Christmas Facts

[RevSRE]

Christmas Facts

List of Questions We May Have Been Asked?

Most of the questions are from people who do not WANT to Believe the BIBLE.

• Did the Angles SING, λεγόντων mean to speak to declare?
• What was Joseph’s occupation, τέκτονος means craftsman?
• one who works as a builder: carpenter, or stonemason.
• any craftsman (but generally not a metalworker, smith)
• Israel was looking for a KING of the Line of DAVID, Joseph and Mary were in that Line and the rightful heir to DAVID’S Throne. When they traveled to Bethlehem for a census of the people, THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN KNOWN! Page 5-7
• Did Joseph and Mary try to get a room in an INN. Page 8
• Did they stay in a HOUSE? Page 9
• How many Magi were there? See page 11-14
• Was Christmas on Dec 25, the story does not say in any form when. 14
• What is the use of XMAS at Christmas? Page 15

List, List, List!​

He Begat Him, over and over, on and on.
What is the meaning and value of all these Lists?
If we look in Matthew at the first verse, it says; Mat 1:1 The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.
In this verse, we may find the first hint of how to understand the list of "begats". We see Abraham was the father of the Hebrews and that David was the Covenant KING. So here we find something very exciting. Mary was not just a young Jewish girl of Israel obedient to the words of an angel. Mary was in the Royal Line of the throne of Israel. Joseph was not just a carpenter that was true to the Old Testament teachings and a man of God. We can see from the list of names that Joseph was in the line of David and the legitimate Heir to be KING OF ISRAEL. It is important to see that there were only two people in time and history that could have been in the place of Joseph and Mary. Now at that time Israel was a conquered people and ruled by Rome. Israel had had a long history of being a conquered people and ruled by Kings appointed by the conquering Rulers. But it is important the understand that Matthew was writing to the Jews, and he presents his discussion in very Jewish Terms. We will miss the whole meaning of this story if we fail to see Matthew is saying JESUS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS By Birth and by legal right. OK, we know that Joseph was not Jesus earthly father, but his place in the list makes Jesus, his legal son, the Legal Heir, and KING because Joseph married Mary. Still, there is another list of these 'Begats" in Luke 3:23-28 that gives more authority to the fact. It traces Joseph’s side of the family back to David and the King title also. So, from Joseph's side of the family, Jesus is still the heir to the throne of David. note Luke 3:28 says Joseph is the SON OF HELI on the line of Nathan.


Matthew gives the genealogy of Mary in the line of royal inheritance; Luke gives that of natural descent made clear by the following table: Jacob in the royal line HAD NO SON but a daughter Mary, so the lines converge and transfer Joseph to the Royal line as next of kin was normal if there was no male heir.
I know that many have said Matthew is Joseph’s line and Luke is Mary’s, But a careful study of Jewish records has shown Mary to be in the Line of the KING.

First Convergence of the Family lines. From David, Matthew traces the royal line through Solomon to Jechonias, whereas Luke gives the natural line through Nathan to Salathiel. But Jechonias was childless, (Jer_22:30,) so that with him the Solomonic line ended. It is by the two convergences of the family line that we are assured a true heir to David's throne. Salathiel, of the Nathanic line, is transferred to the Royal line as next of kin in the family and came into the royal heirship. By this transfer Salathiel stans in both: namely, the line of natural descent from David through Nathan, and the line of political succession to the crown. From Zorobabel’s son, Abiud, Matthew furnishes a series of heirs; from his other son, Rhesa, Luke gives the natural line of Joseph down to Matthat. But this Matthat is the same as Matthew’s Matthan. Of this Matthat Jacob and Heli are two sons; Jacob being the elder, is the royal line, crown-heir; listed in Matthew. The second, Heli, stands in the natural line, Listed in Luke. Heli’s son is JOSEPH.

Second Convergence; The line in Matthew; Jacob, the crown-heir, has only a daughter, MARY. The royal line thus failing of a direct male heir, causes a second convergence, The next in kin from the family, Joseph son of Heli is thus transferred to the royal line by kin and marries Mary making him also heir by marriage.

