Nativity @ MindSay 
christmas
Room for Mary and Joseph at the Inn
Stuart Shepard, director of digital media for Focus on the Family Action, imagines a brand-new holiday in his Stoplight video commentary.
12-17-2007
This Christmas, There’s Room in the Inn for Mary and Joseph
Travelodge, a British hotel chain, is promising a free night’s stay to couples named Mary and Joseph.
"The 'gift' of a free night's stay is to make up for the hotel industry not having any rooms left on Christmas Eve over 2,000 years ago when the original 'Mary and Joseph' had to settle for the night in a stable," the company says on its Web site.
The offer is good at any of the chain’s 322 hotels in the United Kingdom. Any couple able to show proof of identity will receive one free night in a family room. The offer is good from Christmas Eve to Jan. 5.
"We've had a lot of interest," hotel spokeswoman Shakila Ahmed told CNN. "I think people like the fact that it resonates with the Nativity story at a time when the actual meaning of Christmas often becomes forgotten in festive overkill."
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Stuart Shepard, director of digital media for Focus on the Family Action, imagines a brand-new holiday in his Stoplight video commentary.
News to peruse
A few news items from here 'n there:
In the last month our li'l town has seen a long running encampment of "homeless" moved out of their tents by the railroad that owns the land. Homeless, maybe. Some of the campers had lived there over a year. The railroad claimed it was for safety and to stop the crews from being panhandled.
In an unrelated affair, a nearby park where "homeless people" gathered and often snoozed away on park benches was closed for renovations. It's reopening with snooze-proof benches. I'll post a photo next time I go down there. The benches have dividers every 2 feet or so. No more stretched-out snoozin'.
This same town has a plan to install obsolete parking meters as objects-d'art in touristy areas, not to collect parking fees, but to solicit donations that will go to help fund social agencies that help the homeless. A concurrent PR blitz will urge folks to feed the meters instead of donating to panhandlers. The panhandlers, being fairly shrewd business types, (they aren't payin' taxes) will go where the pastures, and handouts, are greener and leave our downtown tourists alone.
"Hey bud, spare a buck or 2 so a man can get a decent meal?"
"Umm, sorry. I gave at the meter."
And yesterday they ("they") announced that Jesus would not be welcome in the Christmas parade, which has been scheduled as the ultimate finale to the opening day of the holiday shopping season. The parade and festivities have been renamed to omit the word "Christmas," to make the event inclusive to all. Specifically they tossed out the live Nativity float a local church planned to enter.
Santa is still invited, but his reindeer will be in violation of the animal ordinance.
And the city, which doesn't allow its citizens, homeless or not, (can you be both?) to keep goats in their yards, is using goats to munch the kudzu from a local hillside. The goats are contained by a fence that has mostly kept them inside and curious children out. Mostly.
Well, what do y'all think about all this? Will the homeless guys stop snoozin' in the park? Will the panhandlers give up on on the tourists? Will Jesus show up at the Holiday Parade? If he does will anyone notice?
Update flash: Due to a deluge of protests, they are letting the scene depicting the Nativity back into the Christmas, ummm, holiday festival. Well, sort of. Jesus still can't be in the parade, but the church can set up their living Nativity in a nearby area that will be open for groups of any faith to have a presence.
In the last month our li'l town has seen a long running encampment of "homeless" moved out of their tents by the railroad that owns the land. Homeless, maybe. Some of the campers had lived there over a year. The railroad claimed it was for safety and to stop the crews from being panhandled.
In an unrelated affair, a nearby park where "homeless people" gathered and often snoozed away on park benches was closed for renovations. It's reopening with snooze-proof benches. I'll post a photo next time I go down there. The benches have dividers every 2 feet or so. No more stretched-out snoozin'.
This same town has a plan to install obsolete parking meters as objects-d'art in touristy areas, not to collect parking fees, but to solicit donations that will go to help fund social agencies that help the homeless. A concurrent PR blitz will urge folks to feed the meters instead of donating to panhandlers. The panhandlers, being fairly shrewd business types, (they aren't payin' taxes) will go where the pastures, and handouts, are greener and leave our downtown tourists alone.
"Hey bud, spare a buck or 2 so a man can get a decent meal?"
"Umm, sorry. I gave at the meter."
And yesterday they ("they") announced that Jesus would not be welcome in the Christmas parade, which has been scheduled as the ultimate finale to the opening day of the holiday shopping season. The parade and festivities have been renamed to omit the word "Christmas," to make the event inclusive to all. Specifically they tossed out the live Nativity float a local church planned to enter.
Santa is still invited, but his reindeer will be in violation of the animal ordinance.
