Away in a Something

Joey EssexHeat Magazine: Will you put a nativity scene under the tree?
Joey Essex: What does that mean?
Heat: You know what a nativity scene is, surely…
Joey: An activity screen? Is it a box you put presents in
Heat: You know, when Jesus was born…
Joey: Oh! The hay round the bottom of the Christmas tree!
Heat: His mum and dad, Mary and Joseph…
Joey: They put him in a cot?
Heat: A crib…
Joey: Like a house? What was that song they used to sing? :Bursts into song “Baby Jesus! Bethlehem! And he used to sit in a little barn?” That was a sick song. I really want to start going to church.
Heat: And the three wise men brought him gold, frankincense and myrh…
Joey: [incredulous] How do you know all of this…

Krish has more on how modern society understands (if at all) what Christmas is about. Here’s the original interview.

7 Comments on “Away in a Something

  1. From the link: “The Christmas story is not just historically true but is life changing.”

    Shouldn’t that be “Christmas stories“? There two, set a decade apart. I’m all for education, but education that gives the whole picture.

      • Matthew’s nativity is set at the time Herod the Great (died 4 B.C.) while Luke’s is set during the census of Census of Quirinius, which Josephus places in A.D. 6-7. The familiar story is a synthesis of these two accounts.

          • The really interesting question to ask of these saving-throws is “does the author believe in biblical infallibility and authority”? If they do, they have a conflict of interest, ’cause they have to reconcile the texts. Since text is an ambiguous signifier of meaning this will always be possible, especially when the texts in question are ancient, and must be translated from dead languages. Doesn’t make the harmonization likely.

            • As opposed to those who want to insist one text is at odds with another in order to support their position the texts aren’t inspired.

              And of course the doctrine of inspiration doesn’t insist on the texts being 100% literally true to be God breathed. Take Job for example…

              • Difference is, allowing the possibility of error doesn’t compel you to find it, whereas the reverse does compel you to deny it. People who say that the birth narratives contradict aren’t doing so to attack biblical inspiration: they’re doing so because that’s where the evidence leads them.

                The synoptic birth narratives are clearly presented as historical accounts. If a person believes the Bible is without error, they have to reconcile them. They can do so in good faith, but so long as they work within that framework, it’s binding.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.