These views secure the true Davidic descent of Mary, which is indeed absolutely necessary to the fulfillment of that most explicit divine promise (2Sa_7:12,) “I will set up thy seed after thee which shall proceed out of thy bowels.

This proposal is sometimes linked to the judgment pronounced against the line of Solomon by Jeremiah, who prophesied that no descendant of Jehoiakim (Jeremiah 36:30) or his son Jechoniah (Jeremiah 22:24–30) would sit on the throne of David. Jesus avoided this judgment because he was the legal descendant—i.e. through Mary—rather than the physical descendant of David—through Joseph.
Zondervan Bible studies, ZA Blog

And here we come to another interesting point, the list here goes all the way back to Adam! If the point was to establish Jesus as the true heir to David's throne, why go all the way back to Adam?

By the discussion and documentation given so far, I feel we have established that Jesus is the Heir to David’s throne and the true seed of Abraham. The list going all the way back to Adam says there is still more to this discussion.

That “More” is to be found in a promise made in Genesis 3:15.

Also, it is seen in the fact that Adam and Eve did not die immediately in the garden. A SUBSTITUTE was offered, and a Blood sacrifice was made which was the symbol of the PROMISE, the promise of a MESSIAH, a CHRIST, a SAVIOR, and that was JESUS!

In Genesis 3:15 The same VERB is used for Seed of Eve and of the serpent, but it is obvious that Satan gets the worst end of the deal. This seems to refer to the crucifixion as the means of the substitutionary atonement for all humans when understood from the NT perspective.

The Genesis 3:15 promise is and always has been the only way of Salvation and that is the substitutionary, vicarious work of Jesus in His death on the cross and the Easter Morning Resurrection.

We say, “He is risen” and another will answer "He is risen indeed", BUT there is MORE, for if I am crucified with Christ, He is my Sovereign LORD, I give my all to Him and share in His Cross, I AM RISEN WITH HIM!!

We may justly say HE IS RISEN and I in HIM!

 

[RevSRE]

Was Jesus born among the animals in the stable because there was no room for Joseph and Mary at the inn?
Many Churches and Church groups will remember the Nativity story this Christmas. A main character of the play an innkeeper eventually forced to turn away Joseph and Mary (who had just arrived in Bethlehem) because the hotel was completely booked. However, the innkeeper still found room for them in one of the area stables. The cast perform wonderfully, and their portrayal of the night Christ was born is fairly common, but how does it compare to the Word of God?
Information about Christ's birth is recorded in the second chapter of Luke:
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. And she brought forth her firstborn Son, and wrapped Him in swaddling cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn. (Luke 2:4–7)

It may come as a surprise to many that the Bible does not provide us with many more details than this about the birth of Christ. The following passages in Luke 2 discuss the angel's announcement of Christ's birth to the shepherds and the shepherds' subsequent visit to see Jesus. Matthew 1:24–25 states that Joseph took Mary as "his wife, and did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son. And he called His name JESUS." The following chapter discusses the visit of the Magi some time later and the escape to Egypt.

A few points must be made as we compare the modern retelling of the birth of Jesus with the truth of Scripture.

First, the Bible certainly teaches that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, but it does not state that Joseph and Mary arrived in that town just in time for her to deliver. In fact, this scenario is highly unlikely since it is doubtful that the two would attempt to make the arduous 70-mile trip from Nazareth in the final stages of her pregnancy. Also, Luke 2:6 implies that they were in Bethlehem for a while before Jesus was born ("while they were there, the days were completed").

Second, the Bible makes no mention of any innkeeper who told them that the inn was full for the night. The reason we imagine this scenario is because the translators of most English versions have chosen the word "inn, or guest chamber" to translate the Greek word καταλυμα (kataluma), which gives modern readers the wrong impression.1

The word καταλυμα as used here means the ending of a trip. Translators IMPLY this ending of a trip would be to stay in an INN or guest room, It does not SAY that.

And she brought forth her firstborn Son, and wrapped Him in swaddling cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn. place for them at the end of the trip.