And the city, which doesn't allow its citizens, homeless or not, (can you be both?) to keep goats in their yards, is using goats to munch the kudzu from a local hillside. The goats are contained by a fence that has mostly kept them inside and curious children out. Mostly.
Well, what do y'all think about all this? Will the homeless guys stop snoozin' in the park? Will the panhandlers give up on on the tourists? Will Jesus show up at the Holiday Parade? If he does will anyone notice?
Update flash: Due to a deluge of protests, they are letting the scene depicting the Nativity back into the Christmas, ummm, holiday festival. Well, sort of. Jesus still can't be in the parade, but the church can set up their living Nativity in a nearby area that will be open for groups of any faith to have a presence.
Joseph is gonna have a headache!
Windy and blustery.. but sunny and gorgeous.. it was unusually hot last night, muggy.. had to turn on the air conditioning unit... and had to have the ac on here at the office this morning.. strange strange... and joseph in my nativity outside keeps getting knocked over from the wind in my nativity scene... lol.. poor guy.. he always seems to get the short end of the stick even since the begining....lOL! I mean do catholics worship Joseph like they do Mary? I dont know.. I hear more about the virgin mary than I do joseph.. And in my opinion.. once she gave birth and everything, I am sure that she gave poor ol' Joe some lovin, that totally takes her out of the virgin category.
Just some idle ramblings in the middle of a sunny Friday afternoon.. off to my acupuncture treatment, Enjoy the song..its one of my favorites!
Love and Laughter,
Dawn
The Nativity Story
I went to costco and had a hot dog. it was awesome. yummy. i then went to look at the books and i picked up the nativity movie book and well i started reading at almost sarted crying (when do i not cry?) so i had to buy it. now i can cry all day. teehee now i had chips and ghetto dip. yummy the bestest, to make the perfect ghetto dip get 16oz of sour cream and 2 packets of dip flavor powder stuff......1 packet for every 8oz...............the bestest, see when you come from the ghetto and dont have money you gotta find cheap and awesome snacks......
Christmas Quiz Answers
1) There is no problem with there being only 2 Magi, since the Bible (Matthew) says only "some", not three or any other number.
2) Those blobby things on their heads were meant to be crowns, intending to mislead you into objecting to only two "kings". The Bible never calls them kings, but since it's possible that Magi wore blobby things such as I have drawn, we can't object to their headgear.
3) The Magi are recorded in Matthew as visiting Christ (and Mary) in a "house". A natural reading of the story gives the impression that their visit may have been a couple of years after His birth.
4) So, if we imagine this scene to be the night of Christ's birth, there is no indication in Scripture that the star was over the stable, nor that it was particularly bright. The Magi were astrologers and it may have been significant to them for reasons other than brightness (apparent size).
5) Yes, I have drawn Joseph with three eyes. He also appears to have only one leg. Mary appears to have no mouth and no fingers (or is wearing mittens). That was merely lazy drawing.
6) There is no record of anyone seeing any haloes when Christ was born. They are an artistic representation of holiness or the glory of God. So arguably they were there, but I have distributed them somewhat arbitrarily.
7) It's unlikely that a calendar would be on the wall, I suppose, but it's even less likely that it would use Latin letters and Arabic numerals. Well, it might I suppose, but there is no Scriptural support for the date of Dec. 25th for Christ's birth. It is possible that the Christians (a few centuries later) wanted to give a Christian meaning to the celebrations that people had been holding for centuries around the Winter Solstice.
8) The people at the time certainly would not have considered it Year 0. We wouldn't either, because Christ was likely born a few years B.C. (!!!) When (several hundred years later) a Christian tried to calculate how many years it had been since Christ's birth, he made mistakes. By checking with other historical data we now know that our calendar is a few years off what was intended.
9) The shepherd scene is intended to be off at a distance, not right next door, but yes, his staff is too short for his standing height -- but that was lazy drawing again. Yes, there should be more shepherds and, I suppose, at least a few sheep in sight.
10) Let's imagine that this is the first angel who appears before being joined by the multitude. In any case, in Scripture angels appear like men (or strange animals). Luke 20:36 is usually read to indicate they are sexless, but at least one translation suggests that the children of the Resurrection are similar to angels in their immortality, not necessarily their genderlessness.
In any case, the delicate, pretty angel of pop culture doesn't appear (to me) to come from Scripture. (You do think my angel is pretty, don't you?)
11) No record of angel wings in Luke either.
12) Some people are convinced of this one; I am not.
Neither the single angel nor the multitude are recorded as singing. The multitude suddenly appeared with the angel "praising God and saying, Glory to God etc." (N.I.V.)
