a name change and to make it easier for pagans to convert over to Christianity.

Listen to this quote from the Encyclopedia Americana which makes it very clear:

"In the fifth century, the Western Church ordered it [speaking of Christ's birth] to be observed forever on the day of the old Roman feast of the birth of Sol [who is the sun god], as no certain knowledge of the day of Christ's birth existed" (1944 edition, "Christmas").

The reason for this confusion is not surprising. The Bible doesn't actually tell us the exact date of Jesus Christ's birth. There is no specific date given. What's more, there aren't any mentions of any celebrations being held honoring Christ's birth date by the early church.

And by the early church we mean the church that we read about in the book of Acts. These people followed Jesus Christ's example and teaching to the letter. And none of that included celebrating the day of His birth. There is no command to celebrate Christ's birthday found in all of Scripture, certainly not in Christ's teachings, nor in the letters of the apostles who founded the church.

As Christians, you and I should desire to follow Christ's example and His teaching and that of His church. And nowhere do we find in Scripture that Jesus instructed us to celebrate His birthday - its just not there. And the apostles to whom the faith delivered, was given and who translated that and transferred it to the church, they followed Christ's example in everything they did.

Again, there is no record of the early church celebrating Christmas or for that matter, the birth of Jesus Christ in any way shape or form.

Even so, it is possible that we can generally know the time or the season of the birth of Christ. Because there are distinct clues that give us an idea about the time of year that He was born.

So what about December 25th? Is it possible the Roman church accidentally adopted the correct date for Jesus' birth? Well, a careful Bible study shows that the middle of winter was absolutely not the time Christ was born. There are two big reasons why Christmas or December 25th can't be the time of Christ's birth.

Let's look at the first one. We know from the Gospel accounts that the shepherds were in the fields watching their flocks at the time of the birth of Jesus.

Luke's account of the birth of Jesus found in chapter 2 of the Gospel of Luke tells us a great deal of the details of many of the facts surrounding that birth. Here is what it says:

"And she brought forth her firstborn Son" - speaking of Christ's mother, Mary - "and wrapped Him in swaddling cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them at the inn. Now there were in the same country shepherds living out in the fields, keeping watch over their flock by night" (Luke:2:7-8 [7] And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.
[8] And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night.
).

Listen to what Adam Clarke's Commentary mentions about the significance of what we just read here in Luke's account. It says:

"... Shepherds were not in the fields during December. According to [a book entitled] Celebrations: The Complete Book of American Holidays , Luke's account 'suggests that Jesus may have been born in summer or early fall. Since December is cold and rainy in Judea, it is likely the shepherds would have sought shelter for their flocks at night' (p. 309)."

Now, what do we have here? We have a recording. A historical fact about shepherds and the flocks in the cold, wet winter. They just weren't there in the fields. The conditions were not appropriate for that to be taking place.

Now let's look at what another source says. The Interpreter's One-Volume Commentary says this passage argues "against the birth [of Christ] occurring on December 25th since the weather would not have permitted shepherds watching over their flocks in the fields at night."

So the first reason we know He wasn't born in December was that there were shepherds in the fields tending their flocks, something that wouldn't have been happening in the cold Judean winter.

The second reason we know Jesus wasn't born in December is that His parents traveled to Bethlehem to register in a Roman census (Luke:2:1-4). Such censuses were not taken in winter, when the temperatures often dropped below freezing and the roads were in poor condition thus inhibiting travel. Taking a census under such conditions would have been self-defeating, since it would have been too difficult for Judean residents to travel and to be counted. Travel back then wasn't as easy as it is today. We live in an age of heated vehicles and snow plowed roads.

We have to understand what it was like in the culture and the setting of that time in the first century.

Now based on these two facts alone, we see that it's impossible that the biblical account of Jesus' birth happened in the winter, let alone on the specific date of December 25th. More than being a simple incorrect guess, the December 25th date was really an attempt to synthesize pagan worship into Christian worship.

So when was Jesus born? Well, we've proven that He wasn't born on Christmas day or December 25th. Stay tuned, and next we'll examine the biblical evidence that we do have that can tell us when He was born and why that matters.

But first, let me briefly tell you about our free Bible study aid that we're offering on this program, the one, Jesus Christ: The Real Story . You can order your own, personal free copy of this booklet by calling: 1-888-886-8632. Again, that's 1-888-886-8632. Or you can go online to BeyondToday.tv and download and begin reading immediately a copy of this booklet.

This study aid can help you understand the truth behind the birth of Jesus Christ and His significance in your life today.