This means there was no NORMAL lodging in the House where they stayed, A private “Bed Room” where Mary had more privacy, but, they stayed in a common room. At this time in history this Common room would have also been a part of the family living quarters where small animals, Lambs, may have stayed for extra attention as needed, so a manger there was not uncommon. Use of καταλυμα as a guest Chamber goes back to John Wycliffe’ first translation of the Bible to English. The Logical place to Stay at the END OF A TRIP is a guest chamber.

This is also the “abode of a family οἰκίαν oikian” where the Magi came the see the Child. And when they came to the house Family, they saw the young child with Mary his mother,

This word okian is like CHURCH, it refers to the PEOPLE, but it can be used of the house, a building.

That may not sound convincing to most people who are familiar with the traditional telling of the Christmas account. But consider that the Greek language has a word for hotel or inn. In fact, Luke used it in Luke 10:34, when he wrote about the Good Samaritan who took the beaten man to the "inn" (pandocheion, πανδοχειον) and paid the "innkeeper" (pandochei, πανδοχει, v. 35) to care for the man.
THE BIBLE STATES THAT THERE WAS NO ROOM FOR THEM IN THE KATALUMA, WHICH WOULD BE BETTER TRANSLATED AS “the end of the trip”
Since Luke was quite familiar with the proper term for inn, why didn't he use it in the account of the birth of Jesus? The probable answer is that Joseph and Mary did not attempt to stay at an inn. The Bible states that at the Kataluma, “end of traveling” there was “NO Normal Dwelling where they would stay.”
Joseph and Mary returned to Joseph's ancestral home of Bethlehem because of the census (Luke 2:1–4).2 As the census was proclaimed throughout the Roman Empire, many Jewish families would have needed to travel to Bethlehem during this time and lodged with relatives who lived in the town.
Joseph and Mary probably stayed with Joseph's relatives in Bethlehem, but because of the large influx of people, the house would have been crowded and at the kataluma “end of traveling” the House was full. Consequently, Joseph and Mary would have been relegated to living in the lower level of the house. It is hard to believe that pregnant Mary would have been turned away from a relative's home in a society that greatly valued familial ties.

Archaeologists have excavated first century homes from the Judean hill country. They have discovered that the upper level served as a guest chamber while the lower level served as the living and dining rooms. Oftentimes, the more vulnerable animals would be brought in at night to protect them from the cold and theft.

This is where the manger comes into play. Mary likely gave birth to Jesus in the lower level of a crowded house, in which some of the animals had been brought in for the night. She then wrapped Jesus in swaddling cloths and laid Him in the manger (feeding box).

Of course, we should never become so focused on the peripheral details of this account that we miss the most important point. Jesus Christ, the eternal Son of God, became a descendant of Adam so that He could ultimately go to the Cross and die in our place. Now the descendants of Adam can be saved from an eternity of separation from their Creator. God gave His Son to this world, which is the greatest gift that could ever be given. Let us celebrate this truth and tell the world about God's amazing love.
Many have made this Journey, some only in their mind, others deeply in their heart, yet all in some way made the Journey of the Magi and a young Jewish couple.
Christmas is a Journey to Bethlehem’s Manger where a King was Born.
In the many years since that day people have denied, twisted, doubted, even discredited parts of the story. BUT, it is all still true. It may have taken a Roman Emperor’s decree to get Joseph and Mary to go to the correct town, it may have required a Special Star to lead the Magi to the King, It took a Heavenly Host of Angels speaking to inform simple shepherds of the birth. BUT,

We are speaking of the Self Existent Most High GOD telling the world
“My Son is BORN!”
The PROMISE is fulfilled,
There is HOPE IN THE WORLD!

