Archbishop admits Nativity is only a myth?

Question

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=JHPSTTVO4EG5FQFIQMGCFGGAVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2007/12/20/nwise120.xml&6=7

reactions?

I wouldn't say he has the final word, but he certainly echoes what scholars have been saying forever... besides, I like to see how people like to argue with the opinion of a man who has spent his entire life studying Theology at high degrees.

IN regards to his faith and his job, it doesn't jeapordize it at all... He is merely saying the story of the nativity is a myth. It doesn't say anything denying Jesus is the savior and what have you.
Just that December is an arbitrary date, the manger story was nonsense and the idea of holy kings visting him are garbage... if that throws off your world view of Christianity, then pick up a book, cuz they're lots of myths involved... My point is that the literal reading of the bible is for lay people, while those who know understand the esoteric nature of the stories. If its over your head, then you are a sheep.

I suggest you people actually read the article. He points out that the traditional story of the Nativity is myth, thats it. There is no scriptural evidence to suggest it is true.

Answer 1

Oh geez, he's not the first to say this, it's been known for a while. They believe Jesus was born in April because the shepards wouldn't be out grazing at night in the winter and also, the amount of time it would take for the three wise men to travel to Bethlehem would mean Jesus would be about three years old before the wise men found him.

We celebrate Jesus' birthday on Christmas but no one ever said it was definitely the day of his birth.

What he said is nothing new to me, but I don't have a problem celebrating Christmas nor will I ever. We celebrate the birth of our savior because we should, it was the greatest moment in history, but just as saints have feast days that we celebrate their lives, it doesn't have to be their birthday.

It was St. Francis that came up with the nativity scene and it was actually to be a year round thing, not just a Christmas decoration.

And people, read the question please. It says he believes the Nativity scene as it is set up is incorrect, not that Jesus' birth never happened. He says it wasn't on Christmas, not that it never happened so everyone stop screaming that he's not saying Jesus wasn't born.

The asker isn't asking that, just what's your reaction to it.

Answer 2

There's myth surrounding the nativity because of mistranslations. It's very likely that the word "stable" was mistranslated, or simply misunderstood. Back in the time of Jesus, entire families lived in duplex-like buildings that also housed the animals. When Mary and Joseph were traveling, and she went into labor, it wasn't that the "inn" was full, but the family they were likely visiting at the time didn't have enough private rooms for them. It's good to remember that families like this had their own livestock, and the livestock often lived in the lower center levels of the house which helped to keep the rest of the house warm. People didn't usually room with the animals, or even directly above them, but in this instance, they wouldn't have had a choice.

It also helps to remember that back in Jesus' time, women did NOT give birth alone, and certainly not with the help of their spouses. They would have had close female relatives around to help. This supports the idea that Mary was visiting family when she went into labor, because that close to her due date, she would not have wanted to deliver among strangers or in an unfamiliar place.

These things weren't noted in the Bible because it wasn't important. It would have been assumed at the time that these passages were written that people knew the circumstances of how to give birth and what would have been socially expected and available.

Answer 3

The telegraph egregiously misquotes the archbishop..

The telegraph says that "Dr Rowan Williams has claimed there was little evidence that the Magi even existed and there was certainly nothing to prove there were three of them or that they were kings." And then it even has this somewhat damning quote: "Matthew's gospel says they are astrologers, wise men, priests from somewhere outside the Roman Empire, that's all we're really told. It works quite well as legend."
Seems pretty bad, huh? So I check the transcript. The quote is *actually*: "Well Matthew's gospel doesn't tell us that there were three of them, doesn't tell us they were kings, doesn't tell us where they came from, it says they're astrologers, wise men, priests from somewhere outside the Roman Empire. That's all we're really told so, yes, 'the three kings with the one from Africa' - that's legend; it works quite well as legend."

OK, so the Archbishop of Canterbury gives an interview in which he's talking about what actually happened there. OK. And really, most of what he said seemed pretty accurate. A little wishy-washy, but throughout the interview he never denies the facts of the gospels, and indeed, he cites the gospels as reliable. And at one point he's talking about the "three kings" bit -- something which I think we all know is suspect. And he refers to that particular bit as legend.
And then the Telegraph flat-out omits the part where he says *what* he says is legend, without even so much as an ellipsis to disclose the fact that it's doing a misleading mash-up of out-of-context quotes. (Specifically the "so, yes, 'the three kings with the one from Africa' - that's legend;") As if that's not enough, a headline is fabricated that substitutes the entire nativity for what's being called a legend.

The telegraph is hopelessly biased trash - it amazes me that anyone still reads it!

Answer 4

sorry I had to throw in a response not necessarily to the question but to the other answerer's. Don't you find it funny that when its something that they don't agree with its "well he wasn't around 2000 years ago so how does he know", yet when its something they do agree with and someone else asks how they know for fact the response is "because it's in the Bible".
I just found this observation a little humorous. I apologize. Carry on.

Answer 5

Yes lets sort out fact and fiction!
I'm sick of the malls being busy because of these three wise men that brought Jesus gifts...
Do we really need to recreate that whole scene.
Why cant Christmas just be about.... AHA... yes Christ!
Let this be myth!

Answer 6

I just posted this, too. I got a lot of teeth gnashing and people cutting down the archbishop. Sad that people will justify their own mythology at any cost - even when EXPERTS are pointing out fallacies and even admitting that the celebration of Christ's birth wasn't in December, but it was purposefully scheduled for the same time as winter festivals to draw in the pagans. Sad.

Answer 7

He's not the only one.

Many even go so far as to say that Jesus is nothing more than an allegory that people decided to personify to get the message across. Then people began to take it to mean that someone named Jesus actually existed.

Answer 8

Well it's about time. Seriously, more people need to read Joseph Campbell and realize that myths are hardly bad things. Actually, before they do that, Christians should read their own Bibles first and learn the difference between what's based right out of scripture and what's an artist's rendition.

Answer 9

If, as the most Reverend Archbishop says that there was no actual Nativity Story (virgin birth, Mary & Joseph, Bethlehem, etc.) then he calls into question 6,000 years of prophecy fulfilled, and yet to be fulfilled.
He also eliminates his own career and job.

Answer 10

I wonder when he will admit that:

Herod the Great had been dead for a number of years.

People did not have to go back to their birth towns for a census.

Nazareth was not there at the alleged time of Jesus.