ChristMyth

It's amazing the number of "facts" we know about the birth of Christ that, as it turns out, are not facts. I mean, we know these things, don't we? Maybe not.

What do we know? Well, we know that there was a star at His birth. That's a given. We know there was a choir of angels. That's for sure. We know that the mean old innkeeper wouldn't let them stay there. Everyone knows that. So He was born in a stable. Just look at the Nativity scenes. Oh, and there were wise men there, too -- three of them. We know this.

So would it disturb you to find out that none of that is true?

In the story of Christ's birth, there is no mention of a star that night. The angels didn't tell the shepherds to follow a star; he told them to "find a baby wrapped in swaddling cloths and lying in a manger" (Luke 2:12). The star was for the wise men and wasn't necessarily visible at all to the people of Bethlehem.

There were angels at the announcement to the shepherds, but the text doesn't say it was a choir. It doesn't say they sang. It says, "And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying, 'Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among those with whom He is pleased!' (Luke 2:13-14).

It's interesting to note that, while we're all sure about that innkeeper thing, there weren't actually very many "inns" in Bethlehem and, in fact, the text doesn't require it. "Wait a minute," I can hear you say, "it clearly says 'there was no place for them in the inn'." That word there for "inn," however, doesn't require what we think of as an "inn." It wasn't like a Motel 6 or something. The word refers to a guest chamber (which, by the way, is the precise word used in Young's Literal Translation). (Note: The same word is used to describe the place where Jesus and His disciples ate the Last Supper (Luke 22:11). On the other hand, the actual word for "inn" was used by Luke in the parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:34).) Joseph had family there and they likely stayed with family. The problem was when the baby was born; there was no room for a newborn in that lodging. No "inn."

"So they went to the stable, right?" Not likely. In Jesus's day livestock was often kept "in the house." Okay, not right in the rooms with the rest of the people, but connected to the house. They kept some of the vulnerable animals there, essentially, in the house for warmth and protection. (Remember Jephthah in Judges? He promised God that he would sacrifice "whatever comes out from the doors of my house" (Judg 11:30-31). He was dismayed when it turned out to be his daughter. But what else was he thinking? Was there someone else in there he wanted to sacrifice? Or did he expect an animal to come out because it was a common practice to keep animals in the house?) And they had a manger for them -- a feeding trough with hay. Lacking the room for the baby in the room they were in, then, they went down to the "living room" -- the larger room -- and made use of the manger.

Oh, and the wise men? Yes, they were there, but not that night. They arrived some time later. Up to two years later. (This is clear because Herod "ascertained from them what time the star had appeared" (Matt 2:7) and, when they didn't return, ordered the deaths of "all the male children in Bethlehem and in all that region who were two years old or under, according to the time that he had ascertained from the wise men" (Matt 2:16). And there may or may not have been three. The only reason we get three out of the text is because three gifts are listed (Matt 2:11). Nothing more.

"So, Killjoy," I can hear you say, "we're wrong all over the place. What's your point?" My point is that we shouldn't be too deeply invested in the details -- details we aren't given. My point is that we should pay attention to the Scripture rather than stories we've been told. Like Paul said, "Test everything; hold fast what is good" (1 Thess 5:21). We seem, at times, to be more deeply attached to the stories than the truth in things like this. I've talked with people who are angry when others suggest that December 25th was not Jesus's birthday. "How dare they insult the King of kings?!" Well, that day isn't in Scripture. But when someone questions the exclusivity of Christ or the "saved apart from works" part of the gospel or biblical morality, we get all wishy-washy. I'm saying that the truth is out there, that the facts are given, and that the story is much, much bigger and better than stars and innkeepers and singing angels. I'm suggesting that we -- you and I -- know our Bibles. That's all.