I for one do not see any problem with the story, even to say GOD could get the Magi there when Jesus was BORN, not much later. I believe in miracles,

 

[RevSRE]

Babylon to Bethlehem via Jerusalem 1160 km or 720.8 miles. Walking 234 hours, 73 days, with other travel time requirements 3 to 4 months. (I did not say the Magi used google maps)

Matthew 2:1, And Jesus having been born in Bethlehem of Judea, in the days of Herod the king, lo, mages from the east came to Jerusalem, 2, saying, 'Where is he who was born king of the Jews? for we saw his star in the east, and we came to worship him.' 3, And Herod the king having heard, was stirred, and all Jerusalem with him, 4, and having gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he was inquiring from them where the Christ is born. 5, And they said to him, 'In Bethlehem of Judea, for thus it hath been written through the prophet, 6, And thou, Bethlehem, the land of Judah, thou art by no means the least among the leaders of Judah, for out of thee shall come one leading, who shall feed My people Israel.' 7, Then Herod, privately having called the mages, did inquire exactly from them the time of the appearing star, 8, and having sent them to Bethlehem, he said, 'Having gone--inquire ye exactly for the child, and whenever ye may have found, bring me back word, that I also having come may bow to him.'9, And they, having heard the king, departed, and lo, the star, that they did see in the east, did go before them, till, having come, it stood over where the child was.10, And having seen the star, they rejoiced with exceeding great joy, 11, and having come to the family, they found the child with Mary his mother, and having fallen down they bowed to him, and having opened their treasures, they presented to him gifts, gold, and frankincense, and myrrh,

When Jesus was born. Though the home of Joseph and Mary was Nazareth, prophecy had declared that Christ should be born at Bethlehem, the native place of David; and this was accomplished by the agency of the Roman emperor.

“In those days” necessarily takes in time enough for the issuance of the imperial decree and its execution in Palestine. All that Luke is concerned about is to indicate how this imperial decree affected the birth of Jesus. Falling into the time in which this decree was put into effect in Palestine, the birth occurred in Bethlehem, not in Nazareth. If such a decree had not been issued, Joseph and Mary would not have been compelled to go to Bethlehem just at this time. Luke alone among the evangelists mentions the names of Roman emperors, and he states them correctly: Augustus Cæsar (Octavian) but Cæsar Augustus (Tiberius) (3:1). Luke connects sacred with secular history. He alone informs us about this imperial decree which included “all the inhabited world.”
Because Greek and Roman historians reported nothing about this great innovation that was inaugurated by Augustus, the critics seized upon Luke’s testimony and attacked his veracity regarding this decree and all else connected therewith. Until a few years ago the critics had things pretty much to themselves, and all one could do was to trust to the reliability of Luke. But now a mass of papyri and several inscriptions have reversed the situation. The evidence is now at hand that Augustus did issue the decree of which Luke speaks, that it was a new, epoch-making measure, and that it inaugurated a periodic enrollment in the empire which continued for over two centuries at intervals of fourteen years. See the writings of W. M. Ramsay.
The pride of the Jews in their genealogies would lead them to the head cities of their families; thus, Mary traversed with her husband the length of the land, from Nazareth to Bethlehem, the city of David (89.48 miles), to whose house they both belonged.

Nazareth to Bethlehem 145 km. 89.48 miles 31 hours walking, 4 days normally.
With a young, expecting mother at least a week.
In Bethlehem of Judea. Bethlehem was one of the oldest places in the land of Judea, and had been in existence at least 1,500 years before the Savior was born. It was the scene of events so touchingly related in the Book of Ruth. It was known as the city of David because it was his birthplace. The little town has an imposing aspect and commanding site.
In the days of Herod the king. This statement gives data for ascertaining the time of the birth of Jesus. It is conceded that it took place in the last year of Herod's reign. But it is known that Herod died about three years before the first year of our era. Therefore, if the Savior was born "in the days of king Herod," he must have been about four years earlier than the date assigned. The difference is in the calendars in use at that time and now.

 

[RevSRE]

There came wise men from the east. The word rendered "wise men" is more correctly "Magi," a term which designates an order of priests and philosophers which belonged originally to Persia and who were extensively distributed over the region of the Euphrates. Those described in the book of Daniel as wise men, astrologers, and magicians, belonged to this order.

Herod had several reasons to fear the Magi and the repercussions of any action he might take against them. His visitors were high-level Parthian priests and very influential members of one of Parthia's two assemblies who elected the empire's monarchs.

Parthia as an empire rivaled that of Rome's at the time of Christ, They were the decedents of Persia and Babylon. In fact, the Parthians dealt the Romans one of their worst defeats in history around 53 B.C. at the battle of Carrhae.