So be sure to request your free copy by calling: 1-888-886-8632. 1-888-886-8632 to request Jesus Christ: The Real Story. Or go online to BeyondToday.tv . And if you live outside of North America, please write to us at the address shown on your screen throughout today's program [Beyond Today, PO Box 541027, Cincinnati, OH 45254].

We've explained how the Bible shows us that Jesus wasn't born on Christmas, in December, or even in the winter of the year. So when was He born?

We find the important clues about the real time of Jesus' birth in what the Bible tells us about His cousin, John the Baptist.

Maybe you've read the Gospel of Luke and thought it was strange that the book and the story begins not with the story of the conception of Jesus, but with the story of the conception of John the Baptist. There's a very good reason for this. Luke was sure to tell us in very specific detail when John the Baptist was conceived and born.

In Luke 1, it tells us that John's mother, Elizabeth was six months pregnant when Jesus was conceived.

"In the sixth month of Elizabeth's pregnancy, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin's name was Mary..." (Luke:1:24-27 [24] And after those days his wife Elisabeth conceived, and hid herself five months, saying,
[25] Thus hath the Lord dealt with me in the days wherein he looked on me, to take away my reproach among men.
[26] And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth,
[27] To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.
).

Elizabeth, the mother of John the Baptist, and Mary, the mother of Jesus, were cousins. That means that from this verse, we know that John was six months older than Jesus. So we can discover the approximate time of year Jesus was born if we know when John was born.

Now let's look at what the Bible tells us about the time of John's birth.

John's father, Zacharias, was a priest serving in the Temple at Jerusalem. The Bible tells us that he and his wife were both righteous people who put their hearts into serving God. Zacharias, we're told, was a priest who served in "the division of Abijah" (Luke:1:5There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.). At this time, the Temple priests in Jerusalem were divided into several different "divisions" or what were called "courses" - or groups of priests that would take turns performing Temple service during the year. It's like a yearly schedule for those serving at the Temple. There were so many priests at the time that they had to be set up on a schedule to have their time to serve in the Temple.

Now, here's what's important. Historians calculate that the course of Abijah mentioned by Luke, during which Zacharias served, happened from June 13-19 in that year ( The Companion Bible , 1974, Appendix 179, p. 200).

The announcement therefore to Zacharias in the Temple as to the conception of John the Baptist took place between June 13-19 as our calendar has it today in that year.

During his Temple service, the angel Gabriel appeared to Zacharias and announced to him that he and his wife Elizabeth would have a child (Luke:1:8-13 [8] And it came to pass, that while he executed the priest's office before God in the order of his course,
[9] According to the custom of the priest's office, his lot was to burn incense when he went into the temple of the Lord.
[10] And the whole multitude of the people were praying without at the time of incense.
[11] And there appeared unto him an angel of the Lord standing on the right side of the altar of incense.
[12] And when Zacharias saw him, he was troubled, and fear fell upon him.
[13] But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias: for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John.
). After he completed his service and traveled home, Elizabeth conceived the cousin of Jesus; the child that would one day become John the Baptist (Luke:1:23-24 [23] And it came to pass, that, as soon as the days of his ministration were accomplished, he departed to his own house.
[24] And after those days his wife Elisabeth conceived, and hid herself five months, saying,
). It seems that John's conception took place near the end of June which was after the division of Abijah and Zecharias completed his Temple service, adding nine months brings us to the end of March the next year as the most likely time for John's birth.

Adding another six months - the difference between the ages of John and Jesus (Luke:1:35-36 [35] And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
[36] And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.
) - brings us to the end of September as the likely time of Jesus' birth.

Now, when we look back and we look at this timeframe, we learn some interesting facts.

Zacharias, remember, was serving during the course of Abijah which was in the middle part of June of that year when he heard the announcement of his son's birth. He went home, his wife conceived John the Baptist toward the end of June that year. Nine months later, John the Baptist was born in the spring, probably during the month of March as we know it today.

Six months later, Jesus Christ was born. Therefore, Christ is six months younger than his cousin and was born most likely in the fall sometime in the timeframe of September or October of that year.

So, if it's provable using what we know from the Bible and some historical research that Jesus was born in the autumn of the year instead of the middle of winter in December, does that mean then we should keep Christmas or Christ's birth and celebrate it in September instead of December? No it doesn't.

For this reason: Nowhere in the Bible is there any instruction or command to commemorate or in any way celebrate the day of Christ's birth. The fact that so many specific dates are given about other important and even less important events in the Bible, yet this exact date - the date of Christ's birth - remains vague, that is significant.