But "praising God" suggests singing (or what we might hear as "chanting" or maybe sort of shouting in unison). I don't read Greek, but I just looked up the word for "saying" here (lego) and it seems pretty flexible. I can believe that the sentence means they "praised God, proclaiming [somehow -- chant, song, rap] Glory to God etc."
(And, as a musician friend pointed out, there is no good reason for having the third note upside down.)
13) A pig is not kosher (acceptable food for Jews). So why is there one in the stable? But as one of my youth group pointed out, how do we know that this wasn't a Gentile stable (or one kept by an unobservant Jew)?
14) When I was in Bethlehem in Feb. 2000, our guide told us that it was unlikely that trees would be wasted on a stable or a manger. (In fact, some argue that the word describing Joseph's work could better be translated "craftsman" and he might have worked with limestone as much or more than with wood.)
Anyway, the cave that is honoured as the birthplace of Christ in Bethlehem features a stone trough for a manger, not a wooden one. A picture of the alleged birthplace of Christ in Bethlehem
15) There would be no website URL on the side of the hill in Bethlehem back then.
2) Those blobby things on their heads were meant to be crowns, intending to mislead you into objecting to only two "kings". The Bible never calls them kings, but since it's possible that Magi wore blobby things such as I have drawn, we can't object to their headgear.
3) The Magi are recorded in Matthew as visiting Christ (and Mary) in a "house". A natural reading of the story gives the impression that their visit may have been a couple of years after His birth.
4) So, if we imagine this scene to be the night of Christ's birth, there is no indication in Scripture that the star was over the stable, nor that it was particularly bright. The Magi were astrologers and it may have been significant to them for reasons other than brightness (apparent size).
5) Yes, I have drawn Joseph with three eyes. He also appears to have only one leg. Mary appears to have no mouth and no fingers (or is wearing mittens). That was merely lazy drawing.
6) There is no record of anyone seeing any haloes when Christ was born. They are an artistic representation of holiness or the glory of God. So arguably they were there, but I have distributed them somewhat arbitrarily.
7) It's unlikely that a calendar would be on the wall, I suppose, but it's even less likely that it would use Latin letters and Arabic numerals. Well, it might I suppose, but there is no Scriptural support for the date of Dec. 25th for Christ's birth. It is possible that the Christians (a few centuries later) wanted to give a Christian meaning to the celebrations that people had been holding for centuries around the Winter Solstice.
8) The people at the time certainly would not have considered it Year 0. We wouldn't either, because Christ was likely born a few years B.C. (!!!) When (several hundred years later) a Christian tried to calculate how many years it had been since Christ's birth, he made mistakes. By checking with other historical data we now know that our calendar is a few years off what was intended.
9) The shepherd scene is intended to be off at a distance, not right next door, but yes, his staff is too short for his standing height -- but that was lazy drawing again. Yes, there should be more shepherds and, I suppose, at least a few sheep in sight.
10) Let's imagine that this is the first angel who appears before being joined by the multitude. In any case, in Scripture angels appear like men (or strange animals). Luke 20:36 is usually read to indicate they are sexless, but at least one translation suggests that the children of the Resurrection are similar to angels in their immortality, not necessarily their genderlessness.
In any case, the delicate, pretty angel of pop culture doesn't appear (to me) to come from Scripture. (You do think my angel is pretty, don't you?)
11) No record of angel wings in Luke either.
12) Some people are convinced of this one; I am not.
Neither the single angel nor the multitude are recorded as singing. The multitude suddenly appeared with the angel "praising God and saying, Glory to God etc." (N.I.V.)
But "praising God" suggests singing (or what we might hear as "chanting" or maybe sort of shouting in unison). I don't read Greek, but I just looked up the word for "saying" here (lego) and it seems pretty flexible. I can believe that the sentence means they "praised God, proclaiming [somehow -- chant, song, rap] Glory to God etc."
(And, as a musician friend pointed out, there is no good reason for having the third note upside down.)
13) A pig is not kosher (acceptable food for Jews). So why is there one in the stable? But as one of my youth group pointed out, how do we know that this wasn't a Gentile stable (or one kept by an unobservant Jew)?
14) When I was in Bethlehem in Feb. 2000, our guide told us that it was unlikely that trees would be wasted on a stable or a manger. (In fact, some argue that the word describing Joseph's work could better be translated "craftsman" and he might have worked with limestone as much or more than with wood.)
Anyway, the cave that is honoured as the birthplace of Christ in Bethlehem features a stone trough for a manger, not a wooden one. A picture of the alleged birthplace of Christ in Bethlehem
15) There would be no website URL on the side of the hill in Bethlehem back then.
Showing 1 - 5. [ Next ]
Quick Links
Latest Comment
Re: Shared Pain With Raechel - 5 months, the next little girl is due January 7
| Terms of Service
| Privacy Policy