The Magi, who were willing to traverse 1,000+ miles from their home, entered Jerusalem with a large entourage that included servants, cooks, and so on worthy of those of high rank, It would take 4 months to make the trip. They also came with an armed escort of perhaps a few hundred Parthian soldiers, not only to protect their safety, but also to guard the precious gifts they carried.

The Magi and the large group that came with them was so large that when they first entered Jerusalem both the city and Herod were greatly alarmed (Matthew 2:3)!



We could remember that these “Wise Men” are from a class of Magi that studied history and the mystery of the Stars. Such knew of three Hebrew men cast into a furnace 7 times hotter than normal only the meet the Jesus Born They would visit on this Day. They knew of a Daniel cast into the Lion’s Den only to be rejoicing in the Morning. THEY KNEW OF A Persian King that declared all would revere the GOD OF DANIEL. It is not Strange that such Men would travel so far to see this KING.



Where is he that is born King of the Jews? Their question shows two things: 1. That they partook of the general expectation that about this time there would appear in the East a Ruler divinely appointed to his mission. The works of profane writers of this period show that this expectation was general. 2. It is plain that the wise men misapprehended the mission of Christ, and expected him to be a secular king. This is important because most others did also, they did not see Jesus’ Kingdom in the Hearts of His People, but as a ruler like other nations.



We have seen his star in the east. No certain conclusion can be reached as to what this appearance in the heavens was. This language implies a miraculous appearance, like a star, which guided the steps of the wise men. Such a view is no less probable than that a pillar of fire should have guided Israel in the wildernass.

It seemed a part of God's plan that Gentiles as well as Jews should offer homage to the infant King.

Herod . . . was troubled. The trouble of Herod is easily accounted for. He was a usurper. This Title “King of the JEWS” was the title Herod used but it was not his. This news seemed to portend a legitimate king, a rival for the throne, around whom the Jewish nation would rally.

All Jerusalem with him. The "scribes" were the successors of Ezra, the official copyists of the Scripture, who naturally became its expounders, and were the theologians of the time of Christ. The priests, as the head of the Jewish religion, and the scribes, were the proper persons to answer Herod's question.

Where Christ should be born. This demand concedes: 1. That the Jews expected a Messiah; 2. That the Scriptures had foretold his coming; 3. That the very place of his birth had been pointed out.

And thou Bethlehem. The quotation is made freely from the Septuagint version "But thou Bethlehem Ephrata, too small to be among the thousands of Judah (i. e., the towns where the heads of thousands resided, the chief towns in the distribution of the tribes), out of thee shall come forth one who is to be the ruler of Israel."

Rulers lived in towns, where the princes or head of thousands lived.

Then Herod privily called the wise men. The crafty and cruel king had gained one point: he now knew where the Christ was to be born. He therefore asks another question of the wise men, by which he hopes to ascertain the age of the royal child.

What time the star appeared. The fact that, as stated below, he slew the children of two years and under, denotes that the star had been seen first about two years before, but that only says seen so the Magi had time to understand it meaning and prepare the trip.

They went their way. So the star . . . went before them.

And when they saw the star. This language shows that for a time, at least, they had not seen the star until they left Jerusalem for Bethlehem. Its reappearance caused them great rejoicing, because it showed them that their quest was not in vain.

And they came to the family. Not, probably, the stable where the Lord was born, but a temporary home obtained after the crowd had left. Many suppose that Joseph and Mary remained at Bethlehem until the forty days of purification were passed; that the young child was presented in the temple as recorded in Luk 2:22; that then they returned to Bethlehem; were visited shortly after by the wise man, and thence fled into Egypt. If this is correct, the young child must have been six or seven weeks old at the time of the visit.

With Mary his mother. The child was probably in the mother's arms.

They fell down and worshipped him.

When they had opened their treasures. They had brought these all the way from the East as an offering. They offer to him gifts such as were offered to kings by ambassadors or vassals.

Gold. A usual royal offering to a King for the ……..……………….office as King.

Frankincense. A costly and fragrant gum, Incense for the……..office of a Priest.

Myrrh is a spice used in embalming one for the Grave, Savior’s office as the Sacrifice.

