Cutting Edge
Sunday, December 18, 2005
I hope you all have a silly solstice
I've been thinking about Christmas. Naturally. It is, after all, the fourth week of Advent. Today's gospel reading started "in the sixth month..." of the year, I'm assuming, and Mary was visited in the sixth month, and presumably, started her sacred pregnancy. So, if there are twelve months in the year, then Jesus was born in the third month of the year, and I think the year started near the Vernal Equinox. Of course, the tales of shepherds in the fields hearing the announcement of the birth of Christ is probably not something that would happen in the middle of winter, yet here we are, in the middle of winter, celebrating the birth of Christ.
I does make sense. Most religions have some sort of idea that the Sun represents,or is controlled by, some god or natural spirit, but the Sun has a personality which must be appeased. The clockwatchers could see the days getting shorter, the nights longer, colder, wilder, more uncertain. Despite the evidence of their memories they couldn't escape the belief that the Sun would one year decide not to come back.
Of course, Christianity does not ascribe a personality to the sun. No angel is charged with carrying it across the heavens. It was put in place by God during creation. The sun is a thing in the Christian worldview. So what do Christians do about watching their neighbors celebrating the return of the sun? They trump all the celebrations by moving the Celebration of the Birth of Christ to the date of the Solstice. The world is dark, sin (for the Christian worldview) is growing. The days were dark, Jerusalem, the City of God, was under the thumb of the Romans, and yet, when things were looking bad, God brought Light into the world. What other day is more appropriate? ¶ 9:02 PM 0 comments
I does make sense. Most religions have some sort of idea that the Sun represents,or is controlled by, some god or natural spirit, but the Sun has a personality which must be appeased. The clockwatchers could see the days getting shorter, the nights longer, colder, wilder, more uncertain. Despite the evidence of their memories they couldn't escape the belief that the Sun would one year decide not to come back.
Of course, Christianity does not ascribe a personality to the sun. No angel is charged with carrying it across the heavens. It was put in place by God during creation. The sun is a thing in the Christian worldview. So what do Christians do about watching their neighbors celebrating the return of the sun? They trump all the celebrations by moving the Celebration of the Birth of Christ to the date of the Solstice. The world is dark, sin (for the Christian worldview) is growing. The days were dark, Jerusalem, the City of God, was under the thumb of the Romans, and yet, when things were looking bad, God brought Light into the world. What other day is more appropriate? ¶ 9:02 PM 0 comments
Monday, December 05, 2005
Thoughts on Mary, Mother of Jesus
A few nights ago my wife and I were watching a special of PBS about the great houses of worship in America. One of them was a Catholic parish with a large dome that depicted the Assumption of Mary, and the person talking about the painting said that it gives a perfect representation of the scene, right out of the Bible (Emphasis mine). I'd like to know which Bible they were reading, because I've read the Bible a lot, and I haven't found the verse that deals with the Assumtion of Mary in the canonical texts. I think I have seen a mention of it in the so-called "heretical" texts, along with the birth of Mary and the Immaculate Conception, which is also not in the Bible.
Then we saw a cable version of Dogma, which isn't as funny on cable, but it puts forth the argument that Mary had other children after Jesus. This is not acceptable to Catholic Dogma, apparently. One argument for Jesus having siblings through Mary and Joseph is found in Mark 6:3
Another bit of proof that Mary was not a virgin all her life is found in Luke 2:7 (thanks to Charles Schultz, most people have heard this one)
Then we saw a cable version of Dogma, which isn't as funny on cable, but it puts forth the argument that Mary had other children after Jesus. This is not acceptable to Catholic Dogma, apparently. One argument for Jesus having siblings through Mary and Joseph is found in Mark 6:3
Is this not the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us(I'm using the King James Version, which is not my standard translation.) Now the Christian Church has also written stories in the "heretical" books that Joseph was an old man, a widower, with other children before he was assigned to take Mary for a wife, therefore (so the theory goes) the brothers and sisters mentioned in Mark 6:3 are his older step siblings, who for some reason were not included in the nativity scenes or the flight into Egypt. Basically, it's a lot of baggage added to the stories to protect Mary as a "perpetual virgin."
Another bit of proof that Mary was not a virgin all her life is found in Luke 2:7 (thanks to Charles Schultz, most people have heard this one)
And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him...and for even more proof (Matthew 1:25):
And [Joseph] knew her not until she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JesusOf course "knew her" meant "intercourse" in the KJV, and other translations make this clearer. In short, Joseph and Mary consummated their marriage (as was proper for the time) and Jesus is her firstborn son. We read about some new translations of the Bible in today's Oregonian and there are samples of John 3:16 from each translation. Each one uses the phrase "one and only Son", which isn't in the more traditional translations, and we're trying to figure out why Jesus has to be Mary's only son and God's only Son. ¶ 9:33 AM 0 comments