God didn't intend for this specific date, the date of Christ's birth, to be celebrated. Now God does give us other specific days to observe that honor Christ and the Father. We do not need to invent our own days and times to do this. For those who love God and His Son, it is only natural to desire to worship both of them. But it is far better to worship God and Jesus Christ on the days and the times God has set.As for the celebration of Christmas in December: Remember what we read earlier about the Roman church adopting pagan practices into the Christian faith to create Christmas. Jesus wouldn't want us to celebrate pagan days as a means of honoring His birth. Now how can I make such a statement?

How do we know what Jesus would or would not want us to do? God makes it very clear He does not like pagan practices and He pretty well lays it out for us in one passage of the Bible that we should take note about. It says this in the book of Deuteronomy.

"When the LORD your God cuts off from before you the nations which you go to dispossess, and you displace them and dwell in their land, take heed to yourself that you are not ensnared to follow them, after they are destroyed from before you, and that you do not inquire after their gods, saying, 'How did these nations serve their gods? I also will do likewise.' You shall not worship the LORD your God in that way; for every abomination to the LORD which He hates they have done to their gods; for they burn even their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods. 'Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to [it] nor take away from it'" (Deuteronomy:12:29-32 [29] When the LORD thy God shall cut off the nations from before thee, whither thou goest to possess them, and thou succeedest them, and dwellest in their land;
[30] Take heed to thyself that thou be not snared by following them, after that they be destroyed from before thee; and that thou enquire not after their gods, saying, How did these nations serve their gods? even so will I do likewise.
[31] Thou shalt not do so unto the LORD thy God: for every abomination to the LORD, which he hateth, have they done unto their gods; for even their sons and their daughters they have burnt in the fire to their gods.
[32] What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.
,NKJV).

We should be happy Jesus Christ was born on the earth. It is a joyous event that brought us many things.

Through Christ's birth, we see how to have a relationship with God the Father. We see His example of a perfect life, a perfect sacrifice. We see Christ's death and His resurrection back to spirit life as a means and a way for mankind to have a chance to share the glory and live forever in the family of God. Christ came to form a new relationship with man that through His blood extends into all nations, to all peoples. He came to become our High Priest and to intercede before God's throne for us.

Because of His birth we have the wonderful hope of a future as a Son of God in His family. Through Him we have hope to have an authentic relationship with God the Father based on truth and love. And if we truly love Him, we will love Him the way that He wants to be loved. And to love God, we should do what He asks.

John was inspired to write this, "But whoever keeps His word, truly the love of God is perfected in him. By this we know that we are in Him" (1 John:2:5But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him., NKJV).

Any relationship involves mutual kindness and respect. If a friend gave you a gift that you didn't like, you'd probably forgive them. But if they gave it to you every year even when you asked them not to, eventually you might start to wonder: "Are they doing this for me or for themselves?", "Is this person really a friend?"

By not obeying God, we are missing out on a closer relationship with Him.

During today's program, I've shown you why Jesus was not born on December 25th. We've offered biblical evidence as to when He was born and we've explained how the Bible nowhere tells us to observe the day of His birth.

So to help you gain more understanding on this subject, we're going to ask you to request this free Bible study aid, Jesus Christ: The Real Story. This is an important study aid that can provide you with many more details that we have not had time to cover in today's program.

Please order your own, personal printed copy of Jesus Christ: The Real Story. You can call us today at the number: 1-888-886-8632. That's 1-888-886-8632.

And when you order this study aid we're also going to send you a free subscription to The Good News magazine. Each bi-monthly issue of The Good News is filled with practical articles to help you better understand the Bible, strengthen your family, and show you what's ahead for our world and the awesome purpose God has for you ahead.

So please, don't wait! Call us now - toll free at: 1-888-886-8632. That's 1-888-886-8632. Or, write to us at the address shown on your screen throughout the program. You can also read Jesus Christ: The Real Story and The Good News online at BeyondToday.tv .

I'm joined now by Steve Myers, one of my fellow Beyond Today hosts.

Steve, we have taken on quite a subject today by exposing that Christ was not born on December 25th and are saying to our audience that they should not be doing that but worshipping God in spirit and in truth. That's an emotional law. That's a hard thing.

[Steve] It's a really hard thing, especially when we have all these connections to Christmas time.

[Darris] And you and I both being individuals that have kept Christmas, we know exactly what the feelings are.

[Steve] Absolutely, it's time for family's to get together. It's time for warm feelings. It's time to put away our differences. We hear the songs about peace and good will to all men and those kinds of things. And it has such a connection with people that even those that aren't Christians keep Christmas and celebrate it because of those different things.