The providence of God is seen in these gifts. It provided the means necessary for the flight to Egypt that was to follow at once, and to sustain the holy family in a foreign land.

Commentary from RCH Lenski.

 

[RevSRE]

The Date of Christmas

No one knows the real birthday of Jesus! No date is given in the Bible, so why do we celebrate it on the 25th December? The early Christians certainly had many arguments as to when it should be celebrated! Also, the birth of Jesus probably didn't happen in the year 1 but slightly earlier in 4 BC.
The first recorded date of Christmas being celebrated on December 25th was in 336, during the time of the Roman Emperor Constantine (he was the first Christian Roman Emperor). But it was not an official Roman state festival at this time.
However, there are many different traditions and theories as to why Christmas is celebrated on December 25th.
A very early Christian tradition said that the day when Mary was told that she would have a very special baby, Jesus (called the Annunciation) was on March 25th - and it's still celebrated today on the 25th March. Nine months after the 25th March is the 25th December!
March 25th was also the day some early Christians thought the world had been made, and also the day that Jesus died on when he was an adult (Nisan 14 in the Jewish calendar) and they thought that Jesus was conceived and had died on the same day of the year.
Christmas had also been celebrated by the early Church on January 6th, when they also celebrated the Epiphany (which means the revelation that Jesus was God's son) and the Baptism of Jesus. (Like the December 25th date above, this was based on a calculation of Jesus's death/conception but from the 6th April not the 25th March.) Now Epiphany mainly celebrates the visit of the Wise Men to the baby Jesus, but back then it celebrated both things! Jesus's Baptism was originally seen as more important than his birth, as this was when he started his ministry.
Most of the world uses the 'Gregorian Calendar' implemented by Pope Gregory XIII in 1582. Before that the 'Roman' or Julian Calendar was used (named after Julius Caesar). The Gregorian calendar is more accurate than the Roman calendar which had too many days in a year! When the switch was made 10 days were lost, so that the day that followed the 4th October 1582 was 15th October 1582. In the UK the change of calendars was made in 1752. The day after 2nd September 1752 was 14th September 1752.
Many Orthodox and Coptic Churches still use the Julian Calendar and so celebrate Christmas on the 7th January (which is when December 25th would have been on the Julian calendar). And the Armenian Apostolic Church celebrates it on the 6th January! In some part of the UK, January 6th is still called 'Old Christmas' as this would have been the day that Christmas would have celebrated on, if the calendar hadn't been changed. Some people didn't want to use the new calendar as they thought it 'cheated' them out of 11 days!
St Augustine of Canterbury was the person who probably started the widespread celebration of Christmas in large parts of England by introducing Christianity to the regions run by the Anglo-Saxons in the 6th century (other Celtic parts of Britain were already Christian but there aren't many documents about if or how they celebrated the birth of Jesus). St Augustine of Canterbury was sent by Pope Gregory the Great in Rome and that church used the Roman Calendar, so western countries celebrate Christmas on the 25th December. Then people from Britain and Western Europe took Christmas on the 25th December all over the world!
The year that Jesus was born isn't known. The calendar system we have now was created in the 6th Century by a monk called Dionysius Exiguous. He was actually trying to create a better system for working out when Easter should be celebrated, based on a new calendar with the birth of Jesus being in the year 1. However, he made a mistake in his math and so got the possible year of Jesus's birth wrong! The calendar is wrong not the Bible!
Most scholars now think that Jesus was born in 4 BC. Before Dionysius's new calendars, years were normally dated from the reigns of Roman Emperors. The new calendar became more widely used from the 8th Century when the 'Venerable Bede of North Umbria' used it in his 'new' history book! There is no year '0'. Bede started dating things before the year 1 and used 1 BC as the first year before 1. At that time in Europe, the number 0 didn't exist in math - it only arrived in Europe in the 11th to 13th centuries!
So whenever you celebrate Christmas, remember that you're celebrating a real event that happened about 2000 years ago, that God sent his Son into the world as a Christmas present for everyone!

Christmas or Xmas?

Christmas is also sometimes known as Xmas. Some people don't think it's correct to call Christmas 'Xmas' as that takes the 'Christ' (Jesus) out of Christmas. (As Christmas comes from Christ-Mass, the Church service that celebrates the birth of Jesus.)

X = chi P = rho

But that is not quite right! In the Greek language and alphabet, the letter that looks like an X is the Greek letter chi / Χ (pronounced 'kye' - it rhymes with 'eye') which is the first letter of the Greek word for Christ, Christos.

Constantine used the first two letters of Christos in the Greek alphabet 'chi' and 'rho' to create a monogram (symbol) to represent the name of Jesus. He said he was told to, “GO AND IN THIS NAME CONQUER!”

The symbol of a fish is sometimes used by Christians (you might see a fish sticker on a car or someone wearing a little fish badge). This comes from the time when the first Christians had to meet in secret, as the Romans wanted to kill them (before Emperor Constantine became a Christian). Jesus had said that he wanted to make his followers 'Fishers of Men', so people started to use that symbol.


When two Christians met, one person drew half a basic fish shape (often using their foot in the dust on the ground) and the other person drew the other half of the fish. The Greek word for fish is ἰχθύας, 'Ichthus'. There are five Greek letters in the word. It can also make up a sentence of Christian beliefs 'Ie-sous Christos Theou Huios So-te-r' which in English means "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour". The second letter of these five letter is X or Χριστοῦ Christos.

So Xmas can also mean Christmas; but it should also be pronounced 'Christmas' rather than 'ex-mas'!

 

[RevSRE]

Christmas Facts

List of Questions We May Have Been Asked?

Most of the questions are from people who do not WANT to Believe the BIBLE.

• Did the Angles SING, λεγόντων mean to speak to declare?
• What was Joseph’s occupation, τέκτονος means craftsman?
• one who works as a builder: carpenter, or stonemason.
• any craftsman (but generally not a metalworker, smith)
• Israel was looking for a KING of the Line of DAVID, Joseph and Mary were in that Line and the rightful heir to DAVID’S Throne. When they traveled to Bethlehem for a census of the people, THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN KNOWN! Page 5-7
• Did Joseph and Mary try to get a room in an INN. Page 8
• Did they stay in a HOUSE? Page 9
• How many Magi were there? See page 11-14
• Was Christmas on Dec 25, the story does not say in any form when. 14
• What is the use of XMAS at Christmas? Page 15

List, List, List!​

He Begat Him, over and over, on and on.
What is the meaning and value of all these Lists?
If we look in Matthew at the first verse, it says; Mat 1:1 The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.
In this verse, we may find the first hint of how to understand the list of "begats". We see Abraham was the father of the Hebrews and that David was the Covenant KING. So here we find something very exciting. Mary was not just a young Jewish girl of Israel obedient to the words of an angel. Mary was in the Royal Line of the throne of Israel. Joseph was not just a carpenter that was true to the Old Testament teachings and a man of God. We can see from the list of names that Joseph was in the line of David and the legitimate Heir to be KING OF ISRAEL. It is important to see that there were only two people in time and history that could have been in the place of Joseph and Mary. View attachment 16825Now at that time Israel was a conquered people and ruled by Rome. Israel had had a long history of being a conquered people and ruled by Kings appointed by the conquering Rulers. But it is important the understand that Matthew was writing to the Jews, and he presents his discussion in very Jewish Terms. We will miss the whole meaning of this story if we fail to see Matthew is saying JESUS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS By Birth and by legal right. OK, we know that Joseph was not Jesus earthly father, but his place in the list makes Jesus, his legal son, the Legal Heir, and KING because Joseph married Mary. Still, there is another list of these 'Begats" in Luke 3:23-28 that gives more authority to the fact. It traces Joseph’s side of the family back to David and the King title also. So, from Joseph's side of the family, Jesus is still the heir to the throne of David. note Luke 3:28 says Joseph is the SON OF HELI on the line of Nathan.
View attachment 16824

Matthew gives the genealogy of Mary in the line of royal inheritance; Luke gives that of natural descent made clear by the following table: Jacob in the royal line HAD NO SON but a daughter Mary, so the lines converge and transfer Joseph to the Royal line as next of kin was normal if there was no male heir.
I know that many have said Matthew is Joseph’s line and Luke is Mary’s, But a careful study of Jewish records has shown Mary to be in the Line of the KING.