And it can be very difficult to separate yourself from the truth of what God's Word is and those feelings because it's so over emotionalized in many ways. I know for my family, as my parents began to understand the truth and that God had something better in mind, it was pretty tough to give it up. I think my dad came to it pretty quick but my mom thought that well maybe she could kind of change it up a little bit and have it be a little bit more Christlike.

[Darris] She was one of those that tried to put Christ into Christmas.

[Steve] Definitely. She definitely did. She was a little apprehensive and thought she could do that. So we went on a mission, I guess you could say, to make it more Christlike. We lit candles during Advent and read scriptures. She had us read scriptures as kids. I remember sitting all in a row and going through different passages. Which you know, it's not bad to read the Bible, but to make it something that it wasn't.

To keep those traditions that people have rather than the truth of the Bible became a problem. So decorating our front door with crosses and nativity scenes or taking us on a car excursion to see live nativity scenes to give it a little bit more of a feeling of reality. She tried to do those things and yet even in all that, she began to see that that really did fall short of what God has in mind.

[Darris] Well, my mother was the same way. She was into it in a sincere effort to honor God, to honor Jesus Christ and the Father. We had all the trappings of Christmas just like everyone else. But she came to see that her traditions in essence were false, and that she'd been lied to. She had enough wisdom to kind of wean my sister and I off of the holiday.

But, there came a day when there was no more Christmas and she had the ability to understand what the Bible teaches about God's festivals, God's Holy Days, there was really no hole that was created emotionally in our life. It was filled with the truth, but because I can see both sides, I understand how difficult it is for a person to make that decision to put God and His Word first as opposed to human tradition and ideas that just don't really cut it biblically or to put into a relationship with God, truth.

[Steve] Yeah, and to just have a day when we put away our differences or we just try to get along while the family gets together for our Christmas dinner. Boy it gets done and the kids open up all the presents and then as soon as it's over with, it really leaves you with an emptiness. It kind of falls so far short of the idea that God has to keep that peace and that confidence in God all the time. That's what God's way has in mind, that we can have a fulfilling life and not just have it for a few moments on one day of the year.

[Darris] You read in Scripture that the angel said, peace on earth good will toward men. Which was a result of Christ's birth, and everyone wants peace whether it's within the family or peace for all the world. It's not there.

Now don't get us wrong by what we've talked about today. We are not diminishing the birth of Jesus Christ into this world. We have already covered that. It's a matter of worshipping God in spirit and in truth and in the manner in which He says to do so. And it's when we get on track with God that we can fully appreciate the complete life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ of Nazareth.

I'd like to remind you to order your own, personal copy of our free study aid: Jesus Christ: The Real Story.

This Bible study aid can help you understand more about this important biblical subject. We encourage you to order your own personal copy of this valuable, free publication and to get your own free subscription to our magazine, The Good News . Request both, today's study aid and The Good News by calling: 1-888-886-8632. Again, that's 1-888-886-8632. Or you can go online to BeyondToday.tv right now and begin reading.

Additionally, while visiting our BeyondToday.tv site we invite you to watch BT Daily . These are short daily videos on important Bible topics and breaking news. Join us throughout the week on the Web for BT Daily and get additional analysis on prophecy, God's great plan for your future and so much more. You can watch Beyond Today and BT Daily anytime on YouTube or on our dedicated Roku channel.

Besides this, the United Church of God has hundreds of Sabbath-keeping congregations meeting each Saturday across the United States and around the world. Go to BeyondToday.tv - click on the "Contact" tab to find a congregation nearest you . Then, call one of our knowledgeable and caring pastors to share your story with them. We are looking forward to hearing from you.

Christ was not born on December 25th in the dead of winter. And celebrating it as such doesn't change this fact. And God never gave us instruction to observe Christ's birth in any fashion. Instead of holding to a wrong day and a wrong idea, isn't it time that you focus on why He was born?

The idea of God coming to dwell among us in the flesh holds more profound meaning to us than the vain celebrations of His birth. Isn't it time that you begin to focus on why Jesus was born rather than when He was born. It will make a big difference.

That's our program today. Thanks for joining us, and be sure to tell your family and friends about Beyond Today . Tune in again next week and join us in praying, "Thy Kingdom come." For Beyond Today , I'm Darris McNeely. Thanks for watching.

[Announcer] For the free literature offered on today's program, go online to BeyondToday.tv

United Church of God El Paso

Wednesday, December 31, 2014