First Convergence of the Family lines. From David, Matthew traces the royal line through Solomon to Jechonias, whereas Luke gives the natural line through Nathan to Salathiel. But Jechonias was childless, (Jer_22:30,) so that with him the Solomonic line ended. It is by the two convergences of the family line that we are assured a true heir to David's throne. Salathiel, of the Nathanic line, is transferred to the Royal line as next of kin in the family and came into the royal heirship. By this transfer Salathiel stans in both: namely, the line of natural descent from David through Nathan, and the line of political succession to the crown. From Zorobabel’s son, Abiud, Matthew furnishes a series of heirs; from his other son, Rhesa, Luke gives the natural line of Joseph down to Matthat. But this Matthat is the same as Matthew’s Matthan. Of this Matthat Jacob and Heli are two sons; Jacob being the elder, is the royal line, crown-heir; listed in Matthew. The second, Heli, stands in the natural line, Listed in Luke. Heli’s son is JOSEPH.

Second Convergence; The line in Matthew; Jacob, the crown-heir, has only a daughter, MARY. The royal line thus failing of a direct male heir, causes a second convergence, The next in kin from the family, Joseph son of Heli is thus transferred to the royal line by kin and marries Mary making him also heir by marriage.

These views secure the true Davidic descent of Mary, which is indeed absolutely necessary to the fulfillment of that most explicit divine promise (2Sa_7:12,) “I will set up thy seed after thee which shall proceed out of thy bowels.

This proposal is sometimes linked to the judgment pronounced against the line of Solomon by Jeremiah, who prophesied that no descendant of Jehoiakim (Jeremiah 36:30) or his son Jechoniah (Jeremiah 22:24–30) would sit on the throne of David. Jesus avoided this judgment because he was the legal descendant—i.e. through Mary—rather than the physical descendant of David—through Joseph.
Zondervan Bible studies, ZA Blog

And here we come to another interesting point, the list here goes all the way back to Adam! If the point was to establish Jesus as the true heir to David's throne, why go all the way back to Adam?

By the discussion and documentation given so far, I feel we have established that Jesus is the Heir to David’s throne and the true seed of Abraham. The list going all the way back to Adam says there is still more to this discussion.

That “More” is to be found in a promise made in Genesis 3:15.

Also, it is seen in the fact that Adam and Eve did not die immediately in the garden. A SUBSTITUTE was offered, and a Blood sacrifice was made which was the symbol of the PROMISE, the promise of a MESSIAH, a CHRIST, a SAVIOR, and that was JESUS!

In Genesis 3:15 The same VERB is used for Seed of Eve and of the serpent, but it is obvious that Satan gets the worst end of the deal. This seems to refer to the crucifixion as the means of the substitutionary atonement for all humans when understood from the NT perspective.

The Genesis 3:15 promise is and always has been the only way of Salvation and that is the substitutionary, vicarious work of Jesus in His death on the cross and the Easter Morning Resurrection.

We say, “He is risen” and another will answer "He is risen indeed", BUT there is MORE, for if I am crucified with Christ, He is my Sovereign LORD, I give my all to Him and share in His Cross, I AM RISEN WITH HIM!!

We may justly say HE IS RISEN and I in HIM!

Israel was looking for a KING of the Line of DAVID, Joseph and Mary were that Line and the rightful heir to DAVID’S Throne. When they traveled to Bethlehem for a census of the people, THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN KNOWN! Their Child WAS also a future KING! They would not have traveled ALONE, the family Both Joseph and Mary’ were of the line of David they ALL would have to go to Bethlehem for the censes. No Mother would allow a daughter to make that trip alone when she, the mother, had to make the trip Also. This GROUP OF THE ROYAL FAMILY OF ISRAEL would have gone to the home of Family. Joseph his mother and father, MARY and her mother and father, siblings on both sides, other Family no mentioned, servants to handle tents, food, and animals – ( this trip would take a week to 12 days) this was normal travel for these people